AA is in no way an unbeatable hand. The average winning hand is 2 pair, so if your AA doesn’t improve to more than just one pair, by the river, odds are pretty good that you’re gonna lose. Donks get AA and slow play so badly, that they end up in showdowns against 2 or 3 other players. The more ppl in the hand also increases the chances that you’ll lose, especially w/ just AA.

Other people will play bad cards, like Q-7, &, K-10, and even much worse, then wonder why their top pair/weak kicker didn’t hold up against the guy w/ 15 outs. Again, they’re screaming that it’s rigged, while everyone else knows that that’s not why they’re losing.

I truly wonder about the ppl that argue for the sites and swear up & down that they aren’t rigged, tho, when it’s so obvious, to solid players w/ live poker experience, that something’s not right. Sure, some of them are ppl that see the really bad ppl screaming rigged all the time, and some are ppl that work for the sites, either directly or indirectly(meaning either on the payroll or writing articles like this), some are maybe ppl that play on high stakes tables, where you see a lot fewer suck outs, cuz ppl are better and aren’t chasing 2 and 3 outters, and there are ppl that want to look like winning players, so they jump on chances to call ppl donks, like when a solid player loses a hand where they were 90% favorites to win, after the turn, and lost to a somebody chasing that miracle card.

Those are the ones that are winning more hands than they actually should be. Getting called a donk and a bad player, even when you know you are a solid live player, and that you are losing a lot more than you should be, can really affect you. I’ve had times when I really questioned my skill, and started thinking that maybe it was my play, and not the site setting me up. Then, one day, I was in some forum like this, arguing about the same thing. This one guy was swearing that it wasn’t rigged, and that I must be a bad player, and everyone else was backing him up, all jumping on me. Now, I knew that a lot of those ppl probably felt the same way as me, but just didn’t want to be called bad players just cuz they said it was rigged. I was feeling really discouraged.

But THEN, me and that one guy started sending private messages, cuz he actually thought that maybe he could “help me become a better player”. Well, come to find out, he had ONLY been playing for A FEW YEARS, and ONLY online. He had almost NO live experience, but yet he was swearing that online poker was no different than live poker. And THIS was a guy making ME question MY skills, after playing live poker for 10 years, most of them in prison, where we played from breakfast until lock down, so I know how often certain hands, like runner runner, should hit. THAT guy had the nerve to argue for the sites, when he had hardly ever even played live. ????

Now, most polls that I’ve seen in forums like this, as to whether online poker is rigged or not, are usually pretty even, like 50%/50%. But how many of those ppl that are saying that it isn’t rigged, either wouldn’t know even if it was, or are ppl that have motives to lie?

I very seldom slow play AA or KK, and I usually win with those hands, even if it’s just the blinds or a small pot. But hands like A-K or A-Q, I only win cuz I steal the blinds or cuz I bluff. When I have those hands, only small cards come, and the times when I DO flop one of my cards, the ONLY other person in the hand w/ me will flop at least 2 pair, if not a set or a straight or better.

That’s the rig that I see the most, where the other person seems to always hit his cards, and I lose w/ hands like A-K to hands like Q-5. Sure, I lose to flopped sets and trips when I have an over pocket pair, too, and it’s always that ONE other person that’s in the hand. If you’re allowing 3 or 4 ppl to see the flop w/ you, then your odds of winning are greatly reduced, no matter what cards you have. But when you’re raising pre-flop, so that only 1 0r 2 ppl are in the hand w/ you, your stronger hands should win a large percentage of the time against weaker hands. Notice that I said PERCENTAGE of times, not AMOUNT of times, cuz that’s their biggest defense, that you see MORE hands online, so you’ll see more BAD BEATS online. And that IS true. But the percentage of times should stay around the same, whether you play 100 hands or a 1000 hands.

I play mostly cash games, micros, cuz there’s just way too much variance in the tourneys. Plus, you’ll get great hands when they don’t matter, but lose w/ monster hands when they DO really matter, so you can play great poker the whole tourney, but w/ 1 or 2 well placed bad beats, you’re gone.

