Home / Community / Forum / Support Area / Poker News /

Two Outers

Old
Default
Two Outers - Sat May 28, 2011, 06:41 PM
(#1)
BGBShooter's Avatar
Since: Dec 2010
Posts: 33
BronzeStar
Ok I'll lay it to rest once and for all .......If hitting the set on the river came only once in every 22 hands like the ODDS ...I would never have said BOO ever ....because it would be extremely rare and not that noticable. But the ****ing truth of this site and the RANDOM RIGGED SHUFFLE>>> Moderators and Kool Aid drinking suck up clowns ( Darkman61 , Sandtrap , ssuglia , Roomik, Pip and the rest of you PS suck ups ) is that happens a minimum 1 in 10 ....... so go screw yourselves all of you.
 
Old
Default
Sat May 28, 2011, 06:56 PM
(#2)
ssuglia's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,393
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by BGBShooter View Post
Ok I'll lay it to rest once and for all .......If hitting the set on the river came only once in every 22 hands like the ODDS ...I would never have said BOO ever ....because it would be extremely rare and not that noticable. But the ****ing truth of this site and the RANDOM RIGGED SHUFFLE>>> Moderators and Kool Aid drinking suck up clowns ( Darkman61 , Sandtrap , ssuglia , Roomik, Pip and the rest of you PS suck ups ) is that happens a minimum 1 in 10 ....... so go screw yourselves all of you.
Where's your proof?

zzzzzzzzz
 
Old
Default
Sat May 28, 2011, 07:04 PM
(#3)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
I think he has a blog entry with a bit of a study he did. I disagreed with him that it was conclusive evidence, but the guy's definitely put a lot of thought into the matter.

Nobody ever mentions me... Why can't I be a Kool Aid drinking suck up clown??

j/k, lol
 
Old
Default
Sat May 28, 2011, 07:08 PM
(#4)
Drywallman3's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by BGBShooter View Post
Ok I'll lay it to rest once and for all .......If hitting the set on the river came only once in every 22 hands like the ODDS ...I would never have said BOO ever ....because it would be extremely rare and not that noticable. But the ****ing truth of this site and the RANDOM RIGGED SHUFFLE>>> Moderators and Kool Aid drinking suck up clowns ( Darkman61 , Sandtrap , ssuglia , Roomik, Pip and the rest of you PS suck ups ) is that happens a minimum 1 in 10 ....... all of so go screw yourselves you.



Why the hostility?
- UDS Dry
 
Old
Default
Sat May 28, 2011, 08:22 PM
(#5)
nickolai693's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 61
why do people argue it he study it do you honestly see the dealer dealing the cards on any of these sites ??? nope John quads wrote it best in his book he is and has been the only pro to not endorse a pokersite like he said cant see whos dealing cards and there is no true enforcer of the sites to regulate them and states that the pros that do endorse sites are doing so cuz they are being paid too .....food for thought ... but it is entertaining the sites that is gl everyone have fun and dont jump down my throat for this post just saying what is and has been said is all
 
Old
Default
Sat May 28, 2011, 08:38 PM
(#6)
TrumpinJoe's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,557
BGB,

Over what sample size did you draw your conclusion?

There a 8*10^67 (that is 8 followed by 67 zeroes) possible ways to shuffle a deck of 52 cards. Out of that size of a population you need sample sizes in the thousands or more before you can make that statement. A few dozen or even a few hundred is just not enough.
 
Old
Default
Sat May 28, 2011, 08:41 PM
(#7)
roomik17's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,556
BronzeStar
just take his word for it Joe...he wont show us proof
 
Old
Default
Sat May 28, 2011, 08:58 PM
(#8)
Fillmore 59's Avatar
Since: Nov 2010
Posts: 131
There's one in every crowd.

Shooter, you just didn't read the fine print when you signed up for Poker Stars. You wanted the Premium not the Standard membership for the site. Sure, you have to send in a few extra box tops and write an annoying little 300 word essay about how suckouts are good for the game. But Premium Poker Stars is worth it.

