[NANONUTS]

[ QUOTE ]
It has been said a few times already. There is no need to share hand histories. For the questions I think most people would want tested any regular player will have enough hand histories that there is no need to merge them.

The reason I see this as a waste of effort though is that the people who believe sites are rigged are exhibiting an emotional reaction. They are losing players and don't want to face the fact that it is their fault so they blame the site. No amount of statistical evidence is going to convince them.

I also don't see why anyone would care enough to want to put the effort in to convince them. I find their form of craziness entertaining.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes there are some idiot donkeys putting forward the opinion that the games aren't fair but there are also winning players with that viewpoint. It's only natural that this side of the argument will attract more disgruntled people but that doesn't mean the argument in invalid. I've already said why I as winning pro for the last 3 years think the sites aren't fair, check my previous posts, I'm not gonna write it again. I would really love someone to compile all the data and run an analysis on it and find out once and for all if the games fair. And even if they weren't I would still be playing as this is my job and if I'm making money that's good enough for me. But I am just very curious as to what could be going on in the software and it annoys the hell out of me the way some people don't even consider what could be happening, dismissing it out of hand when there is huge motive for the sites to balance the cards.

If you took 10-20 winning players lifetime stats and ran an EV calculation on their all-ins to compare actual winnings to the winnings they should have made in theory, this would be enough imo to put end to this argument once and fora all. I think you'd need this amount of data as you don't want people to be complaining about small sample sizes like with the Absolute poker issue.