Is it true...........

Just, lol

I did not LOL when told this from a writer of a so called major online poker site. I found it a concern.

reported riggist

TBH I never thought so before that it was truly rigged, but now pretty sure it is.

Is he saying that over a massive sample, (like enormous), that the hand database should conform to expected frequencies? Or that over smaller individual samples there must be xxxx win/lose?

A fruit machine fwiw, is regulated to payout at between 30-70% and will conform over a relatively short sample. Recently a certain machine has been withdrawn as it was found out that its "sequence" had a paying sequence when first powered up, and so the shrewdies just turned it off for a while before paying.

So it could be that he is right but talking about many millions of hands.

* before playing

What he was saying is that online UK poker must fall in with legislation that rules games of chance such as fruit machines and therefoire must pay out only certain number of hands. It is very concerning to me, but I am just a fun player and not a player who wants to make a living which it must be more concerning to. I am wondering how it can possible be random if it is written into the program this way. He did warn it is not random and therefore.................write in as you wish. A person I trust - jiust saying what I was told.

Fruit machines aren't randomly generated. FOBT's should be. Stuff on the internet? Who knows?

How can it be programmed to let people win so many hands when you can win at poker without having the best hand?

IMO, only really stupid losing players still think that online poker is rigged.

Baracus - only relaying what I was told by a writer of an online poker site and the rules he was to be guided by. Take it as you wish.

For a random genarated deal,i would of thought it has to fit into some % to norm, or it wouldnt be ramdom,it would be off slightly.I cant see any poss that this is measured to each and every account or that it is self correcting.Over a huge sample its with in the % to norm thats acceptable or broke.

Do you think the numbers for roulette on the online Betfair casino are randomly generated, like they are for fobt's in betting offices? Are online casinos and poker subject to any form of legislation? Why is Betfairs poker office in Malta?

tax

If poker is or is not randomly generated, who is to say whether it should or should not be?

Poker, unfortunately, falls under games of chance and hence the legislation of games of chance.

Yes, as far as legislation in pubs, clubs etc goes, but what about on the internet? Has the uk government got any legislation over a game I'm playing now that is say generated in China?

Poker sites are based on offshore islands and therefore don't come under UK law. Your "friend" has researched this well.

What a joke of a thread. I wouldn't spend more than one minute on it. No surprises Jim Hensen moron spouts rubbish again, who is this weirdo?


Jim Hensen 06 Dec 22:47
Is he saying that over a massive sample, (like enormous), that the hand database should conform to expected frequencies? Or that over smaller individual samples there must be xxxx win/lose?

A fruit machine fwiw, is regulated to payout at between 30-70% and will conform over a relatively short sample. Recently a certain machine has been withdrawn as it was found out that its "sequence" had a paying sequence when first powered up, and so the shrewdies just turned it off for a while before paying.

So it could be that he is right but talking about many millions of hands.



Can you please post one link saying how fruit machines are regulated. There is absolutely zero chance 30% would be legal if there were certain regulations. So confirm you are a muppet or a link of your source.

I would of thought the whole thing that keeps it random and hopefully straight, not** would be the competition between poker sites. If we thought one was b3nt, we could vote with our feet and leave.

Well we know for a fact one was**,whats to say others are not ?

Therefore if you win a certain number of hands you must then lose a certain number of hands?

Everybody wins and loses a certain number of hands. Do you mean these figures should be equal? Check out any player listing site to see this is not the case, nor is the ratio between winning and losing hands constant among players.

How could this even be programed given, as someone said earlier, that you can win or lose without a showdown? If I keep folding aces on the flop is the computer supposed to start giving me a higher proportion of aces until I go to showdown with them?

Does it matter how much I win or lose with my winning hands in order to comply with the legislation? Would it matter if I got the right proportion of winning hands but still lost a fortune?

Would it be surprising if poker sites were legally required to be non-random without this being a commonly accepted truth in the poker world?

Would it be odd that poker sites provide details of their random number generators and purport to have these audited without ever having the issue of fraud raised in this context?

Why do you think poker is not a game of chance if the cards really are randomly dealt?

Do you realise that the legal definition of a game of chance includes games in which chance can be over-ridden by skill?

Are you confusing games with lotteries and so forth where the odds of winning a prize are published?

Do you always think what blokes say is true?

Prettyace

The only random thing will be to ensure each player has equal opportunities to be dealt any 2 cards - anything else you were told is a load of tosh I think.

Steve, it tells you on the machine what its payout is, always has done afaik. This is real life, no need for links. Who are you btw?

In a betting shop the lowest they can be set at I think is 79% I think.

In an arcade I think they can be set lower as they are on a different license.

I have no links and I am a moron but I think the above is right.

yes I think the lower end at 30% is older school arcades. Regardless the % is programmed in and has to [should] conform to the legislation.

If you agree with me I must be wrong! ;-)

Helmuthian Folds 07 Dec 02:27
If you agree with me I must be a wrongun! ;-)

I like to crap in my nappy.

Does your friend say the rng is fixed to ensure it conforms to probabilty theory ?

a piece of useless information really but interesting non the less, the technology to produce a completely random number generator fails to exist in this day and age, and if you were to run it over a billion times the same pattern for each different rng would emerge.


random enough imo


also imo it is clear to see that the original poster is a losing player and looking for excuses as he/she (like most of us) thinks their play deserves better than its getting

Pretty can you invite me to your opium fuelled Dinner party in future please....


ty :)

It's threads like this that sometimes make we wonder if there's a second, secret internet only accessible to the intellectual upper class.

There is Bluf but we just didn't tell you about it! ;-)

What a load of rubbish.

If it was true then they would have to publicise this and if they didnt you could sue the company for one trillion dollars.

That all poker sites in the UK have to be in line with 'games of chance legislation' to make sure that it is a actually a game of chance - ie as if they were the same as a fruit machine in a pub. Therefore if you win a certain number of hands you must then lose a certain number of hands?

It is also not the player against the game, it is player vs player where the house takes a fee. Also, this may be stating the obvious, but someone wins every hand.