Hey TheEdge, absolutely, even you think im nuts or have not intentially meant to have added any humour to this, i have enjoyed reading back and **** myself laughing at some of the replies.
I know the above is really an insult, but fully appreciate you and others have watched with interest and sure have been entertained by it, hence the large numbers
Ive certainly not resorted to 'Div', etc, like alot have, which is quite bizarre given the original post was about me being 'abusive', but apparently although we can clearly see this in the posts, i can never back anything up!
Tikay10... I would imagine at the time of Full Tilt, weeks before that happened, you were still going on about sites being reputable and things being 100% squeaky clean, Or was this opinion just formed AFTER they were long gone?
I will tell you a 100% true story, i was, even then, beginning to question deck performance as i believe things changed on Black Friday when sites had to adjust. The very last email from FullTilt, the DAY BEFORE they suspended the site, their email started off 'we strive to meet the very highest of standards and strenuously deny any claims that question the integrity of the site'. A bit like all the sites start off their prewritten emails now.
The integrity of the site! I'm pretty sure you would have said i was 'eccentric' and a 'div' the day before Full Tilt too and would have backed that company to the hilt on why on earth they would be so stupid to do this and that, when they make so much money from fees and rake, etc etc.
I dont really get why im passing off opinion as fact?
The Gambling Commision (whos logo is everywhere when it comes to poker) really doesnt have any involvement in looking at online poker in any shape or form, but the majority of players thinks they have ...Fact.....
The certificates that 'prove' sites are legit are issued by The Gambling Commision despite not having any personal involvement in looking at sites ...Fact...
the external auditors findings determine the issue of the certificate and nothing else... Fact.....
there is a conflict of financial interest in the external auditing of sites.... Fact ....
All sites have a prewritten statement that say when you question anything 'it would not benefit us in any way financially to have deck that was not random, as we only make profit from rake and fees' when clearly a deck that produces enhanced hands WOULD benefit from increased rake... Fact
Which of these that i have mentioned in posts are only 'eccentric' opinion?
Just these few facts should ring somekind of alarm bells to those who are sitting on the fence and are not sure either way.
It is also a fact that online poker regulation is very much open to abuse, even if it wasnt, due to appalling way its set up, as above . You should at the very least, be able to see that this needs reform, even if you continue to believe no-one as yet took advantage and its all above board. Fact!
You didn't capitalize fact as FACT so nothing in this statement is fact , you should know this
I tell you what... lets start a new debate. U can sit out Tikay10, have a biscuit.
Given the above facts, what is their opinion on The Gambling Commision and their role in online poker?
Wouldnt we ALL like to to see their either their wholehearted involvement or handed over to someone who can?
Is it good/safe enough just to put it in the hands of an external auditor, another body who has no idea of whether poker is just luck or skill?
Would we have to have these arguments if it was regulated by poker people, who understood the game and were in a position to truly regulate?
Will people just reply with 'Div'?
I know nothing to nothing about the gambling commission and what it regulates, so I googled and the first thing I find is this.
In December 2016 the Gambling Commission fined Camelot Group £3 million for failing to verify a fraudulent National Lottery ticket that had been presented in 2009.
The Commission found that Camelot had poor fraud prevention controls in place and that it had breached the terms of its licence.[21]
The case was subsequently investigated by police, who found that a Camelot employee who worked in Camelot's fraud department had conspired with a member of the public to claim a jackpot prize of £2.5 million using a bogus ticket.[22][23][24]
In February 2018, the Commission fined British bookmaker William Hill £6.2 million for not protecting players after a series of systematic failures to prevent money laundering.[25]
The Commission issued a £600,000 penalty to LeoVegas in May 2018 for producing misleading adverts to customers as well as several self-exclusion failings.[26]
The following month, in June 2018, the Commission fined 32Red £2 million for failing a problem gambler who had deposited £758,000 with 32Red over more than two years.
