| 23 Sep | Online Poker Is Rigged! Or Not.Posted by PokerBarney on 11:28PM, 23rd Sep 2006Permalink |  Send to a friend |  RSS feed |
I've lost count of the number of times I've seen new (and old!) players claim that poker rooms are rigging their shufflers. The wide and varied range of reasons why they must be doing this includes:
- Someone lost a 4 outer... on the river. Twice.
- Someone lost money to a really bad player.
- Someone always loses at certain limits.
The list of reasons as to why the poker sites would want to do this is even crazier:
- It encourages action, so the site earns more rake.
- It teaches cocky players a lesson.
- It favours certain seats so affiliates win more.
And so on...
While it seems unobvious to these players that poker sites are earning enough money as it is without resorting to shuffle fiddling, rational arguments cannot successfully dispel this urban legend and repeated attempts just give me a headache.
But anyway - there is perhaps light at the end of the tunnel. Or more accurately, there was light there 4 years ago, but it seems no-one noticed. A rather friendly and helpful chap by the name of Tony H from rec.gambling.poker collected almost 38,000 hands and ran them under some pretty thorough analysis.
He started a thread over there to tell us about the results, and actually they're pretty much as we (anyone who has more than a few braincells and plays online poker with any regularity) all expected = it's not rigged. At all.
So, any time someone tells you it is, please, please, please refer them to this post. Then take their money, and tell them it was them there cheating poker site operators what done took all their pennies.
Bookmarks
If you enjoyed reading this post, please share it with others at these social bookmarking sites:
Del.icio.us | 
Digg | 
Furl | 
Reddit | 
Yahoo!
Blogmarks | 
FeedMeLinks | 
Shadows | 
Ma.gnolia
Scuttle | 
Simpy | 
Smarking | 
Spurl
Comments (16)
2. The $25 Challenge (the25challenge [at] gmail [dot] com)
Sun 24th Sep 2006 19:56
your email is not working properly...
Sun 24th Sep 2006 19:56
your email is not working properly...
3. PokerBarney (contact [at] allinpokerblog [dot] co [dot] uk)
Mon 25th Sep 2006 09:41
which email? contact[at]allinpokerblog[dot]co[dot]uk seems to work ok.
Mon 25th Sep 2006 09:41
which email? contact[at]allinpokerblog[dot]co[dot]uk seems to work ok.
4. Yorkshire Pudding ()
Mon 25th Sep 2006 09:47
if online is rigged then why do all the best tournament players (johnny bax, bodog ari etc) and best cash players (green plastic, h@llingol) etc always come out on top? we're all playing with the same rigged software so we're all starting off even. the programming required to target a certain player at a certain table at a certain time to give them an exact card to win would be almost impossible i should imagine.
bad beats only happen to good players and if you're better player donkeys will draw out on you more because you're making the right plays and they're chasing.
Mon 25th Sep 2006 09:47
if online is rigged then why do all the best tournament players (johnny bax, bodog ari etc) and best cash players (green plastic, h@llingol) etc always come out on top? we're all playing with the same rigged software so we're all starting off even. the programming required to target a certain player at a certain table at a certain time to give them an exact card to win would be almost impossible i should imagine.
bad beats only happen to good players and if you're better player donkeys will draw out on you more because you're making the right plays and they're chasing.
5. PokerBarney (contact [at] allinpokerblog [dot] co [dot] uk)
Mon 25th Sep 2006 10:02
for some reason the session handling on this server is now causing a problem, and it seems comment posting is affected. your comments are being posted, so there's no need to hit the button twice. sorry about this.. i haven't touched anything and it just broke!
Mon 25th Sep 2006 10:02
for some reason the session handling on this server is now causing a problem, and it seems comment posting is affected. your comments are being posted, so there's no need to hit the button twice. sorry about this.. i haven't touched anything and it just broke!
6. The $25 Challenge (the25challenge [at] gmail [dot] com)
Tue 26th Sep 2006 01:35
the one you wrote me from does not work properly. please resend.
Tue 26th Sep 2006 01:35
the one you wrote me from does not work properly. please resend.
7. Someguy (someguy [at] someplace [dot] com)
Wed 27th Sep 2006 03:00
To anybody who says that online poker is rigged, or that it's full of cheaters, I say this... if it is, it's not rigged very well, and they aren't cheating very well.
i think most of the discrepancy comes from the fact that the hands/hr is way higher. If you play one table, you could be playing 2x as many hands per hour as a B&M player. If you play 3 or 4... well, every hour gets you a full day of B&M play.