I do usually play tourneys about once a day or so, tho, and I really can’t believe the amount of bad hands that I’ve been receiving lately. I’ve actually had 2 or 3 days in a row, where I’d go whole tourneys w/o even one pocket pair or A-K. I mean, literally, over 100 hands in a row, w/o any playable hands. Just folding and stealing pots the whole time. I think that’s REALLY strange, tho, cuz usually, they’ll make sure you get certain hands the correct percentage of times, just so if you DO send in a hand history, they can say that the percentages were correct. It’s easy for them to show that you got AA the correct amount of times, but a lot harder for us to show how we always seem to run into bad beats at exactly the worst times possible.

People can say that it’s not rigged all they want to, but I would love for somebody to sit in front of the computer w/ me for a few hours, and then dare to say it’s not. I wish I had all the things that record the play on my computer, in real time, like I see ppl on youtube with, so that not only could I show ppl the things that are happening on ONE table, I could ALSO show them how much even stranger things were on the 4 or 5 tables, that I usually play at a time. It’s hard to post a bunch of screen shots, cuz then ppl are saying it’s not enough hands to influence the variance, and it’s hard to show how many hands that you lose to bad beats in 1000′s of hand histories. They know that, too, that’s why they always say to show them the histories.

And why do so many ppl keep playing, if they know it’s rigged? Well, for most ppl, including me, it’s an addiction. Plus, I’m usually a little bit better than a break even player, online, but I always try to move up stakes too fast, cuz I get bored playing smaller stakes, and cuz I want to see if the play gets any better, when you move up, so I never profit consistently. $.50/1.00 is about the highest I’ve played, tho, and I really don’t see much difference between those tables and .02/.04 tables, or between $1 and $11 tourneys.

I refuse to deposit, tho. I haven’t done so in over 2 years. I just keep going up and down, between $25 and $150. I played that way on FTP and PS for years, then got no deposit bonuses on a couple Merge sites and a Cake site, right before Black Friday, which enabled me to keep playing, even tho I’m U.S. I basically consider it entertainment. It’s definitely not real poker. Most of the time, now, I can see the bad beats coming, know exactly what cards are gonna hit to make me lose, but then just laugh when it happens. Hopefully, cuz of Black Friday, they’ll legalize online poker here in the U.S., and maybe they’ll have real regulation, so that sites can’t just sit out on some island, somewhere in the middle of the ocean, and not have to worry about even if they DO get caught cheating us, cuz they’re out of our jurisdiction. Real sites, w/ real RANDOM cards. Wow, wouldn’t THAT be great? Good luck everybody! See you on the tables!

Firstly, major poker sites have been caught cheating before. And major poker sites do not exactly operate within the boundaries of law! This cannot be disputed.

Secondly, it is VERY easy to write the code to rig the game. And it’s very easy to chose who you rig AGAINST. It’s a simple matter of player profiling. Every player is obviously in the database, and anyone who thinks that poker sites (and various other sites) don’t use their databases to profile their members…is very, very, VERY naive.

It is incredibly simple to track players habits. It is also easy to know every player’s approximate personal wealth. It’s easy to know a hell of a lot more, but even those two factors alone are enough for the system to make an automated decision on whether to affect the outcome of hands for that player. For example, a player profiled as ‘Likely to deposit regular top-ups when losing’ is surely a great candidate for regularly running into ‘bad beats’. Of course poker rooms want fresh $$ deposited as often as possible.

As for ‘we’d see patterns emerging’ – Yes we would, and we do… it’s common to hear players who claim the game is rigged talk about similar patterns to one another. The problem is that poker is partly luck, and that magic ‘luck’ word can be used to explain any outcome, as long as the outcome is ‘possible’ no matter how high the odds against it. Online poker rooms often go against the odds.

Another thing about poker, which makes a wonderful ally for poker rooms IF they are rigging, is that players who’s luck holds (those who ‘run good’) cannot even begin to believe that the game might be rigged, because that goes against human nature. So even a player who once felt the game might be rigged, will change his mind during a time when he is winning…because we want to believe that we played well, and that the simple act of playing well outweighs any luck factor…and that if we lose now and then, it’s just ‘variance’. And sometimes it probably is, because it is most likely that IF a poker room rigs the game, they will not rig the game all the time or for every player.

