Vladimir,I think you should make the law suit,even though it's most likely you will not win the case.There are many people,that run insanely bad and when they try to post anywhere about it,they get mucked by "pros",coaches,bad players that run good etc.
All of the above,have their own reasons...coaches advise you to get coaching,pros think they are the best and that sites are perfect,donks just don't understand shit etc.
Pokerstars support give the same stereotypical answers about cigital,or how players tend to only remember bad beats against them and "pros" of course agree and answer the same.Most players that have complaints,can't show others how bad they run,because usually don't use tracking software at all,or do it for not enough time to prove how insanely bad they run.Finally if someone tries to see what has happened in the past,there is no history of lawsuits against pokerstars and everyone just drops it and stops playing there or something...
You people want to know what's pokerstars benefit of having a player run that bad?It's that despite that he keeps playing and all his money goes to bad players,that most likely gamble a lot and lose it to others and the site gets most benefit in the end.I mean come am I the onlyone that has noticed fish running insanely good and then of course lose as easy as they won?
Anyway my point is thatthere should be a real test for the freaking RNG and a law suit has to be filed at last.Vladimir it's most likely,that you will lose it(if you do it after all)
but there will be legal history after it and it may lead to further testing of the RNG.I would suggest though,to try and somehow(through forums or something) gather more people and make the lawsuit all together,though I doubt there will be many people with graphs like yours,but it's more likely to succeed that way.
GL no matter what.
Originally posted by NinjaG4
You people want to know what's pokerstars benefit of having a player run that bad?It's that despite that he keeps playing and all his money goes to bad players,that most likely gamble a lot and lose it to others and the site gets most benefit in the end.I mean come am I the onlyone that has noticed fish running insanely good and then of course lose as easy as they won?.
"All his money goes to bad players".
VladimirN, is that true? Did all your suckouts go in favour of 'fish' or did many go in favour of regs?
"I mean come am I the onlyone that has noticed fish running insanely good and then of course lose as easy as they won?"
And who do they lose it to? Ah, yes: Regs. Just because bad recreational players don't lose their winnings to the same reg they sucked out on in the first place doesn't mean they don't eventually lose it to regs in general. Anyone who believes that the deposits of recreational players end up anywhere than 1. rake and 2. regs' winnings is just deluded. The fact that one reg might be luckier than another is irrelevant to that.
@VladimirN: Your main evidence for you runbad is your tracking software's output which tells you how many hundreds of BI you are below EV. What's more likely: A problem with your version of the tracking software or an endemic problem with a piece of software used by millions which just spits out random numbers?
There are so many holes that a competent opposition lawyer could pick in your "evidence" that I seriously doubt you'd even find a lawyer to take on your case. Sorry to sound harsh.
I'd give my HHs to professional mathematicians who would calculate the odds of the events that have happened. They probably wouldn't even do it in 'BIs under EV' but just pure odds or however they're doing it.
But what I asked is, could this be used to force a more strict and regular checks of their RNG (if nothing more then that)?
I can offer another view from a financial background.
2 Things
1.
There is no point worrying or spending time on things you can't change. It is a waste of time and energy.
2.
The ev model you are using is not an accurate model of what is really happening. It is a fun guideline. The friendly people at pokertracker would gladly discuss the areas taht they know of where it breaks down. There would also be more areas they dont know.
I'd imagine you most likely have a playstyle/leak that is good for 'model profits' but bad in actual play. Like LTCM or VAR or any other simplified financial model that is applied to a more complicated problem and expected to work without a hitch.
As someone with a Masters in Information Technology (Professional), I think I am qualified enough to talk about the Poker Software and RNG generators from a purely Mathematical/Computational aspect. (I can even show you my accreditation if you don't believe me.)
I will start with the first fact, there is no such thing as a perfect RNG.
This is because computers do calculations, they dont do freedom of choice. They are given a psudo random number, something that could be the number of stars in the sky at a specific time, they then do calculations like multiply the number of stars by the time to the smallest portion of a second (1 millionth of a second at the time the calculation started).
This then generates a number that the software will use as a "seed" for the deck. For example Multiply the number by the cards in the deck and select the card that is closest to the random number, remove that card and place it in a pile. Then it would find a new random number and remove another card placing it in a pile. It would repeat that 52 times until it has a psudorandom deck. Impossible to predict unless you knew the exact millionth of a second the calculation happened.
Mind you that is a less random example than what they would use on their software to be able to pass the accreditation.
That is how they generate the deck of cards that they put on the table to deal out.