Additionally, there's the fact that it's a lot easier to play a lot of online than it is to play a lot of B&M. Most of us don't have casinos in our living rooms, but we do have laptops.
Wed 27th Sep 2006 03:00
To anybody who says that online poker is rigged, or that it's full of cheaters, I say this... if it is, it's not rigged very well, and they aren't cheating very well.
i think most of the discrepancy comes from the fact that the hands/hr is way higher. If you play one table, you could be playing 2x as many hands per hour as a B&M player. If you play 3 or 4... well, every hour gets you a full day of B&M play.
Additionally, there's the fact that it's a lot easier to play a lot of online than it is to play a lot of B&M. Most of us don't have casinos in our living rooms, but we do have laptops.
8. cloud (cantwellnick [at] hotmail [dot] com)
Wed 27th Sep 2006 12:44
I wouldn't say online poker is rigged.
I lose about the same amount on every site I play.
Wed 27th Sep 2006 12:44
I wouldn't say online poker is rigged.
I lose about the same amount on every site I play.
9. tom meny (redraider [at] gmail [dot] com)
Tue 26th Dec 2006 04:34
The reason the top players continually come out on top online is because they play at high levels. The poker rooms are rigged at the lower levels.
To your argument :
"While it seems unobvious to these players that poker sites are earning enough money as it is without resorting to shuffle fiddling, rational arguments cannot successfully dispel this urban legend and repeated attempts just give me a headache."
My response is this: WHY WOULDN'T THEY? You say they make "enough" money. Is there ever enough money to be made? Never. If they can get away with it, and it can't be proved you, as an educated and intelligent person, must simply learn to recognize pattern of cheating, patterns of you going broke right after you withdraw some of your money, etc etc.
To read more, go to www.bobostonepony.com
Tue 26th Dec 2006 04:34
The reason the top players continually come out on top online is because they play at high levels. The poker rooms are rigged at the lower levels.
To your argument :
"While it seems unobvious to these players that poker sites are earning enough money as it is without resorting to shuffle fiddling, rational arguments cannot successfully dispel this urban legend and repeated attempts just give me a headache."
My response is this: WHY WOULDN'T THEY? You say they make "enough" money. Is there ever enough money to be made? Never. If they can get away with it, and it can't be proved you, as an educated and intelligent person, must simply learn to recognize pattern of cheating, patterns of you going broke right after you withdraw some of your money, etc etc.
To read more, go to www.bobostonepony.com
10. PokerBarney (contact [at] allinpokerblog [dot] co [dot] uk)
Tue 26th Dec 2006 17:50
Tom, the ability to do something doesn't mean that we can assume that it is being done. Innocent until proven guilty - the burden is on you to do this. If you can conclusively prove to me (and everyone else) that any particular poker site is cheating, despite their frequent independant audits, then I will change my mind and post publically here. Until then, I rest my case.
Tue 26th Dec 2006 17:50
Tom, the ability to do something doesn't mean that we can assume that it is being done. Innocent until proven guilty - the burden is on you to do this. If you can conclusively prove to me (and everyone else) that any particular poker site is cheating, despite their frequent independant audits, then I will change my mind and post publically here. Until then, I rest my case.
11. tom meny (redraider [at] gmail [dot] com)
Sat 6th Jan 2007 05:11
see, that is where you are incorrect. The burden of truth is not on me as I am not in a court of law, nor is anyone being tried here. I do not have some sort of device to hack into the programming of the sites and verify their code, nor would I know how to do this if I did have such machine.
I ask you to prove that the sites are doing independant audits, then I ask you to research the companies that do these so-called audits.
Anyway, Because I don't have the know-how to hack into a sites programming I must rely on patterns. Just like the rats that get shocked every time they eat the cheese on the left, eventually they stop eating the cheese on the left. They don't have go to court and hire lawyers and scientists to prove that they are being tested. They just know that anytime they eat the cheese on the left they get shocked. So, what do they do? They eat the cheese on the right! If I know that everytime I withdraw only a portion of my money on an online site , when I come back to play the remaining bankroll it is gone within minutes. If that happens to me 100% of the time, then eventually I recognize the pattern. And if I recognize a pattern, and it's virutally 100%, then that is all i need. I don't need to prove it. I simply know that I get fucked each time I do that. Therefore, I don't just withdraw some of my money, I withdraw ALL of it.
