I cannot win on pokerstars. Reasons ??

[KurtSF]

[ QUOTE ]
adanthar
Possibly Too Level Headed

[/ QUOTE ]

[Tuff_Fish]

Nobody is ever ever ever ever going to know for sure if the offshore sites are rigged or not.

Most folks who play online agree that they are close enough to random to be suitable for play.

If a site makes $500,000 a day and could make an additional $150,000 by slightly biasing the cards of by having some "house players" with an "inside" advantage, then they very well may do it. You will never know minus a smoking gun.

Tuff

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]

Please post the stakes you play at and your screenname

[/ QUOTE ]

[Piece of Cake]

For one - I don't know how mods don't lock these threads - There's several going on right now that are the same that went on a month ago. That said, this mentality - "I lose because the site's rigged and not because of my play." - is why the game is still profitable. So I don't mind - I encourage it.

More importantly though is that if rigging does indeed exist, it SHOULD be highly profitable to someone like the OP who has figured it out. If you want me to posts graphs that show I or others "have figured it out" and are making a "profit" at sites that are rigged as OP claims then just peek over at any results thread. There's no need to take my word for it. People are consistent winners in spite of this proof from the OP that rigging is going on.

The "rigging" in question isn't against the OP specifically and thus he should adjust his game according to HIS statistical observations on what exactly is being rigged.

I simply propose that the "rigged" events occuring in his stats are exploitable and if he adjusts instead of complains, he should win more as a result of "said rigging" - not less. How is it that there are consistantly winning players in spite of the rigging after all.

According to OP's claim that he's getting sucked out on at an absurdly high rate he should possibly, for instance, take advantage of this anomaly obviously. Maybe, as you said, he could keep pots small when ahead so the best hand will hold up and make pots big when behind so the rigging will "kick in" and he'll make his draw, etc etc. The rigging he's experiencing is in the cards, not against his particular username.

If OP sincerely believes this rigging does in fact occur, and since we all know that other players are still long term winners, in spite of it, maybe it would be logical to assume that those winners too have identified this "rigging" and have adjusted their games accordingly to continue profiting in ways like I just mentioned.

[batair]

I also win less on stars then any other site i play for whatever reason.But there is an easy fix i just dont play there.

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
So it's stupid for them not to make the cards fall that create bigger pots and more action

[/ QUOTE ]

no, 'cause you're not looking at the whole picture.



btw, your conspiracy theories are really quite idiotic, 'cause they're based on a whole series of false assumptions.

sciolist - is it possible to run an analysis of how often the flush card comes on the river?

[derosnec]

i didn't read the whole thread, but i did see a post or two alleging that poker sites benefit from big pots, giving them incentive to juice things up.

ok, fine. but, as someone who plays a ton of hands a month and is supernova (confirming i have no life and play lots of hands), i can tell you that when i look at my PT db for session reviews, i see vast fields of tiny pots or pots that were picked up preflop.

i don't know if that means anything, but if a site was juicing the cards to create action, i'm not seeing it in my db or at the tables.

[excession]

Email support and ask them to set your doomswitch to off.

Xaston did this (he really did - I read the email and reply and they were both hilarious) and within 4 weeks won $43,000 in the end of month Stars $1m [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ClubChamp04]

[ QUOTE ]
Nobody is ever ever ever ever going to know for sure if the offshore sites are rigged or not.

Most folks who play online agree that they are close enough to random to be suitable for play.

If a site makes $500,000 a day and could make an additional $150,000 by slightly biasing the cards of by having some "house players" with an "inside" advantage, then they very well may do it. You will never know minus a smoking gun.

Tuff

[/ QUOTE ]

These are pretty much my thoughts as well. I would guess that almost everyone on this forum would be looking to maximize profits if we owned pokerstars/FTP etc...and if that means throwing some house players in here or there then so be it. It is totally undetectable and we will probably never know the truth unless someone very high up leaks the info, but why would that ever happen? There is no way I would ever bet against this.

[99killed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
my mentality used to be "i'm winning, but that's only 'cause my opponents suck even more than I know I do."

[/ QUOTE ]
Hey, that's me! Actually, perhaps more accurate for me: "I'm winning, but that's only 'cause my opponents suck even more than I know I do, and bonuses save my ass when I suck more than them."

[/ QUOTE ]