Originally Posted by dig420 (Post 13267561)

still sticking by the 'only losers think online poker is rigged' storyline?

Originally Posted by RawAlex (Post 13267256)

Eros, you are correct. But you miss it again: 24k to the company to run the show, and by placing a single player in 3rd place, they would take another 27k - worth a ton more if it isn't going to the company but rather to an employee's personal account, example. There is a limit to how many big money games will play in a day - so taking a major ass second skim is the most profitable way to do thing. Heck, add more big money tournaments, and just skim those too... who cares? Do it over every multi-table game running every day, and tell me how much money that would be going into someone's offshore account.

In a scheme like this, they would NEVER win. Winning is bad. Taking some of the money off the final table is good. 3rd place, 5th place, 6tth place. You have a player who finishes routinely in the top 20 but never really wins, and he would blend into the stats like a ton of other player would. Use hundreds of user names, build them up over time, let them all make money, and smile.

The best part? The game could be audited down to the last card and nobody would be the wiser. No playing with the shuffle, no playing with the dealing, no nothing. Just knowing what cards will be in play and calculating the which hand wins is enough. Debug info, basically.

Originally Posted by Axeman (Post 13267626)

Which the article claims was someone making it appear to be a former official with the company doing the damage. The MSNBC article points the finger at an employee.

There is no evidence that the company directly played a role in this other than being the employeer. Could they have ordered this to happen, sure. Just gotta prove that part.

Originally Posted by eroswebmaster (Post 13267814)

I'm honestly getting tired of having to educate you...LOL.

The rake these sites make just like in live games comes from the huge amount of low limit games going on out there, not the big games, so it doesn't matter how many big games they have going on as long as the low limit players keep feeding the rake machine.

Example:
http://www.pokerhand.org/?1571041
A $96,000 pot an the rake was $1.00

http://www.pokerhand.org/?1614099
$2/$4 NL game $200 pot, $3 rake.

Now to get back to your top 20 finisher theory, once again, tournament pay out schedules are top heavy, favoring the top 3 finishers. Why would they try to skim $5K here or there, when they're making $20K off of a tournament, when all they have to do is start up another without any risk.

I am not saying there has never ever been a "rogue" employee, which may be the case at Absolute. But there is no reason for PokerStars, or PartyPoker to risk an easy money making machine just to increase their profits by 1-5% a year.

Originally Posted by polle54 (Post 13270548)

A good example is that PotRipper had an Infinite River Aggression :)

Originally Posted by sltr (Post 13270709)

i thought frank rosenthal said "it's ALL about the skim."

Originally Posted by dig420 (Post 13271136)

you can knock off saying they wouldn't cheat because there's no reason to cheat. They cheated. There's no reason to say it was a rogue employee. It's already been proven it wasn't.

Are you deef son?

Originally Posted by eroswebmaster (Post 13265945)

I have played close to 250K hands on line at various levels...my roomate plays $100-$200 + online every day and we don't seem to be having any problems.

She is also pretty tight with many of the online companies, in fact was tied very closely to Party Poker and helped them get started.