Sat 6th Jan 2007 05:11
see, that is where you are incorrect. The burden of truth is not on me as I am not in a court of law, nor is anyone being tried here. I do not have some sort of device to hack into the programming of the sites and verify their code, nor would I know how to do this if I did have such machine.
I ask you to prove that the sites are doing independant audits, then I ask you to research the companies that do these so-called audits.
Anyway, Because I don't have the know-how to hack into a sites programming I must rely on patterns. Just like the rats that get shocked every time they eat the cheese on the left, eventually they stop eating the cheese on the left. They don't have go to court and hire lawyers and scientists to prove that they are being tested. They just know that anytime they eat the cheese on the left they get shocked. So, what do they do? They eat the cheese on the right! If I know that everytime I withdraw only a portion of my money on an online site , when I come back to play the remaining bankroll it is gone within minutes. If that happens to me 100% of the time, then eventually I recognize the pattern. And if I recognize a pattern, and it's virutally 100%, then that is all i need. I don't need to prove it. I simply know that I get fucked each time I do that. Therefore, I don't just withdraw some of my money, I withdraw ALL of it.
12. PokerBarney (contact [at] allinpokerblog [dot] co [dot] uk)
Sat 6th Jan 2007 23:52
Tom:
"The burden of truth is not on me as I am not in a court of law, nor is anyone being tried here."
No, but you are claiming something that is out of the ordinary. If I were to claim that there is a teapot orbiting the Earth, it would be up to me to prove that were the case.
If you have statistical evidence showing the patterns then I will pay more attention, but anecdotal proof is not proof.
I can't remember who said this originally, but "Don't mistake coincidence for fate."
Even if it happens an awful lot, it doesn't mean that the two events are related, or that one is dependant on the other. It's an example of a cicular belief system - where you only notice things that reinforce your beliefs, while ignoring things that don't.
Most sites do independant audit and publicise the results. They use government and industry accredited agencies to do so, and this is pretty good in my eyes.
If you (or anyone else) can provide a reproducable experiment that empiracally proves there is something fishy going on (and I suspect no-one can, otherwise they would have by now), then I and everyone else that is on my side of the fence, WILL take notice.
PS - let's not also forget the possibility that your psychology at the tables after a withdrawal is what's affecting your game.
Try putting a bot on the tables after a withdrawal and see if it still happens.
Sat 6th Jan 2007 23:52
Tom:
"The burden of truth is not on me as I am not in a court of law, nor is anyone being tried here."
No, but you are claiming something that is out of the ordinary. If I were to claim that there is a teapot orbiting the Earth, it would be up to me to prove that were the case.
If you have statistical evidence showing the patterns then I will pay more attention, but anecdotal proof is not proof.
I can't remember who said this originally, but "Don't mistake coincidence for fate."
Even if it happens an awful lot, it doesn't mean that the two events are related, or that one is dependant on the other. It's an example of a cicular belief system - where you only notice things that reinforce your beliefs, while ignoring things that don't.
Most sites do independant audit and publicise the results. They use government and industry accredited agencies to do so, and this is pretty good in my eyes.
If you (or anyone else) can provide a reproducable experiment that empiracally proves there is something fishy going on (and I suspect no-one can, otherwise they would have by now), then I and everyone else that is on my side of the fence, WILL take notice.
PS - let's not also forget the possibility that your psychology at the tables after a withdrawal is what's affecting your game.
Try putting a bot on the tables after a withdrawal and see if it still happens.
13. tom meny (redraider [at] gmail [dot] com)
Tue 9th Jan 2007 03:26
no, the difference here from me claiming online poker is rigged, and you claming a teapot is orbiting the earth is that I am NOT THE ONLY ONE claiming that online poker is rigged.
Do a search on google for online poker is rigged and you will see thousands of other people who see the same patterns I do.
I understand your point and I respect it. I simply cannot prove that the programming is rigged because I do not have the programming expertise nor hacking skills to do it. Therefore, as a rational and intelligent human being, I must rely on my senses and my past experiences. Like I said before, if I constantly and routinely notice a pattern of action flops, a pattern of losing the remainder of my bankroll in only minutes after I withdraw only a portion of my bankroll, and a pattern of wins anytime I open a new account or come back from a hiatus from an existing account, then I need to be logical and say that something is not on the up and up.
You can continue on believing that people in the online poker business are moral and ethical human beings that don't have the capability or any reason to cheat.
