Quote:
Originally Posted by HomePokerGames Admin
The problems with using the AP/UB fiasco as supporting evidence is that the culprits were players and former employees who were able to crack the system. Even though many people patted themselves on the back for supposedly being correct about online poker being rigged, that didn't prove anything about the sites themselves. 99% of the "online poker is rigged" crowd are accusing the sites themselves (hence the "Riverstars" and "Jokerstars" labels) of being corrupt. Pointing out that cheating occured doesn't validate that point. To me, having a few selective games (out of the billions of hands) being rigged is nothing close to being a systematic problem.
Second, his point was that almost all losing poker players think the sites are cheating when they lose. This list of poker losers runs to about (literally) tens of millions of people. Even if there were people who did lose because of some type of online rigging, this doesn't validate the other 99.999% of people who lost because of lack of skill.
|
Regardless, if a site with that much money floating around has nothing in place to keep former employees from cracking the system, they are to blame and you might as well call them cheaters. Just my opinion.
Beyond that, I certainly agree that the majority of losers haven't been cheated; they just aren't good. But I still think there is way too much chance of any of us getting cheated at any given time online for us to try to say that the sites aren't or can't be rigged.
mike