Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Kinkikos, post: 647214, member: 26719"]
I'm not sure how the issue of online poker being rigged or not yields to an ontological argument. And the example you provided is highly empirical because it relies on disproof by counterexample. What I believe you're doing in that first paragraph is deliberately posting a lot of claptrap in order to test me and see if I'll catch on. Or perhaps to pat yourself on the back about how superior you folks from the U.K. are because you're sure I *shan't* catch on.
 
Your second paragraph doesn't relate to the issue, either. The only sensible question that can be asked is "Is this particular piece of poker software written or implemented in a rigged fashion?" In that case there is no question of data sets or probabilities. You look at the source code and the debug dump and see plain as day whether it is rigged or not, just as you'd see whether some specific person has one or two or three or four ears sticking out of his head.
 
The thread you included a link to features just a bunch of knee-jerk fanaticism on the Poker is Clean side. "Hey, we are profitable players, so everyone who says he played a rigged game is to be ridiculed." Or even worse: "Hey, we're the Poker Insiders, and anyone who disagrees with our position is An Outsider and The Enemy." Blech.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us