GGPoker – “MoneyTaker69” superuser & new statistical anomalies
I’m the person who first exposed the superuser account “MoneyTaker69” on GG Poker, a case that has since been publicly d
A lot of people here already have suspicions about GG. Personally I’m fairly convinced that something has been going on with the RNG lately as well but obviously that’s just a feeling and not something I can actually prove.That’s exactly why it would be really important for the original poster to share the evidence and analysis he claims to have. So far nothing has been shown publicly and on top of that he hasn’t responded to any of the many follow-up posts after the initial one. Without data discussion quickly turns into speculation no matter how strong the suspicions are. If the conclusions are solid the numbers should speak for themselves
This is wrong.For 6 handed games "Regulars" tend to play a tighter and more condensed/overlapping range with each other than with a looser fish's which has a noticeable impact on the true expected equity of hands while database software can only provide equity analysis utilizing information from cards which were exposed at showdown. Databases will provide EV as if the hand was
This still doesn't effect EV that much because this is a certain situation that is not coming up very often. I don't know any regs calling the UTG raise with A9s, KQ or KJ off. If they are they are not regs. You picked those hands to create blockers... He might 3b if anything but not cold call. Fish sometimes have big cards too not just T3s. You are creating a very imaginative situation where EV can be effected. But unless it comes up often it doesn't have much of an effect on overall EV. His real range is pocket pairs trying to hit a set AQ and that is about it for his flatting range. And the only thing that blocks his AK is AQ, but again his AK also blocks some combos of AQ so it will be less likely he has that hand and more towards pocket pairs. Picking AJ, KQ and KJ is comical to try to win an argument about EV.
you cannot compare live games to online games because live plays much deeper and more people are drunk and/or high out of their gourd.
Live is full ring. It is a different strategy then 6 max especially with fish on the tables that you can't iso. Try to iso 3b or squeeze you find yourself in these awkward 3 way or 4 way pots. It is why the regs turn into passive nits the fold equity is almost 0 pre flop.
This still doesn't effect EV that much because this is a certain situation that is not coming up very often. I don't know any regs calling the UTG raise with A9s, KQ or KJ off. If they are they are not regs. You picked those hands to create blockers... He might 3b if anything but not cold call. Fish sometimes have big cards too not just T3s. You are creating a very imaginative
Yes, its already been debunked and after that no response anymore :p
FWIW rigging the RNG would not be a good method for altering fair outcomes.
A much better way would be to pre-store a DB of billions of random-appearing hands on 1-2 levels of randomness that can be fine tuned for seat position. Think shuffler rigging but at another level. Basically skipping the RNG altogether, other than selecting which pre-rigged hand to deal out.
This method may not work 100 oercent of the time as the players are not colluding, but dealing out stiff pre flop cards will get the desired response a statistically signifcant % of the time.
Not really. An obv sign of rigging - at least for me - would be, that winning players hit less their straights, flushes and sets compared to the pool funding the party. With each draw (draw to straight or flush, pocket-pair to set+) goes a mathematical probability, if MDA shows, that a site is off for certain player-types, I'd conclude rigging.
you should play on GG to see for yourself...
The problem of using statistical oddities to claim some game is rigged is that it is never enough, if it is theoretically possible you could open with pocket aces 5 times in a row. Yes this is a combination that happens once in millions or billions of times but so is any other combination of 5 opening hands. To prove the game is rigged you would have to do so without any shadow of doubt and statistical claims simply can't do that effectively.
What a nonsense. Maybe its never enough because you want to base rigging on 5 hands???
There has been billions of hands played online. If players cant find statistical anomalies in that sample there is a clear and obvious reason for it.
The joke is most riggies do explain "how its rigged", especially against them. Like saying the worse players always get lucky, they are always losing with AA, some guy even complained how he got quads under quads every 100 hands.
This is all so easily proven with statistics but somehow they choose not to... you guess why
I do so so....occasinally, don't like their politics, so don't play much there 🙄 Logged in 300k hands at them, have sophisticated tools for analysis, which I have built, no signs of things not going as supposed. Obv here and there spots where I could have run better, but all in all, looks like a fair game to me. Even if 300k hands might be a little bit small sample-size.
Wowow what are you doing?? Showing evidence over 300k hands?? Thats not how we do things there!
You should to the same thing as OP.
1) make up crazy claims
2) dont show any evidence
3) wait for people to ask for evidence
4) call those people shills
5) piss off
Talking about OP
Its been over 7 months now...
You are still online here on 2+2 so you aren't assassinated by poker shills
When is the appropriate time for the analysis to be shown?
Wowow what are you doing?? Showing evidence over 300k hands?? Thats not how we do things there!