The software
I will comment on the segregation of players based on win% and apply it in a fair example. To work out winning and losing players is very simple. You just have to look at SnG results, which are all stored and then place players in pools based on a value they are given by the software, maybe a high winning player is a 10 and a "fish" is a 1. The numbers will adjust but when they are going to play a game they will be only sat down with players who are of similar numbers.
When 10's are playing 10's there will always be a loser, no matter how perfect each of their play is. So there will be someone who is lower than 10, say 5. The 5 will move up if he wins the games against 1's or down if he loses more.
They would be constantly adjusting the value of each player to account for variance, there is always a chance a fish will just luck out a few times and become a 10 or a pro player will have hit AA cracked every time and be a 1.
Now to your case
If the software WAS showing you specific variance as a winning player, judging by the amount of losses you have made would it not now classify you as a losing player? As a result moving you out of the category of 10's into either a 5 or possibly a 1.
Software Tracking/Simulation
I will mention that any statistics you have on software for tracking as well as simulators are only as good as the people who made it. Human's who have typed Thousands/Millions of lines of code, who inevitably will make mistakes, it is human nature. If software was perfect there would be no "patches".
Because of this, you would have to take any assumptions/calculation/simulations and run them through a variety of mediums. I do not mean just 2 or 3. I am talking, checked, double checked, triple checked, cross checked, randomized, summed, calculated and stamped and sealed.
Finally
This is the odds of winning the top prize in the lotto in Australia
1 in 8,145,060
This is the odds of being struck by lightning[1] in the USA in any given year.
1 in 1,000,000
But when someone wins the lotto you do not go to the governing body and ask if it is rigged, and neither do you ask if the clouds are rigged when you get struck by lightning. The same applies to poker, out of 100 million poker players at least 1 is going to hit that run of bad luck so bad it makes you cry. This may be the case where you are that 1 in 100 million. The fact is though it will happen to someone, the same chance applies to it happening to you or me or one of the coaches or any individual on this forum, or in the world. The cold hard fact is though, that it will happen. Just as posted earlier you have the EXACT same probability of getting 7 :club:2 
followed by 7 :club:2 as you do of getting the same first hand and J :diamond:6 
as a second hand (1 in 1326) chance of any starting hand.
No matter what the insanely incredible odds are if it is a 1 in anything chance it will happen. (1.05x10^-25 chance of getting the same starting hand 4 times in a row) improbable but possible. Just as any possibility in poker is including a downswing worse than yours on perfect playing, just being beaten out by the luck or lack of luck. I am not talking about simulations here which are used to try and eliminate the luck factor I am talking about just pure chance and coincidence, the statistic that defies simulation because its so small (but still exists and happens).
[1] http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/medical.htm
Originally posted by Spikelema
I will start with the first fact, there is no such thing as a perfect RNG.This is because computers do calculations, they dont do freedom of choice. They are given a psudo random number, something that could be the number of stars in the sky at a specific time, they then do calculations like multiply the number of stars by the time to the smallest portion of a second (1 millionth of a second at the time the calculation started).
This then generates a number that the software will use as a "seed" for the deck. For example Multiply the number by the cards in the deck and select the card that is closest to the random number, remove that card and place it in a pile. Then it would find a new random number and remove another card placing it in a pile. It would repeat that 52 times until it has a psudorandom deck. Impossible to predict unless you knew the exact millionth of a second the calculation happened.
Mind you that is a less random example than what they would use on their software to be able to pass the accreditation.
Great post!
Thank you!
I believe that the number of possible "decks" is:
8.06582E+67
(I used Excel's permutation function =PERMUT(52,52) )
Does this not imply that there must be at least that many possible values for "seed"?
If there aren't, then some of the possible arrangements would be missed.
Or am I showing my math ignorance again...
--VS
Originally posted by VorpalF2F
Great post!
Thank you!I believe that the number of possible "decks" is:
8.06582E+67
(I used Excel's permutation function =PERMUT(52,52) )Does this not imply that there must be at least that many possible values for "seed"?
If there aren't, then some of the possible arrangements would be missed.
Or am I showing my math ignorance again...--VS
Yes very much you are correct, the "seeds" will probably vary millions of times more than the number of permutations (52!) The important thing is that as far as generating the deck that is sitting at the table goes, it is as random as humanly possible at this moment. I will not vouch that the software deals from the top of the deck each time though, that is where speculation comes in. (I am also not claiming that they don't deal from the top either) I am merely stating the deck itself as presented to the table for play is random and not "rigged".
Originally posted by Spikelema
This is the odds of winning the top prize in the lotto in Australia
1 in 8,145,060
This is the odds of being struck by lightning[1] in the USA in any given year.
