I posted this on the blog but I didn't want to deprive those who have already read sims piece the opportunity to answer this question.
The real issue is that too many people believe RNG's are rigged and won't play on-line any more, I know plenty. It is for the poker industry to prove beyond any doubt that the RNG's are right, surely it is in their best interests to do this, don't they want these doubters back? It strikes me as a little odd that nothing has been done to seriously address this issue, particularly now, when traffic volumes are falling on many sites. Here's our bit of paper from a company no ones ever heard of isn't enough to bring the doubters back, if they were authenticated by a well know reputable company that would be a start, how about Deloitte's or KPMG.
dont let elsa read it or irish for that matter. good read mind phil Posted by pod1
I've read it and it's a well put together argument from a much respected player. I would give it more credibility if the Alderney GCC would give a straight answer to questions about the deal, and if Sky Bernie would give any answers at all to the perfectly legitimate questions he was asked. Any reply at all from the RNG certifiers would be good too - they seem to have ''gone away''
I've got to be honest I find the blog shortsighted and very narrow-minded. I hear the points raised and have spent much time pondering them myself. I make a pretty decent living at Live Poker, mainly playing in the North East Casino's and DTD. But Online I have had the utter worst swings. I'm not a believer in the higher hand rate more bad beats scenarios. Any player worth their salt does alot of hand analysis away from the table. Where this industry comment seems to hold truth, when its picked apart it doesnt. The counter-argument that we harbour our badbeats far longer than our more frequent - balancing - wins doesnt cover it either, to my mind.
I don't say online poker is rigged. But I do say that there is something very erroneous about RNG's.
I hear the points clearly. I for one HAVE decided to play very little online, as per the last paragraph of the blog. But I do feel that that last paragraph is unfair to individuals that percieve something to be wrong. As consumers they retain the right to question the integrity of a service, simply stating that "if you think its rigged dont play" really is very dismissive of many peoples genuine concern. In any other retail industry if people thought they were being dealt with wrongly they would retain the right to question and complain, not just told "if you dont like it, dont shop there". Frankly this attitude is a large part of the problem. Have you ever tried to reach many of the online sites on a one to one basis?
Lastly, alot of easy answers are put up in this blog. I'd like to put up some counter arguments. I'm not saying these are things I essentialy believe, but they do offer a counter point of view to the statements offered.
You comment that there would be no winning players in that scenario. In fact the opposite would be far more likely. Surely the likes of Tom Dwan, Shwartz and Friedman would be the perfect PR poster boys of online poker sites? Creating huge appeal, showing how young 20 somethings quickly become huge stars and Millionaires.
Large faceless corporations have ALWAYS took advantage of their customers. We live in a very mistrustful age, so despite opinions being hugely varied why do people find it so impossible that another amoral corporation could potentialy act in a less than honest way? Conspiracy theories only remain so until they, quite often, end up being proven. There is rarely smoke without fire.
Again, I am not saying I believe these things, nor do i essentially believe online poker is rigged. I guess what I'm really trying to say is that the debate isnt as simple and "nonsensical" as you propose, and laying it out your way kind of demeans and disregards all the peoples perspective that you open your blog with. Who is anyone to say that they are assuredly correct?
I see online as a very different game to live. The skill level is much lower, people chase where they likely wouldnt live and people have access to cheap games that they frankly dont care enough about to play well, go bust and quickly play another one. There's no chip handling and clicking a button makes for much looser aggressive play. For me these elements play a big part in the action seen.
nice post amybr, well written , like elsa and yourself say, its not down to doubters to prove its fixed, its down to the companys to prove WITH OUT A DOUBT that it isnt!!
nice post amybr, well written , like elsa and yourself say, its not down to doubters to prove its fixed, its down to the companys to prove WITH OUT A DOUBT that it isnt!! Posted by pod1
They won't because they can't.
A huge Corporation wishes to start a Poker Room that is above reproach then chooses to have the site regulated by an autonomous off-shore fiefdom rather than come under mainland UK regulation. If you ask legitimate questions about how the cards are distributed to the players all you are met with is waffle and silence.
You can believe it if you like, refuse to ask questions and remain in the dark. It's your right and your choice. Just as it is the right of anyone who is undecided and therefore chooses to ask those awkward questions.
Some good replys here including from at least 1 very very experienced and successful player (elsa).
I for one find it kinda strange that a player of simuk's stature would post a blog on this subject.
Most people who feel strongly on this matter,either for or against online poker being fixed in some form or other nearly always voice their opinion when these threads arise.
Cant ever remember simuk posting on this matter at all.so why now?
As I said if there is nothing to hide get it authenticated by a well know reputable company, Deloitte's or KPMG would carry more weight than xxx we've never heard of.
