For balance, you do seem to berate, mock & insult players all the time. Why? In one game last night you made over 20 derisory, mocking & insulting comments, whilst your opponent never once commented during the entire game.
Why so much vitriol & hate, especially against players who have not said a word? It's their money, & they are entitled to play any way they wish, just as you are.
PS - I'm a lifelong devotee of PLO8 so often watch the games here, and I generally find PLO8 players to be reasonably cordial, much more so than in other formats. Anyway, at least you play The Great Game, so you get a bonus point for that.
I've experience my fair share of run bad over the years but I think even I would have sat out long before reaching '458 losses on the run'. Hats off to you for your stubbornness.
Any chance of you posting 458 hand histories? No, thought not.
I find it quite funny that people that comments saying i shudnt comment as its so wrong... choose to leave a mocking or belittling comment themselves to me in the process!
U guys pick up on a point and then get it completely wrong.
ENUT; I picked up on a situation, where the outcome appears to be a standard one. I didnt say i didnt go on to win the game in the end, just my ability to finish off a game was severely hampered by a standard double up in that one situation. Clearly, the situation only happened in maybe 1 in 8 heads up games and was logged over a period of months. I do have screenshots of the majority im afraid. I was a winning player on 888, i just couldnt accept that i had to play games knowing that i would have to put up with that situation being a standard outcome, as it was as frustarting as it gets. I think the maths was saying to me that it was not a random outcome... try spinning a coin and see how far you get before a heads beats a tail or vice versa, i think u may get to 10 at best, if you get to 458 i think any mathmatician would say thats impossible.
If a site refuses to look at this 'phenomenom', just puts up a prewritten statement, when the maths is saying its not possible, how would you like me to decipher this?
TIKAY10/SHIPPPY You will not find a comment where i have called a player 'an idiot, a moron, a fish' or anything personal wotsoever, never mind in a more aggresive threatening manner. I do say things along the lines of the deck helping out big errors, i think to use the words 'hate and vitriol' towards a player is totally incorrect. My comments are all geared towards the deck helping a player piling in chips with a hope and a prayer and somehow surviving....
All sites use the phrase 'we would not financially gain from having a deck that was not random, as we only make profits from fees and rake'. This is an untrue statement, so again how would you like me to decipher this? A deck that is performing in such a way that players are encouraged to to reach the maximum rake far in excess of what would occur in a real deck, would clearly be a financial gain in rake... Its not a great statement to use to gain trust, is it?
I find it quite funny that people that comments saying i shudnt comment as its so wrong... choose to leave a mocking or belittling comment themselves to me in the process!
U guys pick up on a point and then get it completely wrong.
ENUT; I picked up on a situation, where the outcome appears to be a standard one. I didnt say i didnt go on to win the game in the end, just my ability to finish off a game was severely hampered by a standard double up in that one situation. Clearly, the situation only happened in maybe 1 in 8 heads up games and was logged over a period of months. I do have screenshots of the majority im afraid. I was a winning player on 888, i just couldnt accept that i had to play games knowing that i would have to put up with that situation being a standard outcome, as it was as frustarting as it gets. I think the maths was saying to me that it was not a random outcome... try spinning a coin and see how far you get before a heads beats a tail or vice versa, i think u may get to 10 at best, if you get to 458 i think any mathmatician would say thats impossible.
If a site refuses to look at this 'phenomenom', just puts up a prewritten statement, when the maths is saying its not possible, how would you like me to decipher this?
TIKAY10/SHIPPPY You will not find a comment where i have called a player 'an idiot, a moron, a fish' or anything personal wotsoever, never mind in a more aggresive threatening manner. I do say things along the lines of the deck helping out big errors, i think to use the words 'hate and vitriol' towards a player is totally incorrect. My comments are all geared towards the deck helping a player piling in chips with a hope and a prayer and somehow surviving....
All sites use the phrase 'we would not financially gain from having a deck that was not random, as we only make profits from fees and rake'. This is an untrue statement, so again how would you like me to decipher this? A deck that is performing in such a way that players are encouraged to to reach the maximum rake far in excess of what would occur in a real deck, would clearly be a financial gain in rake... Its not a great statement to use to gain trust, is it?
Spinning 458 heads is equally as likely as any other 458 combinations of heads or tails.
The deck is the same whatever you play, so the same for SNG's and cash. It is true that there is only the tournament fee from SNG's, but its running off the same deck. I dont like the word rigging. I just believe there is an element that will produce certain cards in certain situations.