So to recap the FACTS – We’re talking about massive corporations who –
- Operate on the edge of, or way outside, the law
- Have been CAUGHT rigging games in the past
- Employ very clever technical staff, easily capable of rigging games, and those staff are sworn to secrecy under contract with the threat of crippling law suits (I know this to be true).

With those FACTS it’s perhaps harder to believe that these sites might be honest.

Until a detailed investigation is performed, it isn’t possible to know whether online poker is rigged generally. It is only possible to KNOW that it COULD be and HAS been in the past.
-

I will answer my own question. They could – so long as they were to come clean about it. Let people know that (if it’s true that it’s rigged) that the odds are less than what we actually know the odds to be by the rules of the game.

Just like cigarette companies were forced to come clean about adding additives to natural tobacco make cigarettes burn faster – so that they’d sell more quantities of them since your smoke basically smokes itself these days. Poker sites (IF they indeed do this) should come clean that they give a slightly higher edge to a poor hand that that should by the rules of the game only win say 2% of the time before the river – it will win say 8% of the time (or whatever). In this case it would be opposite the cigarette analogy. They want to stretch out the time it takes to win from a fish – because the longer it takes (in cash games anyway) the more rakes from both sides.

This is just one possibility – I am not saying that the rigging isn’t more intricate – just saying it doesn’t necessarily have to be in order to be effectively producing more rakes in a basically undetectable way.

People still smoke – and people would still gamble – especially if they are still making a profit off the fish (just not as quickly as they should statistically speaking).

People are not going to quit online poker if they find out their odds as a skilled player are slightly less than in a live game due to rigging (but still ultimately profitable). Nor are fish going to quit playing as they already know the odds as an unskilled player are less but if the odds favour them a tad more than they should – they will get discouraged less quickly and are therefore more likely to get hooked – play more games – hence develop more rakes through extended playing.

It makes sense to drag out the time it takes a skilled player to win the unskilled player’s money. The more hands it takes to drain the fish the more rakes the site makes. This leaves skilled players believing online sites are not rigged because they still show a profit – but not as much as fast as they would without the rigging. However it looks unrigged because they can play more hands per hour than in a live unrigged game – so that makes up the difference. They do however pay more into rakes because of this faster speed or multi-tabling.

Quite honestly I don’t see why an online site would choose NOT to rig ever so slightly. It makes perfect business sense. If it is only slightly rigged to drag out the process – then better players are still going to win in the long run. This would not discourage them – it still beats the odds of trying to win the lotto or keno or roulette.

It’s maybe good for everybody because even though the odds wouldn’t be quite as favourable in a rigged online site as a live game – you can still make a profit or more because you can play more games per hour. If casinos are allowed to offer slots with everyone knowing the odds are atrociously favoured towards the house – then why can’t an online poker site make the odds just slightly different than the odds in a live game – since the odds would STILL be overall better than most gambling games.

They also would not want to ENcourage the poor players to get too good. Otherwise the good players would quit as the rigging would be far too obvious. What do I mean by the sites don’t want to encourage the poor players to get too good? Well when they win 25% of the showdowns they shouldn’t with crap hands (with odd less than 25%) – they begin to feel that luck is a larger component than it actually should be – hence less serious study of the game and it’s probabilities – less incentive to become a shark. This keeps the good players winning most* of the time. But not ALL the times when they should be. Luck plays a part in poker – but over millions of hands the ‘luck’ should be exactly equal to the odds for the hands that were played. Consistent ‘math’ players should come out ahead in cash games against fish providing their bank roll is large enough to sustain them through the ups and downs. Bad beats are to be expected but only within the percentages allowed by the probabilities.

