I cannot win on pokerstars. Reasons ??

[Bobo Fett]

[ QUOTE ]
Go on my dear affiliates, defend your business. You can fool others, but you cannot fool me. I am out of this thread. Fill it up as much as you can. But truth will prevail in the end.

[/ QUOTE ]
Umm...who are the affiliates who have replied to you here? I'm confused. How about you stop with the unfounded accusations.

So obviously you are actually 100% convinced now rather than 90%? I was looking forward to giving you a nice long response, but it seems you have decided to close your mind. Oh well. Let me know if you decide to open it again.

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree 100 percent.

[/ QUOTE ]

what, you also fail at basic mathematics and logic?

you agree with him being wrong?


[ QUOTE ]
Josem please just admit you are a Poker Stars stooge. You have no credibility whatsoever my brother.


[/ QUOTE ]

You are another lying liar who lies.

I've never been employed by PokerStars, nor have received any other non-Poker payments from them.

<font color="white">I just hope they turn my boomswitch on.</font>

[T Kiriakopoulos]

I am back. I cant read so important lies.

First, I disagree, the cheating is not making the pots bigger. The cheating is against the ones who start winning persistently and there is a danger of walking out of the casino with profits. And if there was no cheating, these could only be the very tight, conservative players (who play only the 25% of preflop etc) and can have a huge edge against the fishes (who play with more than 50% of preflop cards, the bloafers etc).

I am not answering for this laughable argument that casino people are so selfless and moral that they are above suspicion of cheating. These are arguments for naive fools.

As for proofs, these are many hundreds or thousands of hands with an enormous expected value (when these hands are played by an average or even bad player), but instead of profit they make huge losses.

Plus the motivational indication that I described in my previous post, that if they dont cheat, they are in danger of not attaining even the half of the deposited money, whereas by cheating they can get it all.

One is not first proven guilty and then accused. First he is accused and then he is proven guilty. We have every right to accuse them by the strong statistical and motivational indications.

[frommagio]

[ QUOTE ]
I am back. I cant read so important lies.

First, I disagree, the cheating is not making the pots bigger. The cheating is against the ones who start winning persistently and there is a danger of walking out of the casino with profits. And if there was no cheating, these could only be the very tight, conservative players (who play only the 25% of preflop etc) and can have a huge edge against the fishes (who play with more than 50% of preflop cards, the bloafers etc).

I am not answering for this laughable argument that casino people are so selfless and moral that they are above suspicion of cheating. These are arguments for naive fools.

As for proofs, these are many hundreds or thousands of hands with an enormous expected value (when these hands are played by an average or even bad player), but instead of profit they make huge losses.

Plus the motivational indication that I described in my previous post, that if they dont cheat, they are in danger of not attaining even the half of the deposited money, whereas by cheating they can get it all.

One is not first proven guilty and then accused. First he is accused and then he is proven guilty. We have every right to accuse them by the strong statistical and motivational indications.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes! Let us accuse the cheating cheaters first, and then we prove them guilty with our proofs! Them and the bloafing bloafers who aid and abet them!

[T Kiriakopoulos]

Yes, you people who defend so furiously the fairness of the games, are the affiliates. You cry out you are 100% certain there is no cheating, or that poor casinos should not be accused before proven guilty. Why on earth someone take such a stand if not an affiliate or working for the casinos?
Every reasonable common person, and especially a scientific and objective thinker, would doubt anything.

Oh, no, I am never 100% certain they cheat. Evenmore, statistics can never proove something 100%. I could say I am 95%, and I am always open minded for the 5% being true.

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
I am back. I cant read so important lies.

First, I disagree, the cheating is not making the pots bigger. The cheating is against the ones who start winning persistently and there is a danger of walking out of the casino with profits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you seriously saying that it is impossible for anyone to win through online poker?

[ QUOTE ]
And if there was no cheating, these could only be the very tight, conservative players (who play only the 25% of preflop etc) and can have a huge edge against the fishes (who play with more than 50% of preflop cards, the bloafers etc).

[/ QUOTE ]

So, because you can't win, no one else can possibly win?

The other option is that you are just a bad player. I know which I think is more likely.

[ QUOTE ]
I am not answering for this laughable argument that casino people are so selfless and moral that they are above suspicion of cheating. These are arguments for naive fools.

[/ QUOTE ]

No one is saying that online poker operators are above "suspicion of cheating." I am saying that if you're going to make serious criminal allegations, you should provide evidence.

You have clearly thought about this issue a lot. Have you reported your findings to the police? If not, why not?

[ QUOTE ]
As for proofs, these are many hundreds or thousands of hands with an enormous expected value (when these hands are played by an average or even bad player), but instead of profit they make huge losses.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please show us the database. Just point me to the URL please.

