Often I think that providers might hide their doings within the shades of variance. It's easy because it never can be proven rigged. You can lose 5 times aces in a row.. 10 times... 15 times... ... 500 times... no matter how often it happens it simply can never be proven as a rigged system because that's the way stochastics work. In such a system it would be easy to place certain deviatians from the standard variance/
odds/probabilities in order to make the better players lose here and there a bit more and the worse players win here and there a bit more. I don't mean the aces example, or all ins where the numbers are on the table and where everyone can see those deviations in his EV graph. I mean more subtile situations where you get setupped a bit more or you lose to unlikely holdings a bit more etc. It would be hard to proof that your opponents simply hit 10% better than they should and you hit 10% worse than you should.
You would need A LOT of samplesize and put a lot of work in data evaluationto show that you are permanently having a "handicap" for example 2pair vs. 2pair more often against you than for you etc..
For a system that does this +- handicap shit I could imagine it works like this:
First of all there would be algorithms and statistics be hold to cathegorize the players playestiles/skilllevels and their deposit/withdrawal tendencies.
Then there would be evaluations who has to win more/less to keep the system running optimal - get the most rake possible.
Then there would be actions taken to stabelize the system and max. Rake. Obviously within a level of certainty that noone can easily proof the rigging. Some players win +1% +2%... +20%.. I mean noone ever proofs a system wrong if he's winning right? So lets go +30%. Some players get handicapped especially if they don't care and deposit again and again. Milk those cows honey! Those guys that rarely or never deposit will get slightly winning or break even players for example. Everyone gets as much that he doesn't run away or hurt the system too much. Unless he/she is advertising the system in a profitable way... And so on...
There is simply no way to proof it right or wrong unless you have insight in the sourcecode. And for many good reasons providers aren't that splashy with their data.
Ps: An easy example at the end. Every year I change contracts of mobile provider, internet provider, insurances, gas provider, electricity provider etc. Why? To save thousands in cash. Running away and making new contracts is the only way to NOT get milked in these days. It used to be different but it's not anymore. Very few companies offer serious stuff with substance to loyal customers. If you stay you get milked in some way and that's a FACT. (Even if you profit in some way, you would profit more somewhere else.)
So the only thing you could do in such a system is run to another system until you get milked and run away again.. Rinse and repeat.
My 2 cents. De rien.
