The fix is in.

    • TovarishStulov
      TovarishStulov
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.05.2009 Posts: 6
      Online poker is rigged. I say this as a statement of fact, one that is transparently obvious to anyone that's ever played online.

      "Really? Even the major sites like Poker Stars and Full Tilt?", you ask rhetorically.
      "Especially," I reply, and for the same reason.

      They all have the same business model and largely base their software on the same algorithms. Why am I writing this? Well, I figure I've wasted enough time on online poker to have a conclusive insight into the scam, and I feel that writing this is far more productive and socially beneficial than depositing any more money into some hucksters online Ponzi scheme.

      For some reason, any poker forum has aficionados that quickly come to the defence of these offshore commercial entities like they were damsels in distress. Their arguments are largely the same, so I'll rebut them, but first the primary point:

      The biggest contention of poker apologists is that poker sites lack the motive to screw their customers. That’s because these people are incredulous (not an uncommon trait), but also lack an understanding of the online poker business model. They think poker sites make their money off of rake, which is a half truth. If that were it, the argument from motive might hold some water. Even then you could never discount human greed and the desire to squeeze out an extra 20% in revenue. But the truth about how poker sites make money will make the rigging and the motivation for it apparent: deposits.

      Yup, you can deposit money into your poker account, never play a hand, and poker sites will be thrilled. That’s because you're giving them your money to do with as they will. Online poker is not a physical casino - your money is not sitting in a vault in the basement, its being used for financial investment and generating a return for the company, regardless of whether you play poker or not. So the motivation for online casinos is to keep as much money on deposit as possible, same as any bank. Hence the rigging model of online poker sites is something called "account churning". This means shuffling money between accounts without letting anyone get comfortable enough with their bankroll to cash out.

      If the motivation was simply to increase the rake, online poker sites wouldn't care too much about who wins the hand. If some dumbass wanted to ship it with Jack/Six off-suit after flopping middle pair, there'd be no motivation for poker sites not to let your Kings hold up. But any decent player knows that once the storm clouds move in you can do no right. Whatever game you play, you will lose. Consecutively. Until your bankroll is significantly eroded or gone.

      How they do this is variable: sometimes you'll be card dead for hours, finally flop top two and get called by a straight draw. Guess who wins. Then you'll flop a monster and get called by a two outer. Guess who wins. Then you'll hit a second nut flush on the turn with three of a suit on the board and get pushed in by the nut flush. Whatever the scenario, it will consistently go one way because the cause of it is account churning software designed to make sure people don't cash out and that new money is being deposited.

      When this software kicks in is variable. Without a window into the guts of the algorithm (whistle-blowers anyone?) the exact logic is unknown, but a common story is "I joined a site, made a bunch of money and then got screwed ever since my first cashout." Its plausible that sites use this as a "level" - the point at which a user is likely to cash out and hence the software activates sometime before they reach that mark. There’s no end to the behavioural analysis techniques they could use to maximise the money on deposit, but this article isn't an instruction set on how to beat a rigged system. My central point has been made.

      Now to the rebuttals.

      "It’s the variance man!/That’s poker!/You just can't handle the swings!/Etc."

      Firstly, anyone who uses the word "variance" as intellectual argument for why people get screwed in online poker is math illiterate. Variance is a much bigger problem in live games because you play fewer hands. A number of people will read that and experience an indefinable feeling that something in that sentence is wrong. That's because the common argument by poker site apologists is that variance is higher online.
      To be clear, variance is the difference between the expected result and the actual result. The greater the sample size of hands the more likely that the outcomes will conform to a normal distribution, and the variance will be less of a factor in the overall result. For the layman, try this: grab a physical deck and deal out a poker scenario, let's say 9/9 vs A/J rainbow preflop (55.72% vs 43.98% with a 0.3% chop). Now deal out five community cards and record the win/loss result. The first time you do this one of the hands will have a 100% win percentage even though it only had maximum 55.72% win probability. Now shuffle the deck and re-deal the community cards. Now do that a a hundred times. By the time you approach 30 you should have win distribution approaching the expected result. Run it a hundred times and you'll find the variance won't exceed +/-5%.

      What this means is that variance is your friend. It’s the statistical rule that tells you something is either conforming to the expected result, or not. If not, it’s rigged. There are no poker gods. There is no black hole of statistical improbability hanging over your head. In this case, sanity is highly statistical.