1 in 1,000,000But when someone wins the lotto you do not go to the governing body and ask if it is rigged, and neither do you ask if the clouds are rigged when you get struck by lightning. The same applies to poker, out of 100 million poker players at least 1 is going to hit that run of bad luck so bad it makes you cry. This may be the case where you are that 1 in 100 million. The fact is though it will happen to someone, the same chance applies to it happening to you or me or one of the coaches or any individual on this forum, or in the world. The cold hard fact is though, that it will happen.
This
As someone with a Masters in Information Technology (Professional), I think I am qualified enough to talk about the Poker Software and RNG generators from a purely Mathematical/Computational aspect. (I can even show you my accreditation if you don't believe me.) I will start with the first fact, there is no such thing as a perfect RNG. This is because computers do calculations, they dont do freedom of choice. They are given a psudo random number, something that could be the number of stars in the sky at a specific time, they then do calculations like multiply the number of stars by the time to the smallest portion of a second (1 millionth of a second at the time the calculation started).
If you truly were Masters in Information Technology (Professional) then you knew that for generating true random numbers nobody uses computers anymore. Quantum random number generators (also known as hardware random number generators) are used instead (for a very long time from now). Pokerstars and most other sites claims they use it
"there is no such thing as a perfect RNG" theory [*] failed 17 years ago
Originally posted by Vygantas82
If you truly were Masters in Information Technology (Professional) then you knew that for generating true random numbers nobody uses computers anymore. Quantum random number generators (also known as hardware random number generators) are used instead (for a very long time from now). Pokerstars and most other sites claims they use it"there is no such thing as a perfect RNG" theory [*] failed 17 years ago
I stand corrected on that point, although you must admit in my example I actually used a hardware example. I wasn't aware that they were classified as pure random and just as "more random" than conventional RNG.
I did say "multiple the number of stars" which I only used over saying, split a beam of light or counted the noise. The idea is that they are "Theoretically" unpredictable as it is not currently possible to predict the results.
Theoretical though, just means that at this current stage there is no known way to calculate them, but it may just be that we do not have the information at this current time to predict but in the future we may very well. Randomness in itself is one of the hardest measurable factors.
So yes at this current time "Theoretically" the numbers are random (and in fact PokerStars does use a hardware random number generator.)
This still does not discount my argument as presented. I have not had a lot of experience with Random Number Generators and my main point was in regards to the code that operates the RNG and the fact that 1 in any number still means it happens once.
first,i also support all your answers to vladimir and try to help(except rihard4a who is again trolling,as he is just dumb donk,who ask you to close this or open,do you make such decisions,GET A LIFE)...
second,if anybody wants to call me a fish also,i challange him to HU sng(WIN FIRST TO 5;),and i am not a LOSING player,rather all you could say that i am winning by quit some margin...as i play micros,i cant make millions,but what interest me most,is GAME INTEGRITY...and i also complained a lot,here or even to STARS regarding such issues...
i partially agree with NINJA above,as i also see a lots of suckouts and dont think its fair...i have AA and get cracked by 27o..so,that should happens 18%(1 out of 5 that i lose with aces),but i also have a feeling that it happens more then this 18%(so,we can run higher or lower,that isnt the point),and not just to me,i see a bunch of suckouts for other players as well...now all those with arguments how LIVE we play less cards and ONLINE way more,so we see more suckouts in short time,is BIAS...as i also played LIVE(I AM NOT A PRO)and the thing is in LIVE play,you most certainly dont see so much ACTION CARDS rolling...what i mean is,you all talk about STARS(there is other rooms as well)and their RNG and processes,how many of you have ever seen or touch that RNG??NONE...thats the correct answer...
as for my opinion,i also think that STARS(and other rooms as well)arent made a really FAIR GAME,they made it ACTION game...and also i think that in that case of AA vs 27o,that 27o is winning way more then 18% gennerally speaking...and that the GAME is made in favor of weaker players already(esspeccially at micro levels,some say that is cause people play way worse hand,so you get beat by 27o,not some JTs or Q9s)and i dont have a proof for it...do you have a proof that isnt so???so,the WHOLE POINT is,i also agree that STARS(as well all the others)should have RNG tests and checks very frequently and results publiclly displayed(i dont meanr RNG parts,i mean actually results of all players hands and how that went)so,that ALL PLAYERS involved in the game are sure that they are reciving FAIR GAME...is that too much to ask???
until that is done,so we have proof for either case,i dont feel comfrotable playing,no matter what you say,as nobody ever here(even some are smart people,lawyers,tehnicians)withness in first hand what is happening with the RNG...now,all you can start pissing on me,i dont care,call me a fish,what ever 
I don't even see the point to argue over RNG and how is it "rigged" or whatever. The fact is that it is random, you cannot do anything about it, PokerStars don't care about your opinion because they get the profit they estimate, even if they do test RNG on regular basis nothing would change at all, the results would remain the same.