I will not allow myself o get bent over like that man. I think you will soon see the truth as more and more people stop playing online, tv coverage slows, the world series of poker attendance goes back down, etc etc etc.
The online poker companies are going to screw themselves right into the ground. Less and less people are playing online poker and it's not because many of the sites have stopped taking business from Americans... It's because the American's that play are tired of getting kicked in the balls.
Tue 9th Jan 2007 03:26
no, the difference here from me claiming online poker is rigged, and you claming a teapot is orbiting the earth is that I am NOT THE ONLY ONE claiming that online poker is rigged.
Do a search on google for online poker is rigged and you will see thousands of other people who see the same patterns I do.
I understand your point and I respect it. I simply cannot prove that the programming is rigged because I do not have the programming expertise nor hacking skills to do it. Therefore, as a rational and intelligent human being, I must rely on my senses and my past experiences. Like I said before, if I constantly and routinely notice a pattern of action flops, a pattern of losing the remainder of my bankroll in only minutes after I withdraw only a portion of my bankroll, and a pattern of wins anytime I open a new account or come back from a hiatus from an existing account, then I need to be logical and say that something is not on the up and up.
You can continue on believing that people in the online poker business are moral and ethical human beings that don't have the capability or any reason to cheat.
I will not allow myself o get bent over like that man. I think you will soon see the truth as more and more people stop playing online, tv coverage slows, the world series of poker attendance goes back down, etc etc etc.
The online poker companies are going to screw themselves right into the ground. Less and less people are playing online poker and it's not because many of the sites have stopped taking business from Americans... It's because the American's that play are tired of getting kicked in the balls.
14. tom meny (redraider [at] gmail [dot] com)
Tue 9th Jan 2007 03:37
by the way:
"Most sites do independant audit and publicise the results. They use government and industry accredited agencies to do so, and this is pretty good in my eyes. "
you need to research the "GOVERNMENT and INDUSTRY ACCREDITED AGENCIES" that you believe the poker sites are using. What governmenet? Not the US government. And "INDUSTRY ACCREDITED" agencies. So online poker accredited agencies. So they same companies that are cheating you, have accredited an agency to say "ya, they're not cheating" and we are supposed to blindly believe? Maybe it is you that should research?
Tue 9th Jan 2007 03:37
by the way:
"Most sites do independant audit and publicise the results. They use government and industry accredited agencies to do so, and this is pretty good in my eyes. "
you need to research the "GOVERNMENT and INDUSTRY ACCREDITED AGENCIES" that you believe the poker sites are using. What governmenet? Not the US government. And "INDUSTRY ACCREDITED" agencies. So online poker accredited agencies. So they same companies that are cheating you, have accredited an agency to say "ya, they're not cheating" and we are supposed to blindly believe? Maybe it is you that should research?
15. PokerBarney (contact [at] allinpokerblog [dot] co [dot] uk)
Tue 9th Jan 2007 12:00
Tom, you don't need to be a programmer to hack the site's systems to see the code. Just do an extensive hand analysis - 100,000 should be representative enough. Get hold of something like PokerTracker or PokerOffice, and you'll soon be able to see whether or not things are out of place.
To do so wouldn't take long (especially if the thousands of believers got involved), and would put this argument to rest, once and for all.
For their part, the poker operators have already done such experiments and have publicised the results. Now it's *your* turn to do the same.
Without something concrete to look at, your beliefs are based on coincidence. For me, that's not strong enough.
Tue 9th Jan 2007 12:00
Tom, you don't need to be a programmer to hack the site's systems to see the code. Just do an extensive hand analysis - 100,000 should be representative enough. Get hold of something like PokerTracker or PokerOffice, and you'll soon be able to see whether or not things are out of place.
To do so wouldn't take long (especially if the thousands of believers got involved), and would put this argument to rest, once and for all.
For their part, the poker operators have already done such experiments and have publicised the results. Now it's *your* turn to do the same.
Without something concrete to look at, your beliefs are based on coincidence. For me, that's not strong enough.
16. tom meny (bobostonepony [at] gmail [dot] com)
Wed 24th Jan 2007 08:18
lol. Ya, show me those results.
Wed 24th Jan 2007 08:18
lol. Ya, show me those results.
Sun 24th Sep 2006 04:01
unfortunetly this is analysis from only one poker site. i honestly do feel party poker is rigged in the sense that the odds dont work out right. if i could be shown this kind of analysis with party poker i would gladly shut my mouth. because whether its rigged or not the notion in my head that it is does effect my game.