      If you're in the business of getting it all in with 75% or better in an unrigged system, you will be a winning player. In fact, your short term variance is likely to be positive, because if you think of every hand as being discreet, you're more likely to win it than lose. Think back on how often "variance" in online poker gave you a 90% daily win record with your 75% hands. Probably not very often. Now consider how often you win 40% of your 75% hands. Seems almost normal doesn't it? In fact, statistically speaking it so far from "normal" that I can't even bring myself to call this article a hypothesis. Online poker is rigged. Period.

      "These are large, publically traded, reputable companies. Why would they risk screwing their customers."

      Firstly, recent news has brought much of the reputability of online poker sites into question. Two of the biggest ones have been indicted on multiple counts of tax fraud and money laundering in the US (their biggest market). I'm no fan of the tax man, but I'll point out this: if online poker sites are willing to risk screwing Uncle Sam, they're not going to be too concerned with screwing an unorganised group of underwear-clad weekend poker warriors (Disclaimer: the author was fully dressed and sober during the writing of this article).

      Secondly, if the site you're reading this post on has a comment section, take a quick peak right now. Someone will invariable post a remark to this effect: "Losing poker player bitching about poker sites to excuse his own poor play." Someone else will second that motion; in the end without access to the sites code, it’s a wash. "Maybe he's right, maybe he's wrong, the jury is still out, who knows." In all probability, this system was phased in as some clever financial manager realised that deposits were a much larger gold mine than rake. One site tried it on a minor scale and saw a boost in profits, then upped the account churning and saw a bigger boost. Some people complained, but were quickly shouted down as being sore losers. A few people even left the site, but because their deposit money was still churning through the system, the sites don't consider that a loss, especially since if left alone, these players would have made money and cashed out repeatedly. More likely, because they were likely to be good players, they first focused on self-criticism and hung in there depositing multiple times, building their bankrolls quickly, then suffering the same string of "bad luck" as they approached their expected cashout level.
      The practice spread, and now that we have a whole slew of poker sites its easy to think that some of them must not be rigged. But a majority of these sites are part of poker networks that run the same base software. So no, they're all rigged. It’s an industry practice at this point, which is not surprising since they all have the same business model with the same incentives.

      "You're not important enough for poker sites to target your measly $100 bankroll. They make millions after all."

      Poker sites don't target my measly bankroll. They target 20,000 measly bankrolls. I'm certain that no-one has ever brought up my name in a staff meeting, but they probably bragged about 90% deposit retention among sub-$1000 accounts. High fives all around.

      "What about the Pro's and Semi-Pros. There are people that make a living off of online poker, and they can't all be in on the conspiracy."

      In some sense online casinos are still casinos. They do have an appreciation for whales and treat them differently - as they should. People with online account over $10,000 will be doing cashouts. All of them. The distribution of fish and sharks is much more narrow, and its impossible to play so far above the rim that a 30% handicap wont quickly funnel your bankroll to the waiting arms of another player - who will then promptly cash out their $50,000 windfall. So the incentive for churning their accounts is substantially less. Plus, with the whales, rake is actually significant. We're not talking about $0.05 a hand anymore.

      So I'd be surprised if large accounts get churned the same way that small accounts do. This is a hypothesis, I'll admit. My own account topped out at $2000 at its peak (reached the first time I joined a poker site a week after I made a $40 deposit). I cashed out a $1000 and have been getting the shit end of the stick ever since. That was two years and 5 poker sites ago. The same story repeats itself every time I got fed up and left a site. Thankfully, I almost always come out ahead in live cash games (You know, those things with the high hand variance). Probably just a coincidence though.

      "Online players are just better that live players./Online players play a more lose-retarded style and are more likely to get it all in with draws." (Ok, so loose-retarded is a personal pet name for my typical online opponents)

      The first statement I generally disagree with, but won't contest too heavily. Suffice it to say that I've never had a problem getting online players to commit their stack with obviously inferior hands, which is generally the mark of a bad player. The second statement rings true. The conclusion that this is in some way a negative is wrong however. If someone wants to commit three quarters of their stack (or all of it as the case may be) drawing to an eight outer, that should be good news. That should mean chips flowing endlessly in your direction with an occasional hiccup and an "aw, shucks" the one time Fishy McFish flops a set of 3's against your pocket aces. I appeal to the good sense of the reader, is this really your experience in online play? If we were talking about 5% variance between expected value and actual results, would anyone really be talking about this issue? If every decent player reading this hasn't experienced the endless strings of coolers and bad beats that define online play (read "account churning") then I stand in utter amazement. Please, share with us what site you play on, they'll get my business.