As in the 888 example, the deck is written to recognise the fact a player is calling off a large amount of his chips, where there really is no call. When u only have 700 on site playing, it is crucial you maintain player numbers and also maximise profits.
If such players are losing at the rate their play dictates, they will not be able to maintain their account. It is a sites best interest financially, to spread to wins around a little, to prevent players 'losing too much' and keep them on site and maintain their interest.
Sites will use quite amateur quotes like 'we do not have the resources to intervene in an individual game even if we wanted to'... even NChanning here in this thread made a comment about a multi million pound company devising a deck 'just for shippps benefit', in an attempt to belittle me.
Its just a case of a business maximising profit, maintaining customers as any business does. No-one is in a little box controlling games, its just a really simple built in algorhythm, to recognise when a player is making calls that are not feasible and helping out accordingly. It is not good for business for players to leave or to lose too much to lose interest, especially when only 700 on site. Sites can not operate if eg 150 on site, could they take that chance?
As i said my ROI is good, i am a former sponsored player with BadBeat.com. But i will tell you now at hi lo, my preferred game, i almost never beat a player that sits with me who is playing it for the first time. It simply will not let them giveaway! Nothing you can do. And TIKAY10 above even inadvertently confirms there was 20 comments in one heads up SNG, where i only comment on ridiculous sub 10% river saves. 20!
not sure you need to lose 458 50/50 coin flips before reaching a statistically relevant sample to make a decision to change your behaviour (in this case leave):-)..........given Waddy's 80% daily win rate on shark, i am starting to think we might have a case of deliberately dropping 'chat bombs' in an effort to achieve the longest ever Sky Poker Thread.......:-
The deck is the same whatever you play, so the same for SNG's and cash. It is true that there is only the tournament fee from SNG's, but its running off the same deck. I dont like the word rigging. I just believe there is an element that will produce certain cards in certain situations.
As in the 888 example, the deck is written to recognise the fact a player is calling off a large amount of his chips, where there really is no call. When u only have 700 on site playing, it is crucial you maintain player numbers and also maximise profits.
If such players are losing at the rate their play dictates, they will not be able to maintain their account. It is a sites best interest financially, to spread to wins around a little, to prevent players 'losing too much' and keep them on site and maintain their interest.
Sites will use quite amateur quotes like 'we do not have the resources to intervene in an individual game even if we wanted to'... even NChanning here in this thread made a comment about a multi million pound company devising a deck 'just for shippps benefit', in an attempt to belittle me.
Its just a case of a business maximising profit, maintaining customers as any business does. No-one is in a little box controlling games, its just a really simple built in algorhythm, to recognise when a player is making calls that are not feasible and helping out accordingly. It is not good for business for players to leave or to lose too much to lose interest, especially when only 700 on site. Sites can not operate if eg 150 on site, could they take that chance?
As i said my ROI is good, i am a former sponsored player with BadBeat.com. But i will tell you now at hi lo, my preferred game, i almost never beat a player that sits with me who is playing it for the first time. It simply will not let them giveaway! Nothing you can do. And TIKAY10 above even inadvertently confirms there was 20 comments in one heads up SNG, where i only comment on ridiculous sub 10% river saves. 20!
you know there are various conspiracy threads on the forum that may be your cup of tea
Its not conspiracy... its just a business... all businesses have techniques to maximise profit and maintain custom. Its just if your a good enough player, you can spot the situations on how business profit is maximised as there is absolutely no variation other than one result. Its not an opinion, maths will tell you, u cant argue against maths. But sometimes when you are an ambassador for a company, an employee, etc, u have no choice but to!
Its cool if you can accept it, i do accept it on a whole that its business and is within regulation, which lets face it.... is non existent. I just choose to point it out at the tables, its not berating anyones play or personal... i just like people to see what they obviously cant.
People have chosen to go down the road of what a terrible (idiot, moron) player i must be. Well guys to be a sponsored player, you have to prove your worth via a monitored account on the site of their choice, This idiot moron had $500 paid into his account daily after proving his worth. Just a thought for the abusive and sarcastic 'u dont know wot your talking about' posts on this thread!
If you genuinely lost a seven hundred and forty-four quattuorquadragintillion / 1 shot, I would submit your evidence to the gambling commission to get a refund and have their licence revoked.
If you genuinely lost a seven hundred and forty-four quattuorquadragintillion / 1 shot, I would submit your evidence to the gambling commission to get a refund and have their licence revoked.