First, you get all the Kool Aid you want. (See how happy it's made Panicky.) And on top of that you are guaranteed, by virtue of the Premium random shuffle adjuster, to arrive at the river with at least one set for every ten pairs you take past the turn. Imagine that. You could soon be drinking the Beverage of Champions with all your friends, Darkman, Sandtrap, ssuglia, Roomik,
Pip, and yes even Panicky himself.

It's not too late. Sign up for Premium Poker Stars now!
 
Old
Default
Sat May 28, 2011, 09:38 PM
(#9)
Da Sens Fan's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,118
Quote:
Originally Posted by BGBShooter View Post
Ok I'll lay it to rest once and for all .......If hitting the set on the river came only once in every 22 hands like the ODDS ...I would never have said BOO ever ....because it would be extremely rare and not that noticable. But the ****ing truth of this site and the RANDOM RIGGED SHUFFLE>>> Moderators and Kool Aid drinking suck up clowns ( Darkman61 , Sandtrap , ssuglia , Roomik, Pip and the rest of you PS suck ups ) is that happens a minimum 1 in 10 ....... so go screw yourselves all of you.

Dude I saw you cry rigged when you lost an all-in as the 70/30 underdog. The moment I saw that I instantly lost any respect for you. When I called you on it you tried saying you didn't read the board right. Shortly after you cried rigged over losing a 52/48 race as the 48 dog.

GIVE ME A BREAK. Uninstall pokerstars and leave the rest of us in peace. Cannot stand people like this.
 
Old
Default
Sat May 28, 2011, 09:41 PM
(#10)
Darkman61's Avatar
Since: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,226
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by BGBShooter View Post
Ok I'll lay it to rest once and for all .......If hitting the set on the river came only once in every 22 hands like the ODDS ...I would never have said BOO ever ....because it would be extremely rare and not that noticable. But the ****ing truth of this site and the RANDOM RIGGED SHUFFLE>>> Moderators and Kool Aid drinking suck up clowns ( Darkman61 , Sandtrap , ssuglia , Roomik, Pip and the rest of you PS suck ups ) is that happens a minimum 1 in 10 ....... so go screw yourselves all of you.
Do the world a favour. Approach loo. Insert head. Flush.

And imagine it's kool aid.

p.s. Haven't a clue what kool aid is. Does it come with bits?

Last edited by Darkman61; Sat May 28, 2011 at 09:43 PM..
 
Old
Default
Sat May 28, 2011, 09:58 PM
(#11)
ssuglia's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,393
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrumpinJoe View Post
BGB,

Over what sample size did you draw your conclusion?

There a 8*10^67 (that is 8 followed by 67 zeroes) possible ways to shuffle a deck of 52 cards. Out of that size of a population you need sample sizes in the thousands or more before you can make that statement. A few dozen or even a few hundred is just not enough.
I tried making this point to him a while back, when he said he was losing a higher percentage of all ins than he felt he should have. I believe his sample was a few hundred "coin flip" all ins over the course of a couple of months.
 
Old
Default
Sat May 28, 2011, 10:02 PM
(#12)
roomik17's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,556
BronzeStar
This is the text as it appears on Cardshat. The original author is Beriac and he did this back in July of 2006:

Intro

So I've seen post after post after post either directly accusing or indirectly insinuating that online poker is rigged. Though the complaints more often than not come from folks who are frustrated from bad beats, the most common theory is that the poker sites so this to encourage action and thus increase the rake at their tables. I think if we polled the regulars here at Cardschat, I bet the vote would slant in favour of "not rigged". Still, despite the fact that accusations of rigging really don't make a ton of sense coming from current players (goodness, why continue to play?), I thought it would be worth investigating.

So here goes nothing...

Logic and reason

This is my own opinion: rigging a poker site would be like a professional athlete stealing sporting goods from his or her team -- the risk of losing something good would dramatically outweight the gains from cheating. I'm trained in game theory, and I can tell you that experts in the field would suggest that this is ludicrous (hip hop afficionados might suggest that it is instead ludacris).

