Originally posted by Fongie
Originally posted by inf4my
I love how you assume that I must be a losing player just because I'm not naive enough to think that these websites are 100% legitimate.
Sorry, but we saw the hands you posted in your last downswing thread. Also, your KK vs AA logic is easily overcome by the fact that you play FR. FR tables are as a general tight, and most people only go all in preflop with the very strongest range. So when you get action preflop with KK on a FR table, villain is mostly going to be holding a strong hand (assuming he's not a fish of course). It only makes sense right.. you don't go all in preflop with a very wide range either do you?
Lastly, look at your samplesize. If you lost 4 stacks in 500 hands, would you call yourself a losing player? Well, I know you wouldn't, but I hope you see how silly it would be. So how can you start juding your AA vs KK or KK vs AA frequency on the same samplesize as you would completely ignore a losing streak due to variance?
You just don't realise how great variance can be.
I can't believe a coach would say something like this.
You saw one of my 100,000 hands and based on that one hand, which was situational btw, you make a judgement on my skill level?
I ran $50 into $900 over 100,000 hands. I think that puts me above 90% of the player base automatically so please, spare me.
Your example makes no sense at all. What difference does it make that I'm playing FR? The odds of AA and KK being dealt in the same hand is ~4% regardless of the structure.
Yes, when someone gives you action at FR, it usually means a very strong hand. That is true of course. But the chance that someone has AA at the SAME TIME that I've been dealt KK is still going to be 4% no matter what, so your example like I said makes no sense.
As far as my sample size goes, everyone in this thread has mistakenly assumed that my entire theory is based on that sample. I mentioned those stats simply as an interesting side note.
I don't think the sites are rigged because of my AA vs KK stats. I think they are rigged because of the type of world we live in, and the fact that there is no good reason for them NOT to rig the cards.
They operate outside the law, because the industry is unregulated.
Slightly modifying probabilities would be almost impossible to detect because it can always be blamed on variance.
Other sites have already been caught, and before conclusive proof was provided, the VAST majority of players refused to believe it was true.
There are no consequences for messing with the probabilities, evidenced by the fact that UB and AP are still in business and doing just fine, and they committed a much more vile offence.
Capitalists throughout history have proven time and time again that when there's money to be made through corruption, they WILL take advantage of it. The most recent example of this is the economic meltdown in the US which was caused almost soley by high level investment bankers and politicians who saw a way to exploit the taxpayers and took advantage of it.
It's these overwhelming facts that lead me to doubt the integrity of these rooms. The sample size was just an afterthought.
