Do we really know that online poker is on the level? I.E., not rigged

[davidlong14]

...internets is rigged.

[dlk9s]

[ QUOTE ]
(Aside: interesting how party gaming is audited by PriceWaterhouseCoopers for UK listing purposes but Itech labs verifies the RNG. Why not have PWC perform all the work? PWC is an international firm that undoubtedly has subject matter experts in this area)

[/ QUOTE ]

This would likely be a conflict of interest, or very close to it. While the chances of shenanigans are very slight, there would be too much opportunity for an unscrupulous manager or partner to "cook the books" or overlook inconsistencies related to links between a rigged RNG and the company's financials.

[antisocialgrace]

[ QUOTE ]
This is not a post about anything that players do (bots, collusion) but whether or not the site provides a fair game (fair shuffler, RNG, a site’s own bots, etc.). Please keep your replies focused on this.

Now before I begin, let me say that I do not think for 100% that it is rigged. But I do think that there is a reasonable possibility that something is going on and the games are not completely on the level. There is enough uncertainty about these online poker entities that I can’t personally see how a reasonable person would not, at a minimum, acknowledge the possibility.

Let’s take a very careful approach to this question. Look at it how an investigator looks at whether or not a crime has been committed. To commit a crime you need two things.

1 – Motive

2 – Opportunity

<u>MOTIVE</u>

Let’s discuss motive first. The most often cited argument for a lack of motive is:

“The sites make so much money off rake, why would they want to risk that by rigging the games?”

(Ignore the idea that they might get caught for a moment. We’ll discuss that when we get to opportunity.)

I do not agree with this statement. The sites could obviously make even more money by rigging the games. Ignoring whether or not they would get caught for a moment, their motivation to rig a game is there. The more games going on, the more money a site makes in rake. The longer a site can keep each player playing and depositing, the more games they’ll have going on. Therefore, don’t let the fish get cleaned out too fast. Keep them around, allow them to think they’re good players. As for the sharks, they’ll mostly equate their losses to variance, bad beats, etc. As long as they see bad play, they’ll keep coming back regardless of the outcome.


<u>OPPORTUNITY</u>

Look at the second half of the sentence above, “why would they want to risk that by rigging the games?” Assuming a site had made the decision to offer a less than fair game, the next step would logically be to assess their risk of getting caught, the opportunity to commit the crime. If the risk of getting caught is high, then the statement above (“The sites make so much money off rake, why would they want to risk that by rigging the games?”) is 100% true and all online poker should be fair. But if the risk of getting caught is low, which I think it is, then the environment is ripe for a crime (rigging a game) to be committed.

I think the risk of a site getting caught rigging the games is low for the following reasons:

1 – Who polices/audit the games on these sites? I know some of these companies are audited by some of the big 4 accounting firms. But remember, that is only the Company’s financial statements that are audited by the firm. The auditor is checking to see if their financial statements are materially accurate only. It is unlikely that a financial statement auditor would expand the scope of that audit to include operational items like a RNG unless specifically engaged by the Company to do so. (Aside: interesting how party gaming is audited by PriceWaterhouseCoopers for UK listing purposes but Itech labs verifies the RNG. Why not have PWC perform all the work? PWC is an international firm that undoubtedly has subject matter experts in this area)

Most of the sites have contracted other parties to assess the integrity/fairness of the games. First off, I have been able to find very little information on these companies. For instance, Itech labs issues a certificate on a somewhat official looking letter verifying party gaming’s games. Has anyone been able to find out any detailed information on Itech labs? I spent a half hour searching for information on the Company and all I found were links to their website and party poker’s website.

And what work does Itech labs perform as a basis for their opinion? This is also something that I have not been able to find. Is their audit adequate? What qualifies this Company to know enough about this industry to issue their report?

How is a certificate from some Company I have never heard of and I can’t find any information on supposed to give me, the player any kind of comfort level?

2 – How hard would it be to fool an auditor? Trust me, it isn’t as hard as you think. The frauds committed at Enron/WorldCom/Healthsouth/Tyco were not near as complex as rigging a RNG and they went undetected for years.

For example, say you have a not so random number generator. Then you hire a Company to come in and verify that RNG. How hard would it be take the rigged RNG out of production during the audit and replace it with a real RNG, then put the rigged RNG back in place after the audit is over and you have your clean certificate?

3 – No way they could keep the rigged games a secret for long. If a game was rigged, why would more than a very small number of people within the Company know about it? The only people that would need to know would be the development team and maybe 1-2 very high level execs. Probably 10-15 people tops. Letting any more people know would be unnecessary and would only increase the risk of getting caught. Also, at the Enron/WorldCom/Healthsouth/Tyco frauds, a very small number of people were aware of the fraud. That is a big reason why it was able to go on for so long.