Thus, I personally believe that it is unlikely that major sites are in any way rigged. I know if I were running one, and I do have a business background, there is no way I would risk the mint that online poker sites make in rake just to add a few extra bucks.

Research

For the sake of argument, I decided to use Poker Stars as my research subject, though I would apply my conclusions to Party, Full Tilt, and any of the other large, reputable sites. As for flybynightpoker.com and stealingyourmoneypoker.com, I speak not for those.

So, I did something incredibly complex and comprehensive: I went to pokerstars.com and looked around. Clicking on "integrity", I found their policy on shuffling basically immediately.

According to Poker Stars, there are many ways to shuffle a deck of cards. How many? Well, picture a 5 followed by 67 zeroes, that's how many. So what Poker Stars has to do is select one of those 50,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ways to shuffle a deck and start dealing the cards.

How do they choose it? Believe it or not, they use us players to generate their random numbers, using "user input, including summary of mouse movements and events timing, collected from client software". In the event that there are problems with this as a RNG (random number generator), they have a backup: "true hardware random number generator developed by Intel, which uses thermal noise as an entropy source". They go on and on describing how they obtain and apply their RNG, but these details are mostly beyond me.

So why should we believe Poker Stars? They could say anything on their website right? Well, their RNG is certified by 2 independent organizations: Cigital and BMM International. I decided to look into these organizations.

Cigital: An independent software risk management organization working with such companies as Qualcomm, Visa International, Texas Instruments, AOL, MasterCard, General Electric, Motorola, Pfizer Health Solutions, and Ericsson. Why would they put all that business on the line to lie for Poker Stars?

BMM International: A global organization that provides independent computer systems assurance and compliance certification testing services, the Australia-based company is a client of the Australian government among other organizations.

My question: Why would Poker Stars lie about its 2-tiered RNG when it is immensely profitable without it, and why would 2 independent organizations risk their reputations to vouch for it?

Conclusions

To me, if this is not enough evidence that Poker Stars (and in all likelihood, the major poker sites) is un-rigged and up-and-up, then nothing is. Personally, I believe it. That's why I bother risking my money there, and at Party Poker, and any of the reputable poker sites. If I thought for a second that they might be rigged, I'd take my cash out in a flash -- and so should you.

So the next time you're thinking you've taken 1 too many bad beats, or that you seem to win more in the morning, or after you've made a deposit, or during full moons, or what have you, and you think about posting that online poker is rigged, please ask yourself 3 questions:

1 - Isn't it possible that it seems rigged to me, because when something happens in my favour or my best-hand-going-in holds up, I don't notice it as much as when I take a huge bad beat?
2 - Anyway, isn't it true that even AA vs. 72o is still just a 8:1 favourite (according to this), and even here you should expect to lose once every 9 times, and no hole cards are 100% to win.
3 - Why would a poker site that is "raking it in", so to speak, bother to risk all its profits and cheat just to generate a little more action?

If you answer "no" to all of these questions, then I have gathered some additional links that you may find helpful: here, here, and here.

Epilogue

If anyone wishes to discuss this further, I would be happy to in a constructive way. I have just found that people are all too ready to blame their woes on multi-billion dollar companies rigging their operations to squeeze a few extra cents out of us. Personally, when I lose a bunch of cash on a bad beat, it's more often than not my own damn fault.

Please feel free to direct future queries about RNGs here, and I will add to it as needed.

Reply
Reply With Quote
 
Old
Default
Sat May 28, 2011, 10:03 PM
(#13)
roomik17's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,556
BronzeStar
From 2+2:

One of the predominant claims put forward by conspiracy theorists is that sites deliberately deal coolers and bad beats to "juice pots" and make them bigger so as to collect more rake. These conspiracy theorists never offer any actual statistical proof. Just their "feeling" that online poker has more "big hands" than it should. This despite the thousands of 2+2 users with large databases of millions of hands, particularly at FTP which is routinely datamined for all hands. Considering how well posters on this site have been able to spot real cheaters, be they bots or super-users, you'd think someone would have some concrete proof by now if there was any substance to any of these speculations.