      I'll end it there, before this turns into a book.
  • 28 replies
    • Hahaownedlolz
      Hahaownedlolz
      Bronze
      Joined: 24.04.2009 Posts: 1,755
      Pokerstars and FTP are on the Isle of Man and they are required by law to have an amount equal to all the player's money in their accounts. So they can not invest with it.


      Just leave the site to be honest. Your not getting any support here. Go to some gambling addicts forum and i'm sure they will all agree that it's rigged. However i think you'll also find they're also very surprisingly losing players.
    • vmarqui
      vmarqui
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.01.2010 Posts: 4,816
      I've read lots of "online poker is rigged" threads, and i must say yours looks better than all of them.
      But thing is, it's not rigged. Your argument looks kind of solid, but still not rigged. How do I know this? when i first started playing poker, i sucked. and i lost. then i got a little better and over time i went from being a break even player to a winning one. not only in online poker, but also playing live.
      how could you explain that? both online and live poker are rigged? i've been on sick heater, and i'm actually a losing/breakeven player? wouldn't make much sense since i've played way too many hands for it to be called a heater.

      dude, online poker is not rigged. if you can't win, it's because you suck. or maybe you are good, but not good enough to beat rake. and the proof of this is that winning player are actually winning money playing online, if it was rigged, everybody would sense something weird is happening.
    • fryandspicy
      fryandspicy
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.05.2010 Posts: 440
      Originally posted by Hahaownedlolz
      Pokerstars and FTP are on the Isle of Man and they are required by law to have an amount equal to all the player's money in their accounts. So they can not invest with it.


      Just leave the site to be honest. Your not getting any support here. Go to some gambling addicts forum and i'm sure they will all agree that it's rigged. However i think you'll also find they're also very surprisingly losing players.
      /thread

      EDIT: Just looked this up to see if it was true and found:
      Q: Is my PokerStars account balance used for your operational expenses or is it kept in a separate account?
      A: PokerStars is proud that, under special banking arrangements, an amount covering the total of all players' account balances is held in segregated accounts, not used for any operational expenses. These segregated accounts are managed by one of Europe's leading financial services groups. These arrangements ensure that PokerStars can at all times fulfil its obligations towards its players, and provides further reassurance that players' funds are always secure with PokerStars.

      So they do in fact make money from our deposits.
    • CrocHunter
      CrocHunter
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.10.2008 Posts: 46
      WOW dude your on tilt big time lol.

      If your on this site you must have got the $50 so why are you depositing money?

      People lose at poker dude its ok its still a game of chance no different then live poker. People go broke at live poker just as much as online ppl. Its all luck with some skill mixed in anyway thats what i beleive when ppl try to tell me different i say then if its skill then why do i have to wait for the right cards in the right position?
    • roopopper
      roopopper
      Bronze
      Joined: 31.12.2010 Posts: 4,289
      lol well I read your whole theology and yep it could be fixed!!! but the problem is I love poker i love the people i have met through this site and I love the extra money poker has generated for me!!! If I invested my money in a uk bank at the moment I would be lucky to make 3% interest, I get far more than that through poker, in fact if party poker want to make money from my money sitting in their account so be it....guess what? that is how the world works!! lol :P

      Lets spell this out.... if I make more than 3% profit from playing poker ie..I deposit 100 dollars and make 4 dollars in one year(yes one year!!!) its better than any short term investment I could make in any uk bank at the moment!!!!
      poker is not just about making quick profits!!!!

      Roo


      :rolleyes:
    • Manijakpokeraski
      Manijakpokeraski
      Bronze
      Joined: 30.09.2010 Posts: 53
      i kinda agree but ........... if that was true...... i would stop poker instantly if i get proofs
    • Wriggers
      Wriggers
      Bronze
      Joined: 21.07.2009 Posts: 3,250
      Wait, I didn't actually see you posting anything different than any other "poker is rigged" thread. You made some half arsed claim about them making money from our deposits, which has already been refuted, so there's your main point gone. All your other points have been repeatadly refuted during the countless other threads claiming that poker is rigged.