32Red had failed to check the customer, who had a net income of £2,150 per month, could afford the bets despite several previous regulatory rulings in this area.[27]
On 31 July 2019 the Commission announced that Ladbrokes Coral would pay £5.9m for past failings in anti-money laundering and social responsibility.
An investigation found that the companies failed to put in place effective safeguards to prevent consumers suffering gambling harm and against money laundering between November 2014 and October 2017.[28]
I tell you what... lets start a new debate. U can sit out Tikay10, have a biscuit.
Given the above facts, what is their opinion on The Gambling Commision and their role in online poker?
Wouldnt we ALL like to to see their either their wholehearted involvement or handed over to someone who can?
Is it good/safe enough just to put it in the hands of an external auditor, another body who has no idea of whether poker is just luck or skill?
Would we have to have these arguments if it was regulated by poker people, who understood the game and were in a position to truly regulate?
Will people just reply with 'Div'?
I know nothing to nothing about the gambling commission and what it regulates, so I googled and the first thing I find is this.
In December 2016 the Gambling Commission fined Camelot Group £3 million for failing to verify a fraudulent National Lottery ticket that had been presented in 2009.
The Commission found that Camelot had poor fraud prevention controls in place and that it had breached the terms of its licence.[21]
The case was subsequently investigated by police, who found that a Camelot employee who worked in Camelot's fraud department had conspired with a member of the public to claim a jackpot prize of £2.5 million using a bogus ticket.[22][23][24]
In February 2018, the Commission fined British bookmaker William Hill £6.2 million for not protecting players after a series of systematic failures to prevent money laundering.[25]
The Commission issued a £600,000 penalty to LeoVegas in May 2018 for producing misleading adverts to customers as well as several self-exclusion failings.[26]
The following month, in June 2018, the Commission fined 32Red £2 million for failing a problem gambler who had deposited £758,000 with 32Red over more than two years.
32Red had failed to check the customer, who had a net income of £2,150 per month, could afford the bets despite several previous regulatory rulings in this area.[27]
On 31 July 2019 the Commission announced that Ladbrokes Coral would pay £5.9m for past failings in anti-money laundering and social responsibility.
An investigation found that the companies failed to put in place effective safeguards to prevent consumers suffering gambling harm and against money laundering between November 2014 and October 2017.[28]
People will reply with 'div' when you're being a div and posting utterly worthless screenshots.
How come you've now shifted your stance a little, and made the debate solely about the UKGC being corrupt?
Hmmm did i say The Gambling Commission was corrupt? Did i? Or did i just say they are not involved as they should be, seeing as their logo on sites suggests they are. I mean they have actually told me they dont get involved so im not too happy with that, are you?
Or maybe you just like posting aggresive comments as you have anger issues!?
I tell you what... lets start a new debate. U can sit out Tikay10, have a biscuit.
Given the above facts, what is their opinion on The Gambling Commision and their role in online poker?
Wouldnt we ALL like to to see their either their wholehearted involvement or handed over to someone who can?
Is it good/safe enough just to put it in the hands of an external auditor, another body who has no idea of whether poker is just luck or skill?
Would we have to have these arguments if it was regulated by poker people, who understood the game and were in a position to truly regulate?
Will people just reply with 'Div'?
I know nothing to nothing about the gambling commission and what it regulates, so I googled and the first thing I find is this.
In December 2016 the Gambling Commission fined Camelot Group £3 million for failing to verify a fraudulent National Lottery ticket that had been presented in 2009.
The Commission found that Camelot had poor fraud prevention controls in place and that it had breached the terms of its licence.[21]
The case was subsequently investigated by police, who found that a Camelot employee who worked in Camelot's fraud department had conspired with a member of the public to claim a jackpot prize of £2.5 million using a bogus ticket.[22][23][24]
In February 2018, the Commission fined British bookmaker William Hill £6.2 million for not protecting players after a series of systematic failures to prevent money laundering.[25]
The Commission issued a £600,000 penalty to LeoVegas in May 2018 for producing misleading adverts to customers as well as several self-exclusion failings.[26]
The following month, in June 2018, the Commission fined 32Red £2 million for failing a problem gambler who had deposited £758,000 with 32Red over more than two years.