Yet no one does.

No, the conspiracy theorists evidence consists entirely of the argument "It would be good for the site".

Except that's completely wrong.

They say it would be good for a site to juice the deck to ensure coolers. Big hands like quads over full house in order to maximize the rake. That the site would stand to make the most money this way.

This is wrong and it betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the poker economy and how winning players and the house make money. This is exactly what a site would NEVER do. In fact, if sites were rigged we would never see quads over full house.

At most sites, the No Limit rake is 5% with a $2 cap. This means the maximum rake is hit when the pot reaches $40.

At a 50NL game if two players go all in, the pot is $100. At 100NL if two players go all in, the pot is $200. The site still rakes only $2.

In fact, the best situation for the house would be if the pot was always exactly $40. A $100 or $200 pot is actually bad for the site because they aren't getting their full share of the rake and there's a chance that somebody goes broke. Even worse if they go broke and never come back.

This is the worst case scenario for both winning players and the house - That losing players go broke too quickly, get frustrated with the game and never come back. You can shear a sheep many times but only kill him once.

It would actually be in a site's best interest to always have a $40 pot. That is, if a site were going to set hands to maximize profit from pot size, they would rig for medium sized pots.

Which of course is impossible since pot size depends too much on players. There's always some donk who'll overplay and get it all in. There's always some nit who will underplay and the pot will be small.

However, from the house's perspective clearly medium sized pots are optimum, small pots are second best since they still collect some rake and nobody goes broke. Large pots, particularly all-ins are the worst case scenario for the house. Both because they miss out on rake and there's a chance somebody goes broke and quits, even for a short time.

Since a site can't ensure that medium sized pots actually stay medium sized, if a site were rigged it would rig for small pots. Action hands and coolers would actually occur far below expectation.

So why do people keep coming back to the idea that there are more big hands online than live?

There are several reasons - Sample size and selection bias are the two most important. You get far, far more hands per hour online than live. At least twice as many hands per hour per table and as many as triple. In addition many online players multi-table. An online multi-tabler can easily see 10-20 times as many hands per hour as a live player. That's sample size. More hands of course means more big hands. Also, if you have the preconceived notion that there are more big hands online, then every time you see one of those big hands it's only going to reinforce that prejudice even if it's not that big of a hand. Whereas live you're not going to be making a note of every big hand. There's your selection bias, we tend to remember things that support what we already believe and discard whatever contradicts it.
 
Old
Default
Sun May 29, 2011, 12:13 AM
(#14)
joy7108's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,287
That's a very well reasoned response, Roomik. I checked a lot of the same things before I started playing for real money, and came to the same conclusions. It makes no sense for any site to rig the games, they rake in the money without cheating.

Great post, keep up the good work!! (though you probably can't convince the tinfoil hat brigade)
 
Old
Default
Sun May 29, 2011, 12:21 AM
(#15)
brkn80's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 440
Hey Sponge Bob how'd you like to shake yer booty over here for the rest of us.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE

Last edited by brkn80; Sun May 29, 2011 at 12:27 AM.. Reason: grovelling
 
Old
Default
Sun May 29, 2011, 12:21 AM
(#16)
stevenl83's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 6
i put it a simpler way my little brother won 5k in a freeroll last summer before he had deposited a 100 so if its rigged y pick my bro in glasgow to rig it for out of all the people that play here?????????? if u are getting knocked out often with good hands as you say then they aint as good as you think and if its any pocket (aa or 22) its still bingo pre-flop a buzz when u win not so much when u lose thats why its called gambling. They are your chips in front of you only you can put them in the centre so bad beat or not u can only blame yourself in the end for risking all your chips. good luck for your next everyone cause it aint all skill either
 