Again, I’m not trying to say that online poker is rigged. What I am saying is that I can’t say with any level of confidence that it isn’t. I have been surprised at how most of the posters here seem to dismiss out of hand any idea that a site is rigged. As I said above, how can one not, at a minimum, acknowledge the possibility?

[/ QUOTE ]

I really can't add much here, you've very articulately encapsulated just about everything I've been saying from time immemorial. I'm a winning player incidently, not one of these many plankton I keep hearing about trying to attribute their losses to something other than bad play.

I too am amazed at how blissfully ignorant and willing to trust the vast majority of online players are. It must be the relative youth and inexperience. Oh well these little boys and girls will have to learn critical thinking skills the hard way I suppose. I just wish they would stay home when it comes time to vote. Course that [censored]'s likely rigged too.

[Rushstreet07]

A wise man once said:

"The only thing for sure is that nothing is for sure"

[nhWPjstUnLKy]

i don't know but i win live more consistent then online, you come across the weirdest beats

[Deuce2High]

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...;gonew=1#UNREAD

[eMbAh]

[ QUOTE ]
A wise man once said:

"The only thing for sure is that nothing is for sure"

[/ QUOTE ]

Then how can it be for sure that nothing is for sure?

[king333]

summary: same as always. donks think it's rigged (only way to explain how someone soooo good could lose)...the rest of us dont care ...we are winning $$. why question the positive

[HensonLosesLots]

I find this funny coming from Ding-Dong...

I remember posting something similiar and he immediately bashed the idea. Obv. he must've been on some amazing online heater and couldn't fathom the idea of online being rigged.

Now, he's probably on a nasty downswing and after this whole AP thing, is -thinking- it may be a greater chance of online being 'rigged'.

It's funny how winning money can narrow your mind and losing money can open it up.

I don't really have a stance with online poker. I think it's quite a shady business, even the stuff that's considered legal like those statistical trackers that displays a person aggressive/loose/positional behavior by keeping track of percentages. I think that gives an individual a huge edge over someone who does not, I never use one nor will ever, as I play poker for fun.

Then there's the 'hole-card' fiasco and that's always been a possibility. It's sort of like comparing cheating that happens in online videogames. You can play an online game and think, how can anyone cheat online? They even have these special anti-cheat programs to catch all the latest hacks. Yet, a simple google search and you can find programs that easily by-pass the anti-cheat program. An obvious example would be Counterstrike. When I first ever played it, I thought, how can anyone see through walls. Someone obviously is upset they suck and keep getting rocked. I mean the game has anti-cheat programs that get updated daily, who could hack that. Simple google search and you get these hacks that are made almost weekly that bypass the latest anti-cheat.

So do I think online poker there are cheats? Well, I honestly don't know, but I would say as of now, it's extremely rare, if any at all. Yes, from the AP hand histories, I would go out on a limb and say that guy is cheating somehow or was really blasted and got extremely lucky. But is it widespread? No, not yet at least. I think it'd take some extremely talented programmers/hackers to ever come up with a program to see 'hole-cards' on anybodies computer. I'm sure it'd be easier if you knew your opponent and knew he had a backdoor trojan. Or if you were a big programmer on a site that knew the code like the back of your hand.

So is it possible? Obviously. Plausible, no.

Again, you have to understand this is computer software. Any very smart software programmer could probably hack into the code. They could also probably find IPs of players they are up against and scan for trojans to see their computer screens.

And it all comes down to money. We all know there is absolutely tons of money being thrown around poker sites.

I'm done with my rant.. I'll obviously get flammed and people will reply with hate. But how can you deny the amount of money any successful hacker could make, and with bad intentions, could make lots of easy money.

As always, the players who have consistantly won money online, and have yet to experience a large downswing will brush this off as nonsense. But just look at the AP hand histories, calling off all your stack heads up in a huge money tournament with 9-10 high (no draws) vs 9-3 high is such non-sense that how can you deny the possibility. The difference from first and second is nearly half, so how could anyone do that?

I can't wait to hear all the naive responses from the people who've played online poker for only a year and yet to experience a downswing.

[antisocialgrace]

i've seen more posts in this thread conceding at least the possibility online poker isn't trustworthy than I have in any other. it's a shame it takes so cogent a post as OP's to bring the skeptics out of the wilderness. stop being so damned cowed by these morons stooging for the industry.