[MicroBob]

I've addressed the idea of 'action flops' before actually.

1. Not sure why they would want these in tournaments.

2. I think the idea that they would generate extra-rake on the higher-stakes tables is false.
On a 10/20 limit game for example, the rake will usually reach the max anyway.
But the action-flops would actually make the hand take longer with more action, thus less hands per hour.

So the incentive for a site that actually wants to rig the game to generate more rake would be for NON-action flops on the higher-stakes tables. The deader the hands the quicker they get through them.


The OP's contention that they make you lose a lot on all your tables OR win a lot on all your tables thus somehow encouragring you to play more because of the greater-than-normal swings is a new one on me.


I have every confidence that we will hear from someone else in the future who will come up with an even more creative observation about his variance and why the site has it in for him but obviously wants certain other players to win.



I'm waiting for something like, "I've noticed that every time I get A5o on one table I see an A and a 5 on the flop on one of the other tables I am playing. This is happening a hugely disproportionate amount of the time.
Reason: Because the site wants me to get angry that I 'hit' a flop but that I hit it on another table.
By ALWAYS putting my winning flops on other tables I end up always tilting away my winnings. PokerStars set this up against me because they saw where I said that Lee Jones book is overrated."