Old
Default
Sun May 29, 2011, 01:38 AM
(#17)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by BGBShooter View Post
Ok I'll lay it to rest once and for all .......If hitting the set on the river came only once in every 22 hands like the ODDS ...I would never have said BOO ever ....because it would be extremely rare and not that noticable. But the ****ing truth of this site and the RANDOM RIGGED SHUFFLE>>> Moderators and Kool Aid drinking suck up clowns ( Darkman61 , Sandtrap , ssuglia , Roomik, Pip and the rest of you PS suck ups ) is that happens a minimum 1 in 10 ....... so go screw yourselves all of you.

Well Hell your honor,no need for jury deliberation here. You simply can't argue with empirical evidence like this.

I may be a "suck up clown" but looking at how many games it takes you to achieve anything in the League and your glittering Q,4 rating on PPL and that monster -40% ROI you have on OPR I'll say that you just plain suck.

No wonder you look for a boogeyman to blame your failure on.

And I agree with what Da Sens Fan said earlier in this post. Idiots like you eff it up for newer player who come in here and are actually looking for a little feedback to grow their games. But then they see this "It's rigged" trash and start looking for that instead of what they should be looking for--which is ways to improve THEIR game.

So to all the newer players who read this "it's rigged" garbage I'm going to state a couple things since Roomik already provided more substansive independent thoughts and statements on this matter. (Nice job as always Room...).

Topic 1. PStars rakes BIG,BIG money every freaking day,like clockwork. Why would they need to rig anything? I've heard the arguments for "action" hands to increase the rake on ring tables but Roomik's post earlier laid out why that's nonsensical.

So how about in MTT's and SNG's? Well the popular theory among the 'tin-foilers" out there is that they want to clear the tables quickly so peeps will jump into another game when they bust and ergo more games will be played,thus increasing PStars rake.

Well a couple thoughts on this one...

One--Just how in the Hell are they increasing rake in a flipping FREEROLL league? You can't increase what does not exist.

Two--As for cash MTT's and SNG's,okay I can see how that could be a motivation except for two little things---First one problem PStars has never had is a lack of games filling and filling fast for that matter,so there's no reason to goose things along. Secondly I think that anyone who looks at this site dispassionately and just judges it as a business model in comparison to it's competitors will come to the conclusion that Stars is easily the best model in this industry. Does anyone really believe that the very same people who built so successful a model would be stupid enough to risk the very integrity of the site (which if there were ever any SERIOUS inquiries and PROOF of it being suspect would drive players away in droves) for a minimal increase in profits from games filling quicker? And who's to say they would fill quicker anyway? How many peeps here time out from playing and do something else for a little while after they suffer a nasty hit? Wouldn't that make games fill slower?

Topic 2. This is for newer players because this is something that you are just going to have to accept in this game and learn to deal with...

If you can work to become a very good player and learn to get it in "good" much more often than not it still guarantees that you WILL,absolutely,no two ways about it,walk away from playing muttering and/or cursing cruel fate more than being Joey Fistpump because YOU sucked out. Because a good player won't put themselves in position to need to suckout as often as a bad player will.

I reconcile myself to one of two things happening EVERY time I load up an MTT or a SNG---either I'm going to win it or I'm going to get railed on a hand that I was ahead on when the chips went in the middle. Do I get it in behind or in a flip sometimes? Yeah,of course. But,unless I'm playing a very wide range because I'm short,much more often than not I get my chips in when ahead.

But even were you to ALWAYS get your chips in as an 80% favorite that only means that you're going to lose 1 of every 5. And to run deep at all in any MTT/SNG you're probably going to get it in at least 5 times over the course of the game,often times a whole lot more than 5 times. So when is the hit going to come? The first time? Second? Fifth? Twentieth? WHEN,not if, the beat comes is usually the biggest determining factor in how successful any MTT/SNG foray is going to be.

Because like I said,unless you win the thing (and many times even then) that hit is going to come.

