[ahopen78]

it is foolish to believe it is rigged. especially after one fricken hour of play!!!

dirtectly from Pokerstars:

from Pokerstars.com website
SHUFFLE

"Anyone who considers arithmetic methods of producing random digits is, of course, in a state of sin." - John von Neumann, 1951

We understand that a use of a fair and unpredictable shuffle algorithm is critical to our software. To ensure this and avoid major problems described in [2], we are using two independent sources of truly random data:
user input, including summary of mouse movements and events timing, collected from client software
true hardware random number generator developed by Intel [3], which uses thermal noise as an entropy source
Each of these sources itself generates enough entropy to ensure a fair and unpredictable shuffle.

Shuffle Highlights:
A deck of 52 cards can be shuffled in 52! ways. 52! is about 2225. We use 249 random bits from both entropy sources (user input and thermal noise) to achieve an even and unpredictable statistical distribution.
Furthermore, we apply conservative rules to enforce the required degree of randomness; for instance, if user input does not generate required amount of entropy, we do not start the next hand until we obtain the required amount of entropy from Intel RNG.
We use the SHA-1 cryptographic hash algorithm to mix the entropy gathered from both sources to provide an extra level of security
We also maintain a SHA-1-based pseudo-random generator to provide even more security and protection from user data attacks
To convert random bit stream to random numbers within a required range without bias, we use a simple and reliable algorithm. For example, if we need a random number in the range 0-25:
we take 5 random bits and convert them to a random number 0-31
if this number is greater than 25 we just discard all 5 bits and repeat the process
This method is not affected by biases related to modulus operation for generation of random numbers that are not 2n, n = 1,2,..
To perform an actual shuffle, we use another simple and reliable algorithm:
first we draw a random card from the original deck (1 of 52) and place it in a new deck - now original deck contains 51 cards and the new deck contains 1 card
then we draw another random card from the original deck (1 of 51) and place it on top of the new deck - now original deck contains 50 cards and the new deck contains 2 cards
we repeat the process until all cards have moved from the original deck to the new deck
This algorithm does not suffer from "Bad Distribution Of Shuffles" described in [2]


PokerStars shuffle verified by Cigital and BMM International

In May 2003, PokerStars submitted extensive information about the PokerStars random number generator (RNG) to two independent organizations. We asked these two trusted resources to perform an in-depth analysis of the randomness of the output of the RNG, and its implementation in the shuffling of the cards on PokerStars.

Both independent companies were given full access to the source code and confirmed the randomness and security of our shuffle.

[ahopen78]

and if you still are not convinced try paradise:

http://www.paradisepoker.com/shuffling.html

[ahopen78]

Originally Posted by ahopen78

and if you still are not convinced try paradise:

http://www.paradisepoker.com/shuffling.html

they get their shuffling reviewed by pricewaterhousecoopers:

http://www.paradisepoker.com/pwc_rev...pri1505#review

Ten, you can close this topic now. there is nothing left to be said.

[Aust1227]

In the last 2 months I have logged approximately 25K hands of poker from at least six different sites.. Do you know what they tell me? It aint rigged, boys and girls.

AA is worth about the same at each site. AK wins about the same percentage of times.. TT is a proven winner, 44 is a proven break even hand. My win per 100 hands is 1.2 BB at the worst site and 6.7 BB at the best site both well within the standard deviation of my 3.4 average.

Is this concrete evidence, of course not. But it is a little better than the anectdotal crap that people commonly shovel around after a bad session.

[dad604]

Originally Posted by johndsoares

so again what site do you guys think is the best ?
I have gotten alot of good info but still not sure!
thanks for everything though!
I am thinking pokerstars.... that way I can kick all your butts in the chiptalk game! BRING IT!

Man this thread has taken a life of its own, away from your original question, but to answer your ?, I really don't think it matters which site you pick. Pick the one that you like the best or try them both.

[JM]

ok so who here wouldn't call a 1x big blind raise from the small blind when you have J 10 and you're in the big blind (and hoping for just that flop!)

[BZLuck]

So the consensus seems to be that I suck at poker, and you all are WSOP qualifiers to be, and that because a gambling site claims they don't mess with the computer programming, that they in-fact, don't. It's gotta be true, right? I found it on the internet, right?!

I offer you the best of luck, and hope to see ya'll on TV soon. My Tivo records them all, so I'll keep my eyes out for ya.

Thanks chiptalk.net netizens for your open minds and understanding. I can't say that I ever met so much adversity to a suggestion or a belief on a BBS in many years. Congrats.

I've learned another lesson in the last 48 hours, and that is not to post anything here that might be even close to controversial, or against the poker gods that apparently reside here.

Better yet, don't post anything here at all, because nobody actually reads the whole post anyway. They get to the part they don't agree with, and then type in their response slowly with a sore wrist from patting themselves on the back for being so correct.

It was fun to visit, until I actually spoke my mind, and then "those that know it all without asking any questions" spoke up to put my in my place.

I forgot that with the "away from the table" poker gurus, they always know more than you do, and will rate you by what YOU should have done, not that they have seen the whole story, instead of what they would actually do with their heart pounding in their chest, and the cigar smoke wafting into in their eyes.

I'd like to say I'll see you later but I probably won't.

Excuse me for forming an opinion that didn't agree with the establishment.

My best to all, don't spend your WPT millions too fast, remember to invest!

BZLuck (Brett in San Diego, CA)

Bookmark removed.

[jackblack73]

Damn man, you're wound up too tight.

[dad604]

Hey BZLuck, cool down man. I don't think anyone is attacking you personally. They are just inputting their convictions which is different from yours.

My own person view is that most site are not rigged. Suckouts happen to every poker player, the better player you are, the more suck outs you get.

At the micro limits, raising with pocket A's will not narrow the field but it still is the correct action as AA has the best odds of winning. Raising with the big pocket pairs will make you more in the long run and the long run is what counts not the immediate result of the current hand.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[pokerace22]

BZ, if you haven't left, take a step back and relax. No one seemed to be attacking you, just trying to let you know that these sites are audited by legit companies and that plenty of people have played 20,000+ hands to know the majority of these sites aren't rigged.

Trust me, I know how you feel, FullTilt has been killing me on the river all week for the most part, but that is poker sometimes. Keep your head up, play solid poker and it will level out.