guy claims he knows a pokerstars programmer that rigged the rng

[syncmaster]

On a serious note, this is really not good. Is this what the conscious believes after the "BAN" and after the AP "rigging"? Its like a highschool rumor, its only going to get worse. Don't get me wrong, half these guys come off like complete morons, but these are the ones we want in our games.

[Daddy Warbucks]

You ever notice how many fish whine about a site being rigged, but never get up from the table until they bust? Online poker isn't in any danger.

[Vertical Taco]

[gtpitch]

[ QUOTE ]
You ever notice how many fish whine about a site being rigged, but never get up from the table until they bust? Online poker isn't in any danger.

[/ QUOTE ]

How many times have we seen it....

fish1: this [censored] is so rigged
Dealer: fish1 rebuys for $3 and has 1500 chips added.

[bystander]

I am a programmer and I can tell you it is far easier to rig poker software than it is to create software to play poker from scratch.
So if anything the argument - it would cost a lot - and is real hard to do is out the window.

The way the programmer said he did it also make sense. Something I would have to do as a programmer is make sure that in the long run the cards are not distributed abnormally i.e too many pocket aces getting cracked, because then anyone can use poker tracking tools and prove its rigged.
On the other hand, I have no idea how a programmer can screw it up to throw a fifth ace. (And release it to public too!)
The really good way to rig the site is to assign numeric values based on their wins/losses/playing style/newbie etc and say the higher number is favored in the deal because he recently joined and has not won much. Based on that the deal can be adjusted on the river /turn. Also settings can control which tables are rigged and which are not. Sometimes too, higher limit tables will not be rigged because firstly, they are very few newbies there and second, the pros might pick up on it.

the net result of a well rigged site: the very good players will still win though they might still suffer a few bad beats from newbies.
The newbies /bad players will last a little longer and will be encouraged.
However, the average/not so good players will now be losing players because all they needed was a little bit of variance to keep them in debt anyway.
thus, most of the rigged site stories will come from average players only since they are the ones the most victimized. Some winning players might discover this but most good players don't play at micro/medium and so may never notice this.
As a programmer, I see nothing extraordinary with this - but as a poker player it is disturbing to know it can be done <i>undetected!</i>

[pipermax]

[ QUOTE ]
I am a programmer and I can tell you it is far easier to rig poker software than it is to create software to play poker from scratch.
So if anything the argument - it would cost a lot - and is real hard to do is out the window.

The way the programmer said he did it also make sense. Something I would have to do as a programmer is make sure that in the long run the cards are not distributed abnormally i.e too many pocket aces getting cracked, because then anyone can use poker tracking tools and prove its rigged.
On the other hand, I have no idea how a programmer can screw it up to throw a fifth ace. (And release it to public too!)
The really good way to rig the site is to assign numeric values based on their wins/losses/playing style/newbie etc and say the higher number is favored in the deal because he recently joined and has not won much. Based on that the deal can be adjusted on the river /turn. Also settings can control which tables are rigged and which are not. Sometimes too, higher limit tables will not be rigged because firstly, they are very few newbies there and second, the pros might pick up on it.

the net result of a well rigged site: the very good players will still win though they might still suffer a few bad beats from newbies.
The newbies /bad players will last a little longer and will be encouraged.
However, the average/not so good players will now be losing players because all they needed was a little bit of variance to keep them in debt anyway.
thus, most of the rigged site stories will come from average players only since they are the ones the most victimized. Some winning players might discover this but most good players don't play at micro/medium and so may never notice this.
As a programmer, I see nothing extraordinary with this - but as a poker player it is disturbing to know it can be done <i>undetected!</i>

[/ QUOTE ]


Found this to be a pretty reasonable and thoughtful response on a subject that usually draws massive amounts of flame from true believers on both sides of the "online poker is rigged" argument.

Although I'm not a programmer it wouldn't seem that it would be any harder for a site to program hand results as Bystander suggested than it would be for IGT to program the RNG on individual video poker machines to give varying degrees of advantage to the casino as they have been doing for years.

[lurker1022]

[ QUOTE ]
Although I'm not a programmer it wouldn't seem that it would be any harder for a site to program hand results as Bystander suggested than it would be for IGT to program the RNG on individual video poker machines to give varying degrees of advantage to the casino as they have been doing for years.

[/ QUOTE ]
LOL really you wear your tinfoil to the local b&m's then too? ever heard of a gaming commission?

[CigarMike]

Seriously, the tinfoil hat joke wasn't that funny the first 231,978 times it was used, nor is it funny now. Thanks for your contribution to the thread anyway.

One thing is obvious from that site, if anythings rigged , its rigged for Washington Redskins fans.

[Komodo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Although I'm not a programmer it wouldn't seem that it would be any harder for a site to program hand results as Bystander suggested than it would be for IGT to program the RNG on individual video poker machines to give varying degrees of advantage to the casino as they have been doing for years.

[/ QUOTE ]
LOL really you wear your tinfoil to the local b&m's then too? ever heard of a gaming commission?

[/ QUOTE ]

Are they actually doing anything other than collecting the licence money?

[pipermax]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Although I'm not a programmer it wouldn't seem that it would be any harder for a site to program hand results as Bystander suggested than it would be for IGT to program the RNG on individual video poker machines to give varying degrees of advantage to the casino as they have been doing for years.

[/ QUOTE ]
LOL really you wear your tinfoil to the local b&m's then too? ever heard of a gaming commission?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to waste the time of this forum arguing the arcania of Nevada Gaming Regulation, but the relevant point in regards to the "online poker is rigged" argument is that RANDOMNESS of card distribution does not result in EQUALITY of card distribution, be it amongst video poker machines in a casino or players on a poker site.

The argument that any statistical disparity in card distribution or hand results would be spotted by tracking programs has been ofton made on this forum in defense of the randomness of poker-site RNGs. I would argue that it is just this homogeneity of result that lends credence to claims of programmed "levelling" by the sites as proposed by Bystander earlier in this thread.

Recall from your Stats 101 course the concept of the Inverted Bell Curve when the results of a series of randomly occurring events are displayed on a graph. Rather than appearing roughly as a straight line of equality (the "mean")the results resemble instead the familiar Bell Curve with most occuring bunched either slightly above or below the "mean" line of equality (the fat part of the Bell) but a distinct but diminishing number extending both above and below the "mean"
to a narrow point at the two extremes of the Inverted Bell.

If all the PokerTracker charts we hear of do in fact show a statistical equality of card distribution and winning hand result, roughly in accordance with the "mean", where are the few statistical anomolies located toward the narrow extremities of the Bell Curve, both above and below the "mean" line?

Surely if anyone had PokerTracker proof of such an anomoly they would be eager to share it on this forum but why haven't we heard from them? If the Bell Curve is a valid statistical concept these aberrations must be out there somewhere unless like "the dog that didn't bark" their absence sheds some doubt on the validity of the poker-sites claims of true randomness in their RNGs.