Welcome to everyone who found the site. Whether you believe its random or you believe its not. Here is some evidence on the site. Based on e-mail from readers I have gotten I will attempt to make this a better all around poker site. Sure beats will still be discussed but maybe we can get some blog reader tourneys going or have blog readers invite others and share there own tourney wins and losses via blogs. Just send me an e-mail I will attempt to create a network of poker blogs.

Believers and.........Non-Believers

Saturday, April 16, 2011

To Craig LaMonte

Since you have decided to post please explain what this comments means:

"Ok...you were AGAIN behind from the jump. MY GOD."

Are you saying that I should lose a hand because I was behind before a flop? If so, you are clearly showing that you dont understand poker. In fact, you are showing that you dont understand odds at all. Apparently you go all in preflop every hand I dont. If I go up against an opponent hold AK and I have A5 I am assuming that your comment means that I am behind from the start......the jump??

But I wouldnt push that all in. So if the flop comes out A53 I am clearly by far a favorite to win the hand now. A beat coming at this point is a bad beat. Maybe this is the jump you are talking about. On a side note, you sound like a retard using this statement....but back to the example. At this point I can only lose this hand by a 3 outer coming in which case a K hits the turn or river, OR the board runs a higher pair.

If an A hits I have a boat, if a 5 hits I have a boat, if a 3 hits I have a higher two pair and still win. So maybe I am missing your statement. The guy had 3 outs and a total of two chances to hit it or 6 chances total out of a full deck. You are trying to say that I should have lost??

Your a moron and I would love to play your home game, in fact I would take a side bet that I would finish higher than you any day of the week because you clearly dont even understand odds, much less the game of poker. "Jump" on that.


Paul Burnette said...

this is so simple - First, if your playing in low stakes, you have more people to a flop, more people chasing cards etc. Next, there is a thing called 'schooling' which basically means the more hands drawing against you, the worse your chance to win is. Please go to Flop turn ruver and you will see they have indepently run over 1 million hands at each of the poker sites and they ALL come out to expected results...The reason you think it's fake/rigged/not random is because you see so many more hands. Online you see 100 hands/hour - at Each table (I play 5 tables regularly) Card room maybe 35/hour. When you see that many more hands, you only remember these types of losses

Crazydiggity said...

what you are stating is simply not true. No studies have been done using players. They have been done as standalone random number generators. Therefore if a site does as I believe to be true, track the player and determine the wins and loses that way, then all of the studies of an RNG dont mean anything. I can tell you this, if someone wanted to come track my games on my computer, the odds would be so far away from realistic odds that even you would have to agree it is rigged.

Thomas said...

Do that. Take a photo of 100% of your hands (including folded pre) for 10,000 hands. And include a transcript. You will notice you are always losing. Also, stop being a bitch about your bad beats. It is random and you see more hands then normal. and feel cheated or something.

And, your almost definitely not as good as you think. Hell, I would love to play you in a homegame (now that FTP is down)

Paul Burnette said...

poor guy, you are SO CLUELESS - it makes ZERO sense for a poker site to cheat. They make money on rake, doesn't matter who wins. They run hand history analysis to spot collusion - Collusion is by far a much bigger problem than anything the software could do, and they monitor it extremely well (at least they did before this weekend). Your claims are that of a bitter poker player who doesn't understand the game...There is ZERO merit to your conspiracy theory - It's funny, but you seem WAY too serious about it...and you have ZERO backup - ZERO - You have a "if someone tracked my games it would be far from realistic"...They have that - it's called POKER TRACKER, costs about $60 and keeps track of every hand you play...

Crazydiggity said...

Again you didnt address what I told you. I have already addressed the fact that FT as a business cannot survive on rake alone. I laid out an entire business plan describing this. The only way to survive is to increase profit. The only way to do that is to make players deposit and play more (hence the invention of rush poker) and the only way to ensure that good players and bad players continue to make deposits is to regulate the players. If your so good post your screen name so we can look you up. I bet you wont. I bet you are a losing player. Sharkscope me. Have fun. I am real about it. I also keep a spreadsheet of my winnings and a loses and as of now after a few years of play I am up a couple grand total. Wheres your stats?

Alex_Haines said...

have you any idea the amount of rake a site like FT makes in a minute? Let alone a year. It's SCARY!!!

Paul Burnette said...

i used to be LimpinAintEZ on Fulltilt, but haven't played regularly for a few years...now i can't play at all - Not only am i in the US, I'm also in Washington State, which currently is the worst of all 50 states and was the first to get banned by Full Tilt.

If you think Full Tilt can't survive on rake alone, there is no point discussing this with you because that is just dumb. You have 30-50k players ALL DAY LONG...Each table is dealing about 100 hands/hour - Each rake taken is a quarter to $3/hand...If you honestly think a poker site (with next to zero overhead outside of software and advertising) isn't making a FORTUNE, you are dilusional...They are making MILLIONS

Crazydiggity said...

No. FT cannot survive on rake alone. I am sorry to break it to you, but FT has to pay enormous fees to operate in in the states of Alderny. In the US our government cannot take bribes. I guarantee on that island FT is paying hundreds of millions of dollars every year to continue to operate, they probably have to increase this each year.

What you just posted proves my point. The same amount of players log in just about every day. They play the same amount of games. The rake becomes a stagnant predictible figure. They HAVE TO let me say it again HAVE TO increase profit streams. This is simply business 101. Phil Ivey walks into a room:

"Awww your profits were the same as last year and you owe more to foreign governments"

"Fuck you pay me"

Howard Lederer "Fuck you pay me"

Andy Bloch "Fuck you pay me"

See how it works. A business has to increase revenue there is no other way to survive. Rush poker was a genius way to accomplish this. But they have to figure out a way to make things move faster, have you deposit more, and play more games. Plain and simple.

Paul Burnette said...

stupidest argument, ever...you prove nothing, you have zero facts...you posted a few hand histories where you got sucked out on (after outflopping a much better hand)...all of your 'proof' is what typically happens in low stakes games...

Paul Burnette said...

Here you go: Argument over :) http://www.beatthefish.com/poker-strategy/why-online-poker-isnt-rigged.html

Crazydiggity said...

So you respond to a sound business theory that I posted with someone elses theory as to why its not rigged. Come on now.

I have this entire site of proof. You call it bad beats, but yet I have identified the players and patterns when this happens. I have literally reached the point that I can play someone heads up and tell you before a card is ever dealt if I will win or lose the match.

How do you explain that? Am I super human. No I simply am starting to understand the code.

Lorin Yelle said...

@ Crazy

Your business theory doesn't even make any sense. If a company makes $1 billion in profits this year and $1 billion next year, this equals $2 billion. You don't have to increase profits every year, nor do you even have to post a profit each year, as long as your long term graph goes uphill. To say otherwise is like saying a pro poker need win every hand or tournament to stay profitable.

Am I wrong here?

Crazydiggity said...

Yes. What are you missing? What you just stated is a stagnant business. A stagnant business that makes the same profit loses money. This is because all other factors the same, inflation increases, and operating expense increases. These are factors that increase when everything else is the same. Therefore making a billion the first year does not equal a billion the next year. The graph would look like this


Therefore to have a long term graph that goes uphill you have to find a way to change the game and increase profits. In poker this can be done through new games (draw poker). Faster games (rush poker) and the unidentified X factor that causes bad beats on FT.

Sorry to break it to you. But the only way for this business to continue to survive is by cheating. There are only so many "new" people to recruit.