MATTBATES, sponsored player for BadBeat.com, backed , whatever u want to call it, not sure what u asking. They put up $500 a day, profits on a 50/50 basis.
HIJOKER At last someone who has looked at the maths, where 888 maintained this was a random occurence! I have spoken directly by phone to The Gambling Commission many times, if you have ever done this it will quickly become apparent to you that their involvement with poker is non existent and no-one there would even look at this, or understand this, nevermind revoke their licence!!!
The Gambling Commission told me they issue the 'certificate' purely on the findings of the external auditor affiliated with each site. The auditor is paid hundreds of thousands of pounds to conduct audits by sites.... if they suspended a site ..... it obviously would cut off their own cash cow. Can anyone see a conflict of financial interest here?
I aked the Commission if they could see the conflict of interest, the manager there got very flustered and basically said it was the end of the conversation, without saying yes or no. I dont know why on earth he would do this
Im afraid this is the level of 'regulation' guys, Ring them yourselves and ask!
888 no interest in my offer to send all screenshots and investigate how this was possibly happening, as they said its verified and audited by stevie wonder.... sorry i meant an independent auditor.
Make of that what you will, but im seeing a table above that says it may not be a completely random occurence ...... some have said why didnt u leave earlier... my answer is if i had collected 50 odd and left.... they would then say its not enough data... i was happy to stay at the time and get some further proof, as many of these games i went on to win anyway and i had an acceptable ROI there. I just accepted that games would take a little longer due to this standard outcome in this one situation, that would only happen in certain games.
The other feature of this standard result that i have yet to mention....., which makes this even more bizarre oddswise... and the above non believers are going to love this...is that every double up win was three of a kind OR BETTER.
It wasnt just 458 on run, it was 3 of kind or better! I would have to accept that if even i had a hand (and as they only had a short stack they were going all in next hand anyway, so the starting hands were generally both spanners ) like AAKQ double suited, their 248K was gonna come out 3 of a kind or better, It was quite a bizarre watch and have taken a fair few videos of them too, with commentary!
I have been searching for a site that wasnt as brutally dishonest and gone through just about the lot. I was recommended Sky. I find Sky the best of how we stand currently in online poker.
Comments
For balance, you do seem to berate, mock & insult players all the time. Why? In one game last night you made over 20 derisory, mocking & insulting comments, whilst your opponent never once commented during the entire game.
Why so much vitriol & hate, especially against players who have not said a word? It's their money, & they are entitled to play any way they wish, just as you are.
PS - I'm a lifelong devotee of PLO8 so often watch the games here, and I generally find PLO8 players to be reasonably cordial, much more so than in other formats. Anyway, at least you play The Great Game, so you get a bonus point for that.
Any chance of you posting 458 hand histories? No, thought not.
U guys pick up on a point and then get it completely wrong.
ENUT; I picked up on a situation, where the outcome appears to be a standard one. I didnt say i didnt go on to win the game in the end, just my ability to finish off a game was severely hampered by a standard double up in that one situation. Clearly, the situation only happened in maybe 1 in 8 heads up games and was logged over a period of months. I do have screenshots of the majority im afraid. I was a winning player on 888, i just couldnt accept that i had to play games knowing that i would have to put up with that situation being a standard outcome, as it was as frustarting as it gets. I think the maths was saying to me that it was not a random outcome... try spinning a coin and see how far you get before a heads beats a tail or vice versa, i think u may get to 10 at best, if you get to 458 i think any mathmatician would say thats impossible.
If a site refuses to look at this 'phenomenom', just puts up a prewritten statement, when the maths is saying its not possible, how would you like me to decipher this?
TIKAY10/SHIPPPY You will not find a comment where i have called a player 'an idiot, a moron, a fish' or anything personal wotsoever, never mind in a more aggresive threatening manner. I do say things along the lines of the deck helping out big errors, i think to use the words 'hate and vitriol' towards a player is totally incorrect. My comments are all geared towards the deck helping a player piling in chips with a hope and a prayer and somehow surviving....
All sites use the phrase 'we would not financially gain from having a deck that was not random, as we only make profits from fees and rake'. This is an untrue statement, so again how would you like me to decipher this? A deck that is performing in such a way that players are encouraged to to reach the maximum rake far in excess of what would occur in a real deck, would clearly be a financial gain in rake... Its not a great statement to use to gain trust, is it?
Are you benefitting equally from the rigging, or are you just that good that you’re able to maintain your impressive ROI against all the odds?