32Red had failed to check the customer, who had a net income of £2,150 per month, could afford the bets despite several previous regulatory rulings in this area.[27]
On 31 July 2019 the Commission announced that Ladbrokes Coral would pay £5.9m for past failings in anti-money laundering and social responsibility.
An investigation found that the companies failed to put in place effective safeguards to prevent consumers suffering gambling harm and against money laundering between November 2014 and October 2017.[28]
I don't know why they're bothering with all that rubbish they should be checking the decks legit on gambling sites jeeeze
But remember it's only fixed to allow the short stack to win a pot after they've lost a big pot in order to keep them playing longer so the site can get more rake and remember this is happening in sit and goes, but it does happen 458 times in a row, definitely.
It happened.... however you want to decipher the fact it happened is up to to you! If you want to believe it didnt happen, again its up to you.
Why do i have screenshots of the one situation in the first place? Maybe i took one of a short stack, who has lost a big pot in the last few hands and then doubled up with 3 of a kind or better on the first all in preflop... and then hoped there would be some more!
The maths said it was it was 0.0000000000000%, it happened, so maybe it was just a fluke, i dont know.
I feel it is one of a few ways that can spread the wins a little, with it being subtle enough for players not really likely to spot, The situation will happen in alot of games, but will be an occurence only now and then for games for any given player.
I'm a winning player on every site ive ever played on... what do u think my motive is for making it up and coming up with this one bizarre situation, which is happening on just one site which isnt this one?
Kapowblamz may just say 'cos your a Div', but u know if anyone at all has an intelligent answer, i cant think of one. It will be interesting for me, to find out why i would be doing it, if i was making it up
I'm a winning player on every site ive ever played on... what do u think my motive is for making it up and coming up with this one bizarre situation, which is happening on just one site which isnt this one?
Kapowblamz may just say 'cos your a Div', but u know if anyone at all has an intelligent answer, i cant think of one. It will be interesting for me, to find out why i would be doing it, if i was making it up
If I told you I'd flipped a coin 458 times tonight, and every single time without fail it landed on 'heads'....
I'm a winning player on every site ive ever played on... what do u think my motive is for making it up and coming up with this one bizarre situation, which is happening on just one site which isnt this one?
Kapowblamz may just say 'cos your a Div', but u know if anyone at all has an intelligent answer, i cant think of one. It will be interesting for me, to find out why i would be doing it, if i was making it up
That is up to you to figure out why your brain has led you to believe the short stack doubled up 458 times in a row, because it did not happen.
Your only evidence is that it must be true because otherwise why would you make it up. I don't recommend you take up law anytime soon.
My day job is to lead a team of data scientists/engineers in a large corporate company, we have the power to build algorithms that can unethically make more money every day of the week, but the corporate / brand image is paramount and so there are multiple controls in Risk/Governance controls that make sure this would never happen. In addition given the highly transient work force / demand for data scientists/engineers who typically change role every 2-3 years the 'secret' would get out when colleagues moved on to other companies.
If you believer in the 'online' deck theory I would strongly suggest you always keep to poker sites that part of larger corporates like Sky rather than independent businesses (although there is a different argument why they would not cheat either, i would accept it's more likely than large corporates as there is likely to be absolute power with one or few individuals which never happens within corporates), whilst you might not believe in some of the values of the individuals involved in large multi nationals like Sky, it is a multi billion group of companies which would have governance in controls to make sure that an incredibly small part of the business which contributes infinitely small amount of income to the annual results could ever tarnish the brand with a such a scandal.
I vote this thread ends and we start a new one that electricity pylons cause covid.........
My day job is to lead a team of data scientists/engineers in a large corporate company, we have the power to build algorithms that can unethically make more money every day of the week, but the corporate / brand image is paramount and so there are multiple controls in Risk/Governance controls that make sure this would never happen. In addition given the highly transient work force / demand for data scientists/engineers who typically change role every 2-3 years the 'secret' would get out when colleagues moved on to other companies.
