Just passing through - that just about sums up the state of internet poker. You have a few big name pros who are paid to play on sites and represent them. I consider these as part of the company, because they aren't really there to play poker but to promote the site. Mostly you have the kids who are just passing through, as they either go broke, or move up to live play.

This is the reason I do not think sites will stop rigging their programmes. The kids are just not on the sites long enough, so it doesn't matter about it being rigged. The decent players have either left online, or are playing at micro levels for fun. It's what I do myself. The only thing I worry about is my Sharkscope. As long as I have a good Sharkscope I am happy.

Nearly every player I have played with in the last 3 or 4 years is gone. Most of them seem to disappear within a few months. I put some down as favourite players, but after a few weeks or months they are nowhere to be found. I find this quite sad but understandable, given the comments they all make about online. They know what is happening. The ones that don't know, are usually losing a lot of money at an alarming rate, even for micro levels. I seriously don't know how some players can lose thousands playing at the one dollar level, but they do.

The ones who lose are replaced by more over aggressive kids who think all you need is a rag ace and an aggressive attitude to win. The sites do their best to help them not lose too quickly, but there is only so much they can do to make up for complete lack of intelligence and ability. Originally I didn't think there would be a big enough supply of dumb people to support rigged online sites, but I was wrong.

Online poker is like a train station. Everyone is going somewhere.

Squirrel you and I were playing at ft yesterday and you saw the beats I was taking in the sng's I played in. We talk about how its always that way. It truly is sick to regularly lose when I am the big favorite. No matter how many times these sites do that to me I will not become one of their brainless conditioned players. I know the difference.

It's why I did the research I did. It was to confirm that what we were experiencing was not selective memory. In a year online I lost 65 per cent of the hands where I went all in as 70 per cent favourite heads up. After that I kept some other stats too, but it got to the point where I didn't need to any more. I wasn't doing it to prove it to anyone else, it was just for me. It confirmed my suspicions to my own satisfaction. It is why I do not play seriously online.

I have since met many others with the same opinion. Anyone who disagrees with this opinion is fine by me. But if you are a winning player and in doubt, do what I did. Take some stats for your own satisfaction. I am not sure what the future of online is. It appears the big sites are making a lot of money. Some of the smaller ones have gone or have fewer players.

It will be interesting to see how the perception of online alters. To many who play, online poker has become a joke, whereas others take it very seriously. There wer some young online players on "Poker After Dark." All of them said they now played less online. A lot of younger players start online and then seem to want to move up to live play. I feel that maybe this is what online has evolved into. A launching pad for the better players while the bad ones go broke. I just get the impression that few players play online for very long before wanting to move to live. The older pros generally don't play online, or play for fun only. This is the case with most of the players I play with. Yet some of the pub players I meet, who are of a lower standard, play online. I am not saying this is the whole truth. It is just my interpretation of what is happening.