As in the 888 example, the deck is written to recognise the fact a player is calling off a large amount of his chips, where there really is no call. When u only have 700 on site playing, it is crucial you maintain player numbers and also maximise profits.
If such players are losing at the rate their play dictates, they will not be able to maintain their account. It is a sites best interest financially, to spread to wins around a little, to prevent players 'losing too much' and keep them on site and maintain their interest.
Sites will use quite amateur quotes like 'we do not have the resources to intervene in an individual game even if we wanted to'... even NChanning here in this thread made a comment about a multi million pound company devising a deck 'just for shippps benefit', in an attempt to belittle me.
Its just a case of a business maximising profit, maintaining customers as any business does. No-one is in a little box controlling games, its just a really simple built in algorhythm, to recognise when a player is making calls that are not feasible and helping out accordingly. It is not good for business for players to leave or to lose too much to lose interest, especially when only 700 on site. Sites can not operate if eg 150 on site, could they take that chance?
As i said my ROI is good, i am a former sponsored player with BadBeat.com. But i will tell you now at hi lo, my preferred game, i almost never beat a player that sits with me who is playing it for the first time. It simply will not let them giveaway! Nothing you can do. And TIKAY10 above even inadvertently confirms there was 20 comments in one heads up SNG, where i only comment on ridiculous sub 10% river saves. 20!
Its cool if you can accept it, i do accept it on a whole that its business and is within regulation, which lets face it.... is non existent. I just choose to point it out at the tables, its not berating anyones play or personal... i just like people to see what they obviously cant.
People have chosen to go down the road of what a terrible (idiot, moron) player i must be. Well guys to be a sponsored player, you have to prove your worth via a monitored account on the site of their choice, This idiot moron had $500 paid into his account daily after proving his worth. Just a thought for the abusive and sarcastic 'u dont know wot your talking about' posts on this thread!
744,282,853,678,701,455,922,507,579,277,316,643,178,128,753,343,813,693,728,245,963,960,974,631,028,119,473,486,019,635,930,893,891,134,220,822,124,816,566,203,939,432,067,701,407,744 / 1
(no, really).
If you genuinely lost a seven hundred and forty-four quattuorquadragintillion / 1 shot, I would submit your evidence to the gambling commission to get a refund and have their licence revoked.
HIJOKER At last someone who has looked at the maths, where 888 maintained this was a random occurence! I have spoken directly by phone to The Gambling Commission many times, if you have ever done this it will quickly become apparent to you that their involvement with poker is non existent and no-one there would even look at this, or understand this, nevermind revoke their licence!!!
The Gambling Commission told me they issue the 'certificate' purely on the findings of the external auditor affiliated with each site. The auditor is paid hundreds of thousands of pounds to conduct audits by sites.... if they suspended a site ..... it obviously would cut off their own cash cow. Can anyone see a conflict of financial interest here?
I aked the Commission if they could see the conflict of interest, the manager there got very flustered and basically said it was the end of the conversation, without saying yes or no. I dont know why on earth he would do this
Im afraid this is the level of 'regulation' guys, Ring them yourselves and ask!
Make of that what you will, but im seeing a table above that says it may not be a completely random occurence ...... some have said why didnt u leave earlier... my answer is if i had collected 50 odd and left.... they would then say its not enough data... i was happy to stay at the time and get some further proof, as many of these games i went on to win anyway and i had an acceptable ROI there. I just accepted that games would take a little longer due to this standard outcome in this one situation, that would only happen in certain games.
The other feature of this standard result that i have yet to mention....., which makes this even more bizarre oddswise... and the above non believers are going to love this...is that every double up win was three of a kind OR BETTER.
It wasnt just 458 on run, it was 3 of kind or better! I would have to accept that if even i had a hand (and as they only had a short stack they were going all in next hand anyway, so the starting hands were generally both spanners ) like AAKQ double suited, their 248K was gonna come out 3 of a kind or better, It was quite a bizarre watch and have taken a fair few videos of them too, with commentary!
I have been searching for a site that wasnt as brutally dishonest and gone through just about the lot. I was recommended Sky. I find Sky the best of how we stand currently in online poker.
Are you actually, seriously, genuinely claiming you lost 458 poker flips in a row?
Like, you're seriously claiming that?
Can the Sky forum software cope with 458 screenshots, cos this needs to be seen to be believed.
Or, alternatively, filed under 'horseshit'.
Think I'll sleep on my decision.