further more,as we all withness now,how most of rooms are trying to influance the ECOLOGY of poker players and made it more suitable(for whom is RIGHT question),and that just shows that they are willing to interfier with how thing are going,why there would be any problem for them to make something else(temper with RNG a bit??)to make that same ECOLOGY better(for weaker players,true,but in same case weaker players and rooms have same intrest,TO THEM PLAY LONGER AND ROOMS GET MORE RAKE,so thy actually dont lie when they say that they do it for weaker players :f_biggrin:)
again,i am not the best player,i just want to see a FAIR GAME,thats all...even if i lose later,i dont mind,as long as it is fair...
also wanted to mention(in my case is true)that when you lose with AA vs 27o,it happens 1 out of 5...so,in my case it happens,i win perhapse 4 times(when it isnt important,torney just started or the guy was short),but when happens that i get a suckout,it will happens when i am deep in tourney or bublle and it really counts...so,that is also important,as that decide how much you win at the end(money wise)...so the odds are good,but the results are in question??
Originally posted by Rihard4a
The fact is that it is random, you cannot do anything about it, PokerStars don't care about your opinion because they get the profit they estimate, even if they do test RNG on regular basis nothing would change at all, the results would remain the same.
FACT???can you verify that for me,please...you get that by inside info or what??it happens that i sent a load of mails to stars about it,and always same answer arrise,CIGITEL and the page all is good and nice..perhapse that is FACTS to you,i am sorry,i am not satisfied with that...
sure,they dont mind my opinion,but what when 10K or 100K players come as me and say>;WE WANT THAT RNG CHECK EVERY DAY...how that would make them feel??and i am sure that they have a reason why they dont make such tests(cause if there isnt anything,very easy,STARS make tests every day and show results,easy game :f_cool:),and it isnt cause they arent able to make it...THEY DONT WANT TO MAKE IT...you can make all your asumptions,i will make mine...
Originally posted by janushr
Originally posted by Rihard4a
The fact is that it is random, you cannot do anything about it, PokerStars don't care about your opinion because they get the profit they estimate, even if they do test RNG on regular basis nothing would change at all, the results would remain the same.FACT???can you verify that for me,please...you get that by inside info or what??it happens that i sent a load of mails to stars about it,and always same answer arrise,CIGITEL and the page all is good and nice..perhapse that is FACTS to you,i am sorry,i am not satisfied with that...
sure,they dont mind my opinion,but what when 10K or 100K players come as me and say>;WE WANT THAT RNG CHECK EVERY DAY...how that would make them feel??and i am sure that they have a reason why they dont make such tests(cause if there isnt anything,very easy,STARS make tests every day and show results,easy game :f_cool:),and it isnt cause they arent able to make it...THEY DONT WANT TO MAKE IT...you can make all your asumptions,i will make mine...
I don't understand your frustrations. It is pretty much random, if it wouldn't you could predict every card preflop to be dealt to any player by just knowing its algorythm. Same postflop.
If you can predict every scenario for at least 5 hands in a row, or even 2 hands in a row, then I would question RNGs functions. And I don't know where did you get 100k people knowing what RNG actually is.
In my opinion only the regs actually know that there is such thing as RNG and not even every single reg. Even if you gather this RNG hating syndicate to question pokerstars, they would politely respond as you just stated, with a link providing CITIGEL.
Just man up and keep playing, because in the end the better player still is profiting from bad players, which is a fact and there are plenty of examples on this particural forum. 
I stand corrected on that point, although you must admit in my example I actually used a hardware example.
no, you used classic (PSEUDOrandom) example which is based on mathematical algorithms.
honestly,i dont want to flame you or anything,just politly expression of our opinions:)
i think you dont understand what i say,i dont want to know what cards are coming out(or that i could ever know that),i am just saying(IMHO)that STARS and other rooms are using some RNG that helps people whom are weak players(obv strong players dont need help)and i see results of that when ever i play,AND I DONT LIKE IT...but,still i am winning,not losing player...
but,in this case,SKILL isnt as important as LUCK(determined by STARS RNG),and more important,i really dont ENJOY the game where some DONKEY make most stupidiest play and get rewarded for it...and constantly over and over again...in REAL LIFE POKER i am sure that wouldnt be happening so often,and my opinion is that STARS are just milking all that they can posiblly get before all is legalised and under govermant(taxes,so that all will be carfully overwatched)and i presume once legalised at all markets,that we will get a bit different pic of online poker...i could be wrong 
time will tell...