3. Lastly focusing on how the cards fall AFTER you have put all your chips in the middle is,quite simply, counter-productive and a complete waste of time. They're going to fall how they're going to fall. Once you have taken any decision making out of the equation it's just fate/luck/karma/VooDoo Monkey Paw mojo or whatever.

Anyone who feels that they are being done in by outrageous fortune I suggest that you download a trial version of one of the tracking sites and look at your results over a decent size sample. PT3 is perfect for this as they offer a 60 day free trial. When you see that ALL of your hands,good or bad,are performing within the standard expected range by +/- 2-4% over a decent size sample it will allay any thoughts of the site being rigged against you and you can get down to playing poker and learning how to improve your game.

Or you can always cry "Rigged!!!" and ride the Wahambulance to poker mediocrity (or worse).

Because one thing I have learned,beyond a shadow of a doubt,is that if you show me someone who cries about the site being rigged then I'll show you a loser.

Last edited by Moxie Pip; Sun May 29, 2011 at 01:47 AM..
 
Old
Default
Sun May 29, 2011, 02:27 AM
(#18)
mcrissinger's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,650
BronzeStar
Won't you a-holes stop using stupid numbers?

Math is stupid. And hard.

And.

RIGGED! Ha!

Room. Too many words. I just wanted to see a dancing dude.
 
Old
Default
Sun May 29, 2011, 03:33 AM
(#19)
QueenBee9979's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 24
BronzeStar
I didn't want to weigh in on this one, but Moxie you are a player I have respected & enjoyed playing with, so here goes ..... You know it is against the rules to use anyone's stats from opr - you agree not to every time you sign in ... You can loose your privileges to use the site - if reported. As for PPL, I don't know what that is but I am sure it is probably set up the same way.
I have looked @ his stats there to & what you need to realize is that if you compare his Dec. stats to the 2011 stats, you will see it proves his point that after he wrote to ps with complaints in Jan. his bad beats got a lot worse. - Now, before you or anyone else ponces - I am not crying rigged - I am just simply making a statement. We have all had our bad beats & know how frustrating it can be - heck, I quit every day in March - lol before finishing 8th in the league ( sadly, I can't even make that decision any more as my government made it for me). Let me add that right after taking 2 bad beats in a roll is the wrong time to start a thread in the forum, so maybe we should cut him some slack.
He is a great poker player & coach - look at his finishes in the league & how many times he had to fight his way back up the ladder after experiencing "variance". I can not & will not disclose the names of all the players he helped, but I will tell you it is astonishing at the results - people coming from 1500 & below to front page of the standings & even in top 10. I know this for a fact because I have come into contact with all of them not because he told me. I offer myself as an example; he started coaching me in mid Jan. - look at my results before & after that point in the league. Then, yes Moxie or anyone else, look at my opr prior to & after he gave me tips / coached me in poker. I am not saying my stats are great or nothing of the sort; I am just saying I have improved & I do know I still have a long way to go.
In closing, I want you all to know - I have watched way over half of his hands in the last 4 months & he only plays the top hands. I have watched him loose to lesser hands way more than I do. I have seldom seen him play anything other than a top 10 hand unless he was on tilt. I think we all know what makes us go on tilt - a lucky donk calling a raise with a bs hand & then winning it. Then, when on tilt & likely very short stacked, we do make questionable calls & or bluff bets - we have all done it.
Just my thoughts...
Attack if you must, I can handle it .....
QBee
 