If you believer in the 'online' deck theory I would strongly suggest you always keep to poker sites that part of larger corporates like Sky rather than independent businesses (although there is a different argument why they would not cheat either, i would accept it's more likely than large corporates as there is likely to be absolute power with one or few individuals which never happens within corporates), whilst you might not believe in some of the values of the individuals involved in large multi nationals like Sky, it is a multi billion group of companies which would have governance in controls to make sure that an incredibly small part of the business which contributes infinitely small amount of income to the annual results could ever tarnish the brand with a such a scandal.
I vote this thread ends and we start a new one that electricity pylons cause covid.........
Goodness me, from out of nowhere, we suddenly see the Post of the Thread. Clearly, Mr AAA understands these things properly.
Governance & Compliance are SO important & yet had not even been mentioned. And yes, there's such a thing as whistleblowers, especially when staff, perhaps disgruntled, move on. If the RNG were to be interfered with, hundreds of people within the business would soon know - code writers, programmers, Techies, Suits, and most of all - MOST OF ALL - the great Gods of Compliance, with whom nobody is allowed to argue. It's amazing how powerful Compliance are. The entire Sky Poker software then has to be logged in the Run Book, which is available for hundreds of Staff to see. Sky Poker has been around 15 years, a shed load of staff have come & gone in that time, & yet not one of them has gone public on what would be a headline scandal. It's not exactly something they could keep quiet for long in this day & age.
And we should not assume that because it's perhaps possible to do these things, that the Staff - ALL of them - are necessarily corrupt. Because they would ALL be equally guilty. Very unfair to suggest they are, but I suppose that's what happens on the internet these days, when it's so easy to point fingers without a shred of credible evidence & seemingly without any conscience.
I can't speak for 888 of course, but we can reasonably assume the same applies there. Been around for ages, & perfectly respectable.
End of thread imo, & an early contender for 2022 Post of the Year.
Just wanted to add 1 extra thing to @TrebleAAA 's excellent post.
If we take Sky as an example, it has been bought out twice in recent years (first by Stars, then as part of Stars being bought out by Flutter).
I respect the right of people to believe I am stupid. I had to save those cornflake packets for ages to qualify first as a Barrister, then to cross over as a Solicitor.
I have been involved in a fair few £Billion takeovers, and have managed to surround myself with people who are not stupid. Unsurprisingly, the people spending that sort of money use a multidisciplinary team of advisers, including Forensic Accountants. Strange how the takeovers in the gambling/poker industry have all gone ahead...
I think you just look at it in a totally incorrect way, as most. There would be no 'scandal', there is no 'cheating' and with your company its a totally different industry and would be unethical, whereas here it isnt. We as poker players and purists see it as scandals and cheating, but the owners and industry just see it as just another '**** shoot, lucky game' with acceptable elements that favour the house. Who when playing roulette, wagering on black or red, shouts 'hey thats cheating!' when it lands on Green 0?
Its an industry that deals soley on online gambling, with controlled wins, i dont know why you think slots/blackjack/etc against the house which have fixed percentage wins is acceptable not to be random, if people playing each other isnt. Its still all about making money for the house either way. Certainly the Gambling Commission sees it as all the same thing, so sites are doing nothing wrong.
I actually spoke to the top man at The Gambling Commision and asked if they would be willing to ask sites to put up a discalimer along the lines of 'please be advised the deck is for entertainment and leisure purposes only and will not neccessarily perfom to true mathematical odds' as a banner.
I believe this is something that needs to be displayed as eg. the young talented poker player who has honed his game via books and maths, will persist in his correct play believing he is just being 'unlucky' and could get himself in financial difficulty very quickly... and they do! Players need to know the score, to make an informed decision, like the banner on slots.
His answer was NOT that the banner is not neccessary, as the statement is absolutely untrue, but one of that 'oh i dont think the sites would like that'. There is no cheating, its just that the Regulator does not acknowledge the game of poker has any skill element whatsoever and games of complete luck can have house edges.