No one says that the site is rigged, what they are saying is the rng maybe isn't very random! However that doesn't mean you dont have to play, it just means that outdraws occur more often, and that can close the gap between the good and poor players, i should know ive donked a few quid off some good players, fish rule!!!!
The skill level is much lower, people chase where they likely wouldnt live and people have access to cheap games that they frankly dont care enough about to play well, go bust and quickly play another one. Posted by AMYBR
if theres one difference between live and online play its that online is alot harder than live poker at the same levels
I make a pretty decent living at Live Poker, mainly playing in the North East Casino's and DTD. But Online I have had the utter worst swings. Posted by AMYBR
+1 to LoL_Raise's ccomment about online poker being, on average, much tougher than online... and it's not even close.
Therefore it's not a surprise that ssomeone who is winning live, is less successful online.
That's not intended to belittle the fact that you are making a living playing live poker... still need to be at a decent skill level... WP & long may it continue.
You comment that there would be no winning players in that scenario. In fact the opposite would be far more likely. Surely the likes of Tom Dwan, Shwartz and Friedman would be the perfect PR poster boys of online poker sites? Creating huge appeal, showing how young 20 somethings quickly become huge stars and Millionaires. Large faceless corporations have ALWAYS took advantage of their customers. Posted by AMYBR
Given the huge downswings that at least 2 of these have had, it's stretching credibility to suggest that, their success is in any way related to poker sites skewing things unfairly in their favour.
Comments
Seeing how good you run though I ask myself questions, lol. How much you paying Giddens?
Will read blog.
at last someone who uses / speaks common sense. Great read
I posted this on the blog but I didn't want to deprive those who have already read sims piece the opportunity to answer this question.
The real issue is that too many people believe RNG's are rigged and won't play on-line any more, I know plenty. It is for the poker industry to prove beyond any doubt that the RNG's are right, surely it is in their best interests to do this, don't they want these doubters back? It strikes me as a little odd that nothing has been done to seriously address this issue, particularly now, when traffic volumes are falling on many sites. Here's our bit of paper from a company no ones ever heard of isn't enough to bring the doubters back, if they were authenticated by a well know reputable company that would be a start, how about Deloitte's or KPMG.
I don't say online poker is rigged. But I do say that there is something very erroneous about RNG's.
I hear the points clearly. I for one HAVE decided to play very little online, as per the last paragraph of the blog. But I do feel that that last paragraph is unfair to individuals that percieve something to be wrong. As consumers they retain the right to question the integrity of a service, simply stating that "if you think its rigged dont play" really is very dismissive of many peoples genuine concern. In any other retail industry if people thought they were being dealt with wrongly they would retain the right to question and complain, not just told "if you dont like it, dont shop there". Frankly this attitude is a large part of the problem. Have you ever tried to reach many of the online sites on a one to one basis?
Lastly, alot of easy answers are put up in this blog. I'd like to put up some counter arguments. I'm not saying these are things I essentialy believe, but they do offer a counter point of view to the statements offered.
You comment that there would be no winning players in that scenario. In fact the opposite would be far more likely. Surely the likes of Tom Dwan, Shwartz and Friedman would be the perfect PR poster boys of online poker sites? Creating huge appeal, showing how young 20 somethings quickly become huge stars and Millionaires.
Large faceless corporations have ALWAYS took advantage of their customers. We live in a very mistrustful age, so despite opinions being hugely varied why do people find it so impossible that another amoral corporation could potentialy act in a less than honest way? Conspiracy theories only remain so until they, quite often, end up being proven. There is rarely smoke without fire.
Again, I am not saying I believe these things, nor do i essentially believe online poker is rigged. I guess what I'm really trying to say is that the debate isnt as simple and "nonsensical" as you propose, and laying it out your way kind of demeans and disregards all the peoples perspective that you open your blog with. Who is anyone to say that they are assuredly correct?
I see online as a very different game to live. The skill level is much lower, people chase where they likely wouldnt live and people have access to cheap games that they frankly dont care enough about to play well, go bust and quickly play another one. There's no chip handling and clicking a button makes for much looser aggressive play. For me these elements play a big part in the action seen.
But there is much more to the debate here.
I for one find it kinda strange that a player of simuk's stature would post a blog on this subject.
Most people who feel strongly on this matter,either for or against online poker being fixed in some form or other nearly always voice their opinion when these threads arise.
Cant ever remember simuk posting on this matter at all.so why now?
OR was he asked to make this blog?
No one says that the site is rigged, what they are saying is the rng maybe isn't very random! However that doesn't mean you dont have to play, it just means that outdraws occur more often, and that can close the gap between the good and poor players, i should know ive donked a few quid off some good players, fish rule!!!!
if theres one difference between live and online play its that online is alot harder than live poker at the same levels