Old
Default
Sun May 29, 2011, 05:49 AM
(#20)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueenBee9979 View Post
I didn't want to weigh in on this one, but Moxie you are a player I have respected & enjoyed playing with, so here goes ..... You know it is against the rules to use anyone's stats from opr - you agree not to every time you sign in ... You can loose your privileges to use the site - if reported. As for PPL, I don't know what that is but I am sure it is probably set up the same way.
I have looked @ his stats there to & what you need to realize is that if you compare his Dec. stats to the 2011 stats, you will see it proves his point that after he wrote to ps with complaints in Jan. his bad beats got a lot worse. - Now, before you or anyone else ponces - I am not crying rigged - I am just simply making a statement. We have all had our bad beats & know how frustrating it can be - heck, I quit every day in March - lol before finishing 8th in the league ( sadly, I can't even make that decision any more as my government made it for me). Let me add that right after taking 2 bad beats in a roll is the wrong time to start a thread in the forum, so maybe we should cut him some slack.
He is a great poker player & coach - look at his finishes in the league & how many times he had to fight his way back up the ladder after experiencing "variance". I can not & will not disclose the names of all the players he helped, but I will tell you it is astonishing at the results - people coming from 1500 & below to front page of the standings & even in top 10. I know this for a fact because I have come into contact with all of them not because he told me. I offer myself as an example; he started coaching me in mid Jan. - look at my results before & after that point in the league. Then, yes Moxie or anyone else, look at my opr prior to & after he gave me tips / coached me in poker. I am not saying my stats are great or nothing of the sort; I am just saying I have improved & I do know I still have a long way to go.
In closing, I want you all to know - I have watched way over half of his hands in the last 4 months & he only plays the top hands. I have watched him loose to lesser hands way more than I do. I have seldom seen him play anything other than a top 10 hand unless he was on tilt. I think we all know what makes us go on tilt - a lucky donk calling a raise with a bs hand & then winning it. Then, when on tilt & likely very short stacked, we do make questionable calls & or bluff bets - we have all done it.
Just my thoughts...
Attack if you must, I can handle it .....
QBee

Yep,I could get jammed up for that no argument. If so que sera,sera.

Not going to "flame" at you Queen,the 2-3 times we tabled together I had a good time chatting with you AND I know you can play. And for that matter I think BGB is a pretty good player off the couple times I tabled with him.

And I've had several peeps on here contact me via PM whom I've helped where I can myself,so I can respect that as well. So I would hope that the "it's rigged" trip that he's on is just what you said earlier---TILT. Because tilt you can fix that. Loading up a game thinking you're beat before you even start? THAT you can't fix,except by letting it go.

We all hit some ugly ass variance form time to time. That's poker in a nutshell. I had a run where I lost something like 35 out of 50 hands holding AA or KK. Didn't matter where---PSO,rings,MTT's,SNG,whatever game it was if I had one of those hands the suckout was coming.

All you can do is play through it and keep making good decisions.

Look at "The Grinder",Mike Mizerachi. He went thorugh a bad variance run that stretched for over a year. No matter what he did.or how he played it,he was getting wailed on like a pinata on Cinco de Mayo. But he turned it around and made a deep run in the WSOP Main Event and is back on his game.

The dude that won the $6 Million tourney on Stars a couple months back typed into chat while the FT was waiting for the splits on the chop to be worked out "I just want to thank the RNG for straight effing me for a year. It was worth it." I damn near wasted my keyboard spitting up a beer when I read that.

You are going to come to a point,everyone, when you play this game where it's going to make you hate it enough to quit,or give in and go down the path of "I never win a race so what's it matter?" or some such nonsense.

Why? Because only the great games can make you love to play them so much that you have to hate them a little to sometimes.

And I'm with you...I would take 100 donk hits on my AA hands in a row to get back on here tomorrow and walk away whistling a happy tune.

Well maybe not a hundred. Fifty though...
 

Getting PokerStars is easy: download and install the PokerStars game software, create your free player account, and validate your email address. Clicking on the download poker button will lead to the installation of compatible poker software on your PC of 51.7 MB, which will enable you to register and play poker on the PokerStars platform. To uninstall PokerStars use the Windows uninstaller: click Start > Control Panel and then select Add or Remove programs > Select PokerStars and click Uninstall or Remove.

Copyright (c) PokerSchoolOnline.com. All rights reserved, Rational Group, Douglas Bay Complex, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 1DZ. You can email us on support@pokerschoolonline.com