      But the fact is, there is absolutely no evidence that online poker is rigged, and there's a shitload of evidence that it's not rigged (Please don't make me post nanonoko's graph again). Hell, I could even post my graph and point out the exact points where I had a poker epiphany, started playing better, and started winning more.

      Or, in a short but sweet fashion: You're wrong.
    • EmanuelC16
      EmanuelC16
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2010 Posts: 13,897
      TL;DR

      There's a Romanian that thinks something like you.. he says you can only win X times the amount you deposit and then you are required to redeposit to avoid being BE for life. If you want I can link you to him so you guys can have a good chat.
      :coolface:
    • One12ver
      One12ver
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.05.2008 Posts: 249
      Ya your right! Poker is rigged and so is life. You work 3/4 of your life so you can die and be thrown in the ground or burnt. :f_cry: What the hell is the use getting up every day and giving your best just to die? Why, because you feel good doing it. Same with poker. I love poker and really don´t care in the end how much money I´ve lost or won or if it´s rigged or filled with dirty players.

      Don´t go through life with so many "chips on your shoulder". If you don´t like poker then don´t play but posting here @ PS wont get you any sympathy.

      I love my whisky, my wife, my girl freinds but most of all my poker and all of the pain and pleasure it gives me. :f_biggrin:
    • evertonroar
      evertonroar
      Bronze
      Joined: 26.06.2009 Posts: 737
      But any decent player knows that once the storm clouds move in you can do no right. Whatever game you play, you will lose. Consecutively. Until your bankroll is significantly eroded or gone
      n

      not if you are a decent winning player
    • conall88
      conall88
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2009 Posts: 1,715


      that is all.
    • conall88
      conall88
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2009 Posts: 1,715
      @ontopic

      "online poker is rigged"
    • Yoghi
      Yoghi
      Black
      Joined: 10.09.2007 Posts: 14,387
      Im glad it's rigged, else I'd never be able to win
    • Waiboy
      Waiboy
      Bronze
      Joined: 18.09.2008 Posts: 4,877
      Originally posted by One12ver
      I love my whisky
      At last, something ITT that is rigged.
    • chenny8888
      chenny8888
      Silver
      Joined: 03.10.2007 Posts: 19,324

      Online poker is rigged. I say this as a statement of fact, one that is transparently obvious to anyone that's ever played online.

      "Really? Even the major sites like Poker Stars and Full Tilt?", you ask rhetorically.
      "Especially," I reply, and for the same reason.

      They all have the same business model and largely base their software on the same algorithms. Why am I writing this? Well, I figure I've wasted enough time on online poker to have a conclusive insight into the scam, and I feel that writing this is far more productive and socially beneficial than depositing any more money into some hucksters online Ponzi scheme.

      For some reason, any poker forum has aficionados that quickly come to the defence of these offshore commercial entities like they were damsels in distress. Their arguments are largely the same, so I'll rebut them, but first the primary point:

      The biggest contention of poker apologists is that poker sites lack the motive to screw their customers. That’s because these people are incredulous (not an uncommon trait), but also lack an understanding of the online poker business model. They think poker sites make their money off of rake, which is a half truth. If that were it, the argument from motive might hold some water. Even then you could never discount human greed and the desire to squeeze out an extra 20% in revenue. But the truth about how poker sites make money will make the rigging and the motivation for it apparent: deposits.

      Yup, you can deposit money into your poker account, never play a hand, and poker sites will be thrilled. That’s because you're giving them your money to do with as they will. Online poker is not a physical casino - your money is not sitting in a vault in the basement, its being used for financial investment and generating a return for the company, regardless of whether you play poker or not. So the motivation for online casinos is to keep as much money on deposit as possible, same as any bank. Hence the rigging model of online poker sites is something called "account churning". This means shuffling money between accounts without letting anyone get comfortable enough with their bankroll to cash out.

      If the motivation was simply to increase the rake, online poker sites wouldn't care too much about who wins the hand. If some dumbass wanted to ship it with Jack/Six off-suit after flopping middle pair, there'd be no motivation for poker sites not to let your Kings hold up. But any decent player knows that once the storm clouds move in you can do no right. Whatever game you play, you will lose. Consecutively. Until your bankroll is significantly eroded or gone.

      How they do this is variable: sometimes you'll be card dead for hours, finally flop top two and get called by a straight draw. Guess who wins. Then you'll flop a monster and get called by a two outer. Guess who wins. Then you'll hit a second nut flush on the turn with three of a suit on the board and get pushed in by the nut flush. Whatever the scenario, it will consistently go one way because the cause of it is account churning software designed to make sure people don't cash out and that new money is being deposited.