Lastly I am saying it could be done – not whether it actually is. I don’t know for sure. But let us ponder the likelihood that a multi-billion dollar business would rig to keep poorer players from being adequately discouraged. I think it’s highly likely that they WOULD. Most arguments against the idea that online poker would be rigged use the idea “but if X online poker company got caught it would hurt their business – so that’s why they wouldn’t do it”… Are you KIDDING ME? Yeah RIGHT> People have gambling problems – people know the odds for winning the lotto are like 1 in millions and yet they still play. Poker is less luck than say the lotto – but if the odds are only slightly less in your favor because the site rigs slightly to keep the fish population from dwindling – is that going to stop you? If you are highly skilled and you should win say 70% of the pots. Would you quit if you found out you could only win 60% of the pots with your skill as the extra 10% was going towards fish with hands they wouldn’t win in a live game. No you wouldn’t stop as the odds are still in your favor but only slightly less – but it still beats trying to win the lotto or winning at craps. People still play other casino games with far sparser odds than even rigged poker. It is the nature of humanity.

If you want and analogy – then think of it this way. A site which doesn’t at least slightly favor the fish would be unsustainable. A healthy starting population of fish would exist – attracting sharks. The sharks would get well fed telling the other sharks about the free lunch. More fish would come and either get eaten instantly or transfer up the food chain into being a shark and predating on fish. The longer this goes on – the more sharks you get and the less fish. The little fish would die out or find more friendly habitat and the sharks would turn to cannibalism and eat each other. Then there would be no fish left and no sharks either – hence no online poker sites, no rakes, no big business.

What online poker sites probably have to do is level the playing field. Like hunting season or fishing season. Let the fish population spawn for a bit give them a break here and there they shouldn’t get (break ABOVE the lucky breaks dictated by the probabilities of the game itself). Keep the predators in check. Don’t feed the predators too well or soon there will be too many of them and the prey will go extinct – followed shortly thereafter by the predators themselves.

At first when comments started to be made about major online poker sites my reaction was simple i was and AM a damn good businessman the sites would have to be INSANE to risk these huge money machines!!! now i am not talking about stolen info to see hand etc that is theft not fraud so i was one of the STRONG defenders that online poker was sound.
Now i provided my poker history in b/m here is my online history
Ladbrokes when they had the good omaha games profitable
Paradise{first time around} profitable
Pokerstars first two months very profitable after which i have not had a winning month for two years
Hmmm senility? altzeimers? yet the cash games i continue to play i show a profit 7/10
Now most of your posters either dismiss concerns as either whiners,crap players,too small samples and most of the comments concern hold em!!! Wrong place to look!!! to many times all the money is in preflop and the variations WILL be huge 5 cards to come!!! now omaha hello pot limit the most common street for the money to move is the turn.ONE card to come now i never have and never will whine about bad beats INDEED by definition the more bad beats YOU get the better player YOU are again using omaha as the example you have got ALL the money in with the best of it.THAT IS WINNING POKER. yet like me you are getting killed month after month
I have played internet poker right from its inception and i have seen many sites come and go.and the most common cause for a site to be no longer viable? its traffic dies off players stop reloading and the games break why because these newbie players who have invested 1/2/3 hundred dollars have zero chance against the vultures waiting for them{i resemble that remark} in a straight game they are dead meat they may invest once or twice more then thats it
OK WHY the poker bubble has burst the two poker sites that listed on the London Stock Exchange both issued warnings within two months of their listings that “in the current climate previous growth estimates may prove a little ambitious”OOPS
We can then look at the {joke}attempts of american lawmakers to prevent Americans playing on line all bad news for the poker sites,lol i did see one comment about credit card fees in the 8/10% range bullshit can i have the job please 3%max
THERE IS ONLY ONE REASON ANY POKER SITE WILL PLAY SILLY BUGGERS TO STOP NEW PLAYERS LOSING TOO MUCH TOO QUICKLY SURVIVAL
Do you have any conception in a near saturated market what the cost of a new credit card using player is today,listed companies have to reveal numbers!!!
5000 DOLLARS PER MEMBER oh dear we just spent 5k lets let the pros f**k him up so he leaves in two weeks YEAH RIGHT

When Philip put a 3 outer on me for 200large i smiled said nice hand retired to the bar had a large cognac and then threw my guts up thats class POKERSTARS has none i quit