[ QUOTE ]
Plus the motivational indication that I described in my previous post, that if they dont cheat, they are in danger of not attaining even the half of the deposited money, whereas by cheating they can get it all.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is simply false. This makes no sense. Your argument is based upon a predication that no one is a winning player. This is rediculous.

[ QUOTE ]
One is not first proven guilty and then accused. First he is accused and then he is proven guilty. We have every right to accuse them by the strong statistical and motivational indications.

[/ QUOTE ]
The final sentence is wrong. You have no right to accuse people simply because they have a motive to do something - you have not provided any evidence that anything has even been done wrong, let alone that the poker sites are behind an international fraud.

You have claimed a number of times that there is some sort of "statistical" evidence/proof/indication. Where is this available?

[frommagio]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, you people who defend so furiously the fairness of the games, are the affiliates. You cry out you are 100% certain there is no cheating, or that poor casinos should not be accused before proven guilty. Why on earth someone take such a stand if not an affiliate or working for the casinos?
Every reasonable common person, and especially a scientific and objective thinker, would doubt anything.

Oh, no, I am never 100% certain they cheat. Evenmore, statistics can never proove something 100%. I could say I am 95%, and I am always open minded for the 5% being true.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, you affiliating affiliates, will you deny the prooves of every reasonable common person, and especially those scientific and objective thinkers, who would doubt anything? Why on earth you would do this for?

Like Kristapolous, I too remain open minded for the 5% being true.

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, you affiliating affiliates, will you deny the prooves of every reasonable common person, and especially those scientific and objective thinkers, who would doubt anything? Why on earth you would do this for?

Like Kristapolous, I too remain open minded for the 5% being true.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol awesome.

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, you people who defend so furiously the fairness of the games, are the affiliates.

[/ QUOTE ]

But I'm not an affiliate! I never have been! I never intend to be!

[ QUOTE ]
You cry out you are 100% certain there is no cheating,

[/ QUOTE ]

I assume that English is not your first language, so I'm willing to cut you some slack. But throughout this thread, those of us who require evidence to believe something (ie, are sceptical of claims that poker sites are running an international fraud conspiracy) have repeatedly said that there is a chance that poker sites are rigged. No one has claimed that they are "100% certain there is no cheating".

This is a pretty obvious straw man claim, and it is another example that you are either ignorant of what we are discussing or you are deliberately lying.

[ QUOTE ]
or that poor casinos should not be accused before proven guilty.

[/ QUOTE ]
We are simply asking for SOME evidence! SOME proof! SOME indication! even a little bit!

[ QUOTE ]
Why on earth someone take such a stand if not an affiliate or working for the casinos?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because I think your offensive slurs on thousands of people are simply offensive, as well as based upon ignorance and idiocy.

[ QUOTE ]
Every reasonable common person, and especially a scientific and objective thinker, would doubt anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course I, and any other sane player, am concerned about the honesty and fairness of online poker sites. But despite the many people who claim there is something wrong, not one has ever provided me with any evidence that any major site is rigging the deal.

Don't you think it is remarkable that out of the many people who make serious criminal allegations that NOT ONE skerrick of evidence has ever been presented on these boards?

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, no, I am never 100% certain they cheat. Evenmore, statistics can never proove something 100%. I could say I am 95%, and I am always open minded for the 5% being true.

[/ QUOTE ]

So provide these statistics that show 95% certainty that the pokersite operators are cheating.

[Bobo Fett]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, you people who defend so furiously the fairness of the games, are the affiliates. You cry out you are 100% certain there is no cheating, or that poor casinos should not be accused before proven guilty. Why on earth someone take such a stand if not an affiliate or working for the casinos?
Every reasonable common person, and especially a scientific and objective thinker, would doubt anything.

Oh, no, I am never 100% certain they cheat. Evenmore, statistics can never proove something 100%. I could say I am 95%, and I am always open minded for the 5% being true.

[/ QUOTE ]
You've yet to present even a snippet of proof that anything is rigged, so I doubt you'll have what I ask for next, but I'll try anyway.

Could you please show me:

1) Evidence of anyone responding to you being an affiliate?

2) A quote where anyone tells you that they are 100% certain that there is no cheating.

3) A quote where anyone calls a casino poor or says that a casino should not be accused.

You insist on repeating over and over in your posts that we can't be 100% certain, blah blah blah. Yet no one has ever said they are. You might be taken slight more seriously if you stop throwing around baseless accusations.

The reason non-affiliates would take such a stand should be obvious, but I'll spell them out for you.

1) We make money playing poker. We make money from fish like you. We want fish like you to keep playing.

2) We tire of the ceaseless, proofless threads. SHOW US PROOF!

3) It amuses us.

Edit: I think Josem has said all of this better than me. Please to be responding in a rational way to either of our posts.