      When this software kicks in is variable. Without a window into the guts of the algorithm (whistle-blowers anyone?) the exact logic is unknown, but a common story is "I joined a site, made a bunch of money and then got screwed ever since my first cashout." Its plausible that sites use this as a "level" - the point at which a user is likely to cash out and hence the software activates sometime before they reach that mark. There’s no end to the behavioural analysis techniques they could use to maximise the money on deposit, but this article isn't an instruction set on how to beat a rigged system. My central point has been made.

      Now to the rebuttals.

      "It’s the variance man!/That’s poker!/You just can't handle the swings!/Etc."

      Firstly, anyone who uses the word "variance" as intellectual argument for why people get screwed in online poker is math illiterate. Variance is a much bigger problem in live games because you play fewer hands. A number of people will read that and experience an indefinable feeling that something in that sentence is wrong. That's because the common argument by poker site apologists is that variance is higher online.
      To be clear, variance is the difference between the expected result and the actual result. The greater the sample size of hands the more likely that the outcomes will conform to a normal distribution, and the variance will be less of a factor in the overall result. For the layman, try this: grab a physical deck and deal out a poker scenario, let's say 9/9 vs A/J rainbow preflop (55.72% vs 43.98% with a 0.3% chop). Now deal out five community cards and record the win/loss result. The first time you do this one of the hands will have a 100% win percentage even though it only had maximum 55.72% win probability. Now shuffle the deck and re-deal the community cards. Now do that a a hundred times. By the time you approach 30 you should have win distribution approaching the expected result. Run it a hundred times and you'll find the variance won't exceed +/-5%.

      What this means is that variance is your friend. It’s the statistical rule that tells you something is either conforming to the expected result, or not. If not, it’s rigged. There are no poker gods. There is no black hole of statistical improbability hanging over your head. In this case, sanity is highly statistical.

      If you're in the business of getting it all in with 75% or better in an unrigged system, you will be a winning player. In fact, your short term variance is likely to be positive, because if you think of every hand as being discreet, you're more likely to win it than lose. Think back on how often "variance" in online poker gave you a 90% daily win record with your 75% hands. Probably not very often. Now consider how often you win 40% of your 75% hands. Seems almost normal doesn't it? In fact, statistically speaking it so far from "normal" that I can't even bring myself to call this article a hypothesis. Online poker is rigged. Period.

      "These are large, publically traded, reputable companies. Why would they risk screwing their customers."

      Firstly, recent news has brought much of the reputability of online poker sites into question. Two of the biggest ones have been indicted on multiple counts of tax fraud and money laundering in the US (their biggest market). I'm no fan of the tax man, but I'll point out this: if online poker sites are willing to risk screwing Uncle Sam, they're not going to be too concerned with screwing an unorganised group of underwear-clad weekend poker warriors (Disclaimer: the author was fully dressed and sober during the writing of this article).

      Secondly, if the site you're reading this post on has a comment section, take a quick peak right now. Someone will invariable post a remark to this effect: "Losing poker player bitching about poker sites to excuse his own poor play." Someone else will second that motion; in the end without access to the sites code, it’s a wash. "Maybe he's right, maybe he's wrong, the jury is still out, who knows." In all probability, this system was phased in as some clever financial manager realised that deposits were a much larger gold mine than rake. One site tried it on a minor scale and saw a boost in profits, then upped the account churning and saw a bigger boost. Some people complained, but were quickly shouted down as being sore losers. A few people even left the site, but because their deposit money was still churning through the system, the sites don't consider that a loss, especially since if left alone, these players would have made money and cashed out repeatedly. More likely, because they were likely to be good players, they first focused on self-criticism and hung in there depositing multiple times, building their bankrolls quickly, then suffering the same string of "bad luck" as they approached their expected cashout level.
      The practice spread, and now that we have a whole slew of poker sites its easy to think that some of them must not be rigged. But a majority of these sites are part of poker networks that run the same base software. So no, they're all rigged. It’s an industry practice at this point, which is not surprising since they all have the same business model with the same incentives.

      "You're not important enough for poker sites to target your measly $100 bankroll. They make millions after all."

