Test Results by Site:
The results of the flop all-in bad beat tests show that PokerStars, Ongame Network, Merge Network and the Entraction Network all had samples that were well within one standard deviation of expected results - these are very close to expectancy.
Bodog's sample fell just under 2 standard deviations from the expected result in favour of the underdog - this result should occur due to variance in roughly 5% of tests (or approximately once in every 19 tests).
The results of the bad beat tests show that our alternative hypothesis is incorrect and therefore we can conclude that the games tested were fair with respect to 'bad beats' for flop all-ins.
Party Poker's bad beat test sample fell just over 2 standard deviations from the expected result in favour of the underdog; 2.17 to be precise. From 12,193 flop all-in hands, the underdog improved to win 90 more times than expected. This result should occur due to variance in approximately 3% of tests (or roughly once in every 33 tests).
This bad beat test result is within our margin for error of 2 standard deviations (see the discussion page for an explanation of errors). Even without the margin for error it could easily be explained by variance and therefore cannot be seen as evidence of rigging - in fact it would be unusual if we didn't get a result like this occasionally. Hence, we must conclude that our alternative hypothesis is incorrect and that the Party Poker games tested were fair with respect to 'bad beats' for flop all-ins.