This is where the confusion lies, poker players knowing the game is about maths and skill and the regulator seeing it in a completely different way... poker players thinking omg they wouldnt do that to our beautiful game, there would be a scandal, its cheating etc... while The Gambling Commision is thinking its just the same as slots.
I'm a winning player on every site ive ever played on... what do u think my motive is for making it up and coming up with this one bizarre situation, which is happening on just one site which isnt this one?
Kapowblamz may just say 'cos your a Div', but u know if anyone at all has an intelligent answer, i cant think of one. It will be interesting for me, to find out why i would be doing it, if i was making it up
If I told you I'd flipped a coin 458 times tonight, and every single time without fail it landed on 'heads'....
What would be your honest thoughts on that claim?
My honest thoughts are that its not possibly happening as a random occurence and there is something not quite right?
Comments
Given the above facts, what is their opinion on The Gambling Commision and their role in online poker?
Wouldnt we ALL like to to see their either their wholehearted involvement or handed over to someone who can?
Is it good/safe enough just to put it in the hands of an external auditor, another body who has no idea of whether poker is just luck or skill?
Would we have to have these arguments if it was regulated by poker people, who understood the game and were in a position to truly regulate?
Will people just reply with 'Div'?
How come you've now shifted your stance a little, and made the debate solely about the UKGC being corrupt?
In December 2016 the Gambling Commission fined Camelot Group £3 million for failing to verify a fraudulent National Lottery ticket that had been presented in 2009.
The Commission found that Camelot had poor fraud prevention controls in place and that it had breached the terms of its licence.[21]
The case was subsequently investigated by police, who found that a Camelot employee who worked in Camelot's fraud department had conspired with a member of the public to claim a jackpot prize of £2.5 million using a bogus ticket.[22][23][24]
In February 2018, the Commission fined British bookmaker William Hill £6.2 million for not protecting players after a series of systematic failures to prevent money laundering.[25]
The Commission issued a £600,000 penalty to LeoVegas in May 2018 for producing misleading adverts to customers as well as several self-exclusion failings.[26]
The following month, in June 2018, the Commission fined 32Red £2 million for failing a problem gambler who had deposited £758,000 with 32Red over more than two years.
32Red had failed to check the customer, who had a net income of £2,150 per month, could afford the bets despite several previous regulatory rulings in this area.[27]
On 31 July 2019 the Commission announced that Ladbrokes Coral would pay £5.9m for past failings in anti-money laundering and social responsibility.
An investigation found that the companies failed to put in place effective safeguards to prevent consumers suffering gambling harm and against money laundering between November 2014 and October 2017.[28]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambling_Commission#:~:text=regarding problem gambling.-,Licensing,government on gambling-related issues.
Or maybe you just like posting aggresive comments as you have anger issues!?
Why do i have screenshots of the one situation in the first place? Maybe i took one of a short stack, who has lost a big pot in the last few hands and then doubled up with 3 of a kind or better on the first all in preflop... and then hoped there would be some more!
The maths said it was it was 0.0000000000000%, it happened, so maybe it was just a fluke, i dont know.
I feel it is one of a few ways that can spread the wins a little, with it being subtle enough for players not really likely to spot, The situation will happen in alot of games, but will be an occurence only now and then for games for any given player.
I dont know.
Maybe im just a 'Div'.
I dont know.
Really quite concerning that players get angry believing it is random, as there is absolutely nothing to get upset about!
If you are married to this guy and he has a can of Stella in his hand...... RUN... RUN NOW AND DONT LOOK BACK!
And for gods sake dont mention RNG's.......
Imagine.
Kapowblamz may just say 'cos your a Div', but u know if anyone at all has an intelligent answer, i cant think of one. It will be interesting for me, to find out why i would be doing it, if i was making it up
What would be your honest thoughts on that claim?
Your only evidence is that it must be true because otherwise why would you make it up. I don't recommend you take up law anytime soon.