      Poker sites don't target my measly bankroll. They target 20,000 measly bankrolls. I'm certain that no-one has ever brought up my name in a staff meeting, but they probably bragged about 90% deposit retention among sub-$1000 accounts. High fives all around.

      "What about the Pro's and Semi-Pros. There are people that make a living off of online poker, and they can't all be in on the conspiracy."

      In some sense online casinos are still casinos. They do have an appreciation for whales and treat them differently - as they should. People with online account over $10,000 will be doing cashouts. All of them. The distribution of fish and sharks is much more narrow, and its impossible to play so far above the rim that a 30% handicap wont quickly funnel your bankroll to the waiting arms of another player - who will then promptly cash out their $50,000 windfall. So the incentive for churning their accounts is substantially less. Plus, with the whales, rake is actually significant. We're not talking about $0.05 a hand anymore.

      So I'd be surprised if large accounts get churned the same way that small accounts do. This is a hypothesis, I'll admit. My own account topped out at $2000 at its peak (reached the first time I joined a poker site a week after I made a $40 deposit). I cashed out a $1000 and have been getting the shit end of the stick ever since. That was two years and 5 poker sites ago. The same story repeats itself every time I got fed up and left a site. Thankfully, I almost always come out ahead in live cash games (You know, those things with the high hand variance). Probably just a coincidence though.

      "Online players are just better that live players./Online players play a more lose-retarded style and are more likely to get it all in with draws." (Ok, so loose-retarded is a personal pet name for my typical online opponents)

      The first statement I generally disagree with, but won't contest too heavily. Suffice it to say that I've never had a problem getting online players to commit their stack with obviously inferior hands, which is generally the mark of a bad player. The second statement rings true. The conclusion that this is in some way a negative is wrong however. If someone wants to commit three quarters of their stack (or all of it as the case may be) drawing to an eight outer, that should be good news. That should mean chips flowing endlessly in your direction with an occasional hiccup and an "aw, shucks" the one time Fishy McFish flops a set of 3's against your pocket aces. I appeal to the good sense of the reader, is this really your experience in online play? If we were talking about 5% variance between expected value and actual results, would anyone really be talking about this issue? If every decent player reading this hasn't experienced the endless strings of coolers and bad beats that define online play (read "account churning") then I stand in utter amazement. Please, share with us what site you play on, they'll get my business.

      I'll end it there, before this turns into a book.
    • AKM247
      AKM247
      Bronze
      Joined: 26.05.2010 Posts: 412
      Of all the flaws in your argument, may I point out just a minor one;

      You say that the software is designed for goodplayers (who practice BR Management & thus keep their money in their poker account) to be out drawn/lose ridiculous hands & money to reacreational players (who will withdraw any winnings they have) . . . . how is that consistent to your argument about keeping money in their coffers?

      Well presented, but still nonsensical. The fact that you put so much energy into this only makes it more irritating to me, I have trouble understanding how you can be so deluded.

      I am not sure what you're trying to achieve here, you will certainly get no sympathy. The proof is quite simply in the play imo, when you're playing well you see an upward trend and when you don't play well you'll find you loose money. If you feel that strongly about it you're able to make a complaint to any regulatory bodies that oversee Poker rooms & whilst you're at it jump on some conspiracy theory websites :)

      I work in the online gaming industry so for any limpers in this thread/discussion rest assured that his concerns are balderdash
    • Saruniks
      Saruniks
      Bronze
      Joined: 30.08.2010 Posts: 1,213
      it's like zeitgiest. Half of those are only your thoughts and half are just coincidents. :coolface:

      ok, go play live poker and let's see if you can make money there as you are very good player judging by your thoughts why can't you make money online.
    • Saruniks
      Saruniks
      Bronze
      Joined: 30.08.2010 Posts: 1,213
      Originally posted by conall88
      @ontopic

      "online poker is rigged"
      you must have deposited 5000$, now you will lose eveything.
    • farbwenz
      farbwenz
      Bronze
      Joined: 01.01.2010 Posts: 359
      i completely agree with you. online poker is rigged.

      That's why you should deposit as much money as u can afford, play for 2 months(or whatever you think is the time before u get doomswitched) and withdraw, deposit at the next poker platform. this way you would get your maximum boomswitch level. when you deposit all the money you won on the way, you have become a whale and don't need to care about statistics anymore.

      There are maybe 30 bigger poker rooms, so it will take you 6 years to become a millionaire. better than university:D
    • 1
    • 2