I'm sorry, didn't know, me stupid never ever will happen again;-)
Just for everyone serious, if you are in the same situation like me, that GG, IPoker and WPN are your only options, GG is completely fine, especially if you play micros.
What a nonsense. Maybe its never enough because you want to base rigging on 5 hands???There has been billions of hands played online. If players cant find statistical anomalies in that sample there is a clear and obvious reason for it.The joke is most riggies do explain "how its rigged", especially against them. Like saying the worse players always get lucky, they are always lo
Statistics don't prove anything, that's the point, they can tell you the chances of X event occuring are 1 in a million or something, but they don't prove if it did or did not happen legitimately, just that something is as X likely or unlikely.
Statistics don't prove anything, that's the point, they can tell you the chances of X event occuring are 1 in a million or something, but they don't prove if it did or did not happen legitimately, just that something is as X likely or unlikely.
99.9999% certainty is good enough for most purposes. If someone shows me proof even of a 99% chance a poker site is rigged I'm not playing on there.
Statistics don't prove anything, that's the point, they can tell you the chances of X event occuring are 1 in a million or something, but they don't prove if it did or did not happen legitimately, just that something is as X likely or unlikely.
Actually almost nothing proves more than statistics
And you actually gave the reason. If something is supposed to happen 1 in a million hands but on one pokersite it happens 1 in a 10k hands this would be a huge huge red flag and they will not pass an RNG check and I wont be playing on a site like that.
You rather trust a made up stories from players who played 10k hands online and are bitter about their losses?? In what universe is this more reliable than statistics?
Statistics don't prove anything, that's the point, they can tell you the chances of X event occuring are 1 in a million or something, but they don't prove if it did or did not happen legitimately, just that something is as X likely or unlikely.
LOL what?! They proof everything if sample is big enough! If something should happen X % and it happens X %, then this is a clear sign, that the game is fair. What further proof you would need/want?
I mean to be fair, his screenname is Tilted and Broke
Maybe we shouldnt expect rational thought
Games are certainly fair at GG, the tool I have built proofs that. Didn't make this to see if a site is rigged but to see how hot/cold I'm really running, but obv it also allows you to see, if games are rigged against you.
That GG is shady as f***, not something I question. They advertise 100 TP + 100 Gem /1$ rake, at me that's not the case. Didn't study law, but for me that's a clear case of misleading advertising. Considering that GG has licenses in Malta and the UK, really wonder how they get away with that. Also the advertised % are shady. A shrimp (advertised 25% rakeback) gets that when taking the 1000$ for 800.000 GEMs. A shrimp is someone raking 100-500$/year. To get the advertised rakeback, he needs to rake 4.000$, with PVI kicking in, needed amount of rake might be 5x the amount. So play 40 years, never take out rakeback and then we give you, what we advertise?! Just outright LOL!
Just for the additional LOLs, a shrimp could also grind 330-1.650 years to get a whopping 6-30% rakeback, depending on PVI.
Yea I always wondered how they could advertise something like 50% rakeback but actually give 12,5% because the hidden PVI is 0.25
Whats stopping a site from advertising 500% rakeback but due to some bad luck everyone's PVI is 0.01 so players only get 5% actually?
As we saw the appropriate time never came as you claimed in the original post
GG continue to missbehave with not banning the dozens of bot that appear on daily basis especially chinese fake accounts
As we saw the appropriate time never came as you claimed in the original post
GG continue to missbehave with not banning the dozens of bot that appear on daily basis especially chinese fake accounts
If bots appear on daily basis what makes you think that GG not banning them? Logically they should appear on daily basis if they’re keep getting banned no?
If bots appear on daily basis what makes you think that GG not banning them? Logically they should appear on daily basis if they’re keep getting banned no?
the word "appear" does not mean a new account pops up. it simply means that they are noticeable, new or otherwise.
GG seems to be less "fanatic" in getting rid of bots than good old Stars, wouldn't dispute that. I have reported them a handful players playing almost 24/7 and I still could see them playing days after that. That said, it's 2026, the use of bots and RTA I expect to encounter on any site. If someone wants to avoid this, google the popular bot-softs and RTAs, the sites they don't recommend, these are the sites you want play at.
Games are certainly fair at GG, the tool I have built proofs that. Didn't make this to see if a site is rigged but to see how hot/cold I'm really running, but obv it also allows you to see, if games are rigged against you.That GG is shady as f***, not something I question. They advertise 100 TP + 100 Gem /1$ rake, at me that's not the case. Didn't study law, but for me that's a
I did study law and im in UK. You are right, thats dodgy as hell lol. Im not on GG myself but if you want/care feel free to send me more detail and ill get someone who isnt me (as im retired and too lazy now tbh) to look into. They shouldnt really be getting away with that at all, and its not even close.