If you believer in the 'online' deck theory I would strongly suggest you always keep to poker sites that part of larger corporates like Sky rather than independent businesses (although there is a different argument why they would not cheat either, i would accept it's more likely than large corporates as there is likely to be absolute power with one or few individuals which never happens within corporates), whilst you might not believe in some of the values of the individuals involved in large multi nationals like Sky, it is a multi billion group of companies which would have governance in controls to make sure that an incredibly small part of the business which contributes infinitely small amount of income to the annual results could ever tarnish the brand with a such a scandal.
I vote this thread ends and we start a new one that electricity pylons cause covid.........
@TrebleAAA
Goodness me, from out of nowhere, we suddenly see the Post of the Thread. Clearly, Mr AAA understands these things properly.
Governance & Compliance are SO important & yet had not even been mentioned. And yes, there's such a thing as whistleblowers, especially when staff, perhaps disgruntled, move on. If the RNG were to be interfered with, hundreds of people within the business would soon know - code writers, programmers, Techies, Suits, and most of all - MOST OF ALL - the great Gods of Compliance, with whom nobody is allowed to argue. It's amazing how powerful Compliance are. The entire Sky Poker software then has to be logged in the Run Book, which is available for hundreds of Staff to see. Sky Poker has been around 15 years, a shed load of staff have come & gone in that time, & yet not one of them has gone public on what would be a headline scandal. It's not exactly something they could keep quiet for long in this day & age.
And we should not assume that because it's perhaps possible to do these things, that the Staff - ALL of them - are necessarily corrupt. Because they would ALL be equally guilty. Very unfair to suggest they are, but I suppose that's what happens on the internet these days, when it's so easy to point fingers without a shred of credible evidence & seemingly without any conscience.
I can't speak for 888 of course, but we can reasonably assume the same applies there. Been around for ages, & perfectly respectable.
End of thread imo, & an early contender for 2022 Post of the Year.
Post more please TrebleAAA.
The Waddy aka Durex because he is impermeable and resistant.
I'll get my coat.
If we take Sky as an example, it has been bought out twice in recent years (first by Stars, then as part of Stars being bought out by Flutter).
I respect the right of people to believe I am stupid. I had to save those cornflake packets for ages to qualify first as a Barrister, then to cross over as a Solicitor.
I have been involved in a fair few £Billion takeovers, and have managed to surround myself with people who are not stupid. Unsurprisingly, the people spending that sort of money use a multidisciplinary team of advisers, including Forensic Accountants. Strange how the takeovers in the gambling/poker industry have all gone ahead...
Its an industry that deals soley on online gambling, with controlled wins, i dont know why you think slots/blackjack/etc against the house which have fixed percentage wins is acceptable not to be random, if people playing each other isnt. Its still all about making money for the house either way. Certainly the Gambling Commission sees it as all the same thing, so sites are doing nothing wrong.
I actually spoke to the top man at The Gambling Commision and asked if they would be willing to ask sites to put up a discalimer along the lines of 'please be advised the deck is for entertainment and leisure purposes only and will not neccessarily perfom to true mathematical odds' as a banner.
I believe this is something that needs to be displayed as eg. the young talented poker player who has honed his game via books and maths, will persist in his correct play believing he is just being 'unlucky' and could get himself in financial difficulty very quickly... and they do! Players need to know the score, to make an informed decision, like the banner on slots.
His answer was NOT that the banner is not neccessary, as the statement is absolutely untrue, but one of that 'oh i dont think the sites would like that'. There is no cheating, its just that the Regulator does not acknowledge the game of poker has any skill element whatsoever and games of complete luck can have house edges.
This is where the confusion lies, poker players knowing the game is about maths and skill and the regulator seeing it in a completely different way... poker players thinking omg they wouldnt do that to our beautiful game, there would be a scandal, its cheating etc... while The Gambling Commision is thinking its just the same as slots. My honest thoughts are that its not possibly happening as a random occurence and there is something not quite right?
"I actually spoke to the top man at The Gambling Commision"