![]() |
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: When is the 75 going in? | |||
| turn |
|
13 | 56.52% |
| river |
|
5 | 21.74% |
| It never/sometimes gets into the pot |
|
5 | 21.74% |
| Voters: 23. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#161
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
But if this man calls a raise from bb and its hu he check raises 100% of the time. I called him out on this and he wont do it against me anymore. But that strategy was working for him, everytime hedid that play he ended up sucking out. [/ QUOTE ] So, you think that the pokerstars site is programmed to favour a player who calls a raise from the BB and then check raise the flop? Why on earth don't you do this? You say it works "everytime"! (of course, the other option is that you know you are talking crap and that this is not true) |
|
#162
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
have you ever lost set over set five times (four on flops) in one day or flush over flush five times in a row? I have. Guess where .. [/ QUOTE ] However great the odds against something happening, given enough trials, it will eventually happen. Flush over flush in a game with community cards is unremarkably common. (If they were flushes of different suits, you would have a scoop. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]) |
|
#163
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] He called your bluff guys. Post his damn stats!! [/ QUOTE ] It's not a bluff. It takes a while to request 500k hands, didn't get them til overnight and couldn't import til I got home. Split the (650mb) file into smaller ones, importing to PT now. [/ QUOTE ] Nevermind. Inadmissable, chain of custody. [/ QUOTE ] Chain of custody goes to the weight and not the admissibility. Guess you didn't get that far in your crim law 101 class. [/ QUOTE ] Yes I know that. It's still inadmissable in my court. |
|
#164
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
Yes I know that. It's still inadmissable in my court. [/ QUOTE ] I don't understand this. I'm not a lawyer. Can you please explain this? |
|
#165
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] have you ever lost set over set five times (four on flops) in one day or flush over flush five times in a row? I have. Guess where .. [/ QUOTE ] However great the odds against something happening, given enough trials, it will eventually happen. Flush over flush in a game with community cards is unremarkably common. (If they were flushes of different suits, you would have a scoop. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]) [/ QUOTE ] Five times consecutively I lost when I had a flush to a higher flush, all three-on-board not four. Two of them were Queen-high. I would say that's pretty damned deviant in any sample. |
|
#166
|
|||
|
|||
|
I just lost with AA back to back -- yet somehow -- I still don't believe it's rigged -- no really it's not. Chit happens which sucks and life goes on...
|
|
#167
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Yes I know that. It's still inadmissable in my court. [/ QUOTE ] I don't understand this. I'm not a lawyer. Can you please explain this? [/ QUOTE ] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_of_custody Whatever stats Poker Stars were to post at this point (it's been 12 hours and they already tried to dance around it after he called their bluff) would be suspect because of how long they've been subject to possible manipulation. |
|
#168
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
Whatever stats Poker Stars were to post at this point (it's been 12 hours and they already tried to dance around it after he called their bluff) would be suspect because of how long they've been subject to possible manipulation. [/quote but that's absurd! it's not possible, over an anonymous internet forum, to maintain the records that you request. Also, your claim that PS staff have "already tried to dance around it after he called their bluff" is self-evidently absurd. |
|
#169
|
|||
|
|||
|
antisocial's posts are just bizarrely dumb.
I disagree with much of what onlinepro says but even he isn't as bad as this. |
|
#170
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Yes I know that. It's still inadmissable in my court. [/ QUOTE ] I don't understand this. I'm not a lawyer. Can you please explain this? [/ QUOTE ] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_of_custody Whatever stats Poker Stars were to post at this point (it's been 12 hours and they already tried to dance around it after he called their bluff) would be suspect because of how long they've been subject to possible manipulation. [/ QUOTE ] it's impossible for pokerstars to fake records in their custody, but when an employee takes them home on his own time and imports a 650 MB file for 12 hours, they're fixed this is more lol than the politics forum |
![]() |
|
|