Does this mean they don't? Just because someone has not put the money into cataloging and mapping hands from poker sites does not mean squeeky clean. The FBI and CIA are certainly not! Richard Nixon wasn't and he was running America.
Have you read what anyone else has written here? Many players, and nearly all regular high volume internet players us PT to track play, it's why Absolute were rumbled. With the millions of hands that these players have on record, not a single one has ever found anything wrong with any of the current online poker rooms as far as the RNG goes. If you can provide evidence outside of "I was rivered by a one outer" then not only will you be the first, but you'll also achieve instant fame as the man who "cracked the internet poker conspiracy". Your fame will be instant, so get to it I urge you.
You have a lot of trouble understanding the difference between live random poker and software written poker. They are TOTALLY different.
Yup, one involves single tabling with live people and has a far greater emphasis on reading abilitiy, the other is far more mathematical becasue reads are harder, and pushing people off hands is also harder becasue the ease of clicking a button, compared to physically pushing your chips in with your low flush draw etc means less chasers in live play.
There is no doubt that online poker is manipulated (because they can)
There is plenty of doubt, in fact there is no reason to suspect they do this at all!?!?!?
for many reasons: a) to ensure quick results for tournament play (as they get no rake only entry fee)and: b) for ring games, the faster a hand is completed the more games are created in the hour and therefore more rake. Simple math and what I can see simple rationale.
a) If we accept that two reasons are "many" then lets carry on. b) They can ensure quick results by increasing the blinds more quickly, having smaller starting stacks, and shortening the levels, so what is the need to go to the extremely difficult to achieve, and complicated lengths of fixing bust out hands? c) If a hand is completed faster, then surely the pots are smaller, so more hands, but possibly more rake? Want more rake - then reduce the clock per action, make faster software (like UB) or up the rake (like Boss moving to Euros, or Ladbrokes raking 6%)
You have to remember, in live poker 12000 entries would take over 7 days (possibly 10) to complete. PokerStars can achieve that feat in around 5-6 hours. Now there are two reasons for that:
1. The games are faster online ( but not that fast (without help from rigged software) that 11,999 players are eliminated in 6 hours), and
For Stars to run a 6 hour 12,000 player tourney (of which there are no actual examples anywhere in the world to date), I presume you are referring to a freeroll? You cannot compare a freeroll, with it's short stack, short rounds, and extreme loose play, with a 12,000 player live tourney with deep stack, long clock, and TAG play. Poker Stars weekly Million plays for 12 hours or more, and despite having a friendly structure is still far more quicker structuire than live play, and you get 3 times as many hands per hour, so really thats a 3 day tourney for 4000 players.
2. Software manipulation ensures fast action and quick results ( I have seen so many setups where three players are all holding pocket pairs - ensuring an all-in scenarios - this is rare in live play, Quads appearing in 4 hands within an hour - never seen that in all my 30 years of playing live, flushs to make you think these are as common as pairs and to top it off, allinners getting runner, runner and winning against someone who has a st8 off the flop so many times it makes a mockery of the statistics of live play)
Selective memory. I rememeber sitting down to play a small stakes NL game last year, and within the first hour I saw a flopped AAA board, with the case Ace on the turn. Amazingly, the following morning I sat down and again within the first hour I saw a flopped AAA, with the case Ace on the turn. Rigged? Well the first was at Caesers Palace, and the second at Venetian. Later in the second day I was at MGM (my fave Vegas card room) and within the hour there had indeed been four shown down quads hands, two to the same girl, and happily one for me. I also got paid on the Casers hand as I held a King and got called by a Queen.
Celebrity late night poker a couple of years ago, 1st heat, 1st hand, and Stephen Hendry knocks an opponent out with a Royal Flush. I don't remember anything else about that series, but I remember this hand.
Play long enough you see it all, but you'll only remember the exceptional hands.
Without both above points working together, tourneys of this size would hold up the site for days.
No they wouldn't, you clearly don't know how to set a tournament up to finish within a particular range of time. Why do you think casinos (live ones) have a certain clock, chip stack, and levels? It's not random, experience based upon how many players they historically get, and speed of play, coupled with when they need to finish, means they set up the structure accordingly. Online is the same.
I'm sorry but your argument is only based on your narrow view.
<cough>
However, any player of the live game would be very suspicious of the "spin" these online sites spew out, and be totally convinced of their charade once they have played online.
Many live players are, becasue when they go online they lose. Live players in general are poorer players, and are quick to assert the reason they lose is because of "fixing", sadly as more and more internet pros go live, they are finding their lack of ability is the route of their issues, not the poker sites.
One day it will be proven. By the way, isn't poker run by random number generators like casino slots??? Hmmmm do I see something similar here????
No, but then you don't understand that slots are also a house game it seems?