Posted Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:56 pm GMT by FTC Racing
I'm been playing online for about 2 years.
I play on pokerstars most of the time.
I was playing the other night and one person kept on winning and winning. They had 8 players on the table. No one could beat him.
Maybe someone would win 1 time out of his 15 hands.
If he had a poker bot why did poker stars did not catch it?
If he did have one would they even catch him?
Online poker is starting to suck with all the cheating.
Online poker sites has to have something to stop cheaters or those poker bots. Well just wanted to see what yall think. Do yall think I should email pokerstars and let them know? If online poker is starting to get like this my days or over and I quit playing online.
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:01 pm GMT by vyni
| FTC Racing wrote: |
If he had a poker bot why did poker stars did not catch it? |
Exactly what is it that you're alleging happened? At how many consecutive hands won is one be declared a cheater?
Just because someone out plays you doesnt make them a cheat. However if you suspect a cheater, then report it to the casino/site it occurred on.
Posted Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:38 pm GMT by hawkonzen
are you sure this was not just a lucky streak? i've won 10-15 hands in a row on 100$ NL without cheating and i'm certainly not a bot 
What is this cheating i'm hearing so much talk of?
did all hands go to showdown by the way?
Posted Sun Aug 06, 2006 5:06 pm GMT by supafrey
I think you're a degenerate and an idiot.
Posted Sun Aug 06, 2006 6:43 pm GMT by FTC Racing
| supafrey wrote: | | I think you're a degenerate and an idiot. |
I'd like to see things from your point of view but I can't seem to get my head that far up my ass.
Posted Sun Aug 06, 2006 7:05 pm GMT by Johny
*grins* This is gonna get good...
Posted Sun Aug 06, 2006 7:32 pm GMT by supafrey
1. There are no poker bots that can beat a good player.
2. I play on alot of tables, too. I'm not a computer.
3. You probably weren't playing a bot - but if you were losing to one, that's just embarassing.
4. You're welcome in my ass any day, big guy.
Posted Sun Aug 06, 2006 8:01 pm GMT by ninetensuited
classic
Posted Sun Aug 06, 2006 8:13 pm GMT by Ryan231
Poker bots that are commercially available typically play very weak poker, the only real appeal to them is that they can earn a profit of something like 3/4 BB/hour and you can run many tables 24/7 for a steady slow profit. They really aren't very good and can easily be put off a hand.
Posted Sun Aug 06, 2006 9:41 pm GMT by hawkonzen
oh didn't know they really excisted.. do they play statistics? and NEVER bluffs? sounds like me 
Posted Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:41 pm GMT by MasterShake
If I'm at a table and the same guy keeps winning, I switch tables. Pretty simple solution actually.
Posted Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:56 pm GMT by mindgame
The best a bot can ever do is make the theoretically correct play, whether it's to call, fold, or raise.
Think about that for a second. How many times have you made the theoretically best play and still lost????
Okay, stop counting, you get my point.
Winning 20 hands in a row can't be accomplished by any bot. How could a bot give you the best hand that many times? It can't, doesn't, won't. It can't give you the best hand EVER. It can just make the mathematically best play with the cards it's dealt and the situation it's in.
Streaks happen. I never seem to have the kind I run into, but that's because when I see a guy win 14 hands in a row (which I actually did see in a 10/20 casino game last year) he's playing hands I wouldn't have seen the flop with in a million years. That particular evening the guy won 23 out of 26 hands, winning almost $3000 in under an hour. The rest of us kept getting very good hands and he just kept cracking them. It was maddening.
There is no question that the game was straight, I knew the dealer and we were using $15,000 automatic shuffling machines. Even your imaginary bot can't beat that guy on that run.
Period.
You're right, though. There is, IMO, a lot of cheating on the internet.
Posted Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:59 pm GMT by supafrey
Mindgame.. Not only are you not really a heavy internet player, you don't seem to be involved in the internet poker community to a heavy degree anymore. You also don't play at higher limits, nor have any empirical evidence of ANY kind to support your opinion.
Speculate more, please.
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:10 am GMT by khaosanroad
Even if someone has a decent bot, I could only see it being good on LIMIT tables, where it is a bit more mechanical.
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:58 am GMT by mindgame
Are you suggesting there are computer programs that allow the user to CREATE the hands he gets on an internet site--that can crack the site software and overide the server?
Thank you, though, for your opinion on whether or not I can have an opinion. I'd rather know if there was, in fact, an idea of mine about which you had a thought. I am unconvinced that your pronouncement that I don't have a right to an opinion is not just another condescending swipe for which you are becomming (sadly) famous. What is at the root of your proclivity for dismissal rather than engagement? Have you explored this with your therapist?
My work is such that I have a need to know what computers are capable of doing and not doing, and I have several contacts whose particular expertise is computer security. The issue here is one of the integrity of the server system, the ability of that system to transmit data securely, and whether random encryption algorythms are capable of compromise for a couple hundred or thousand bucks an hour. In the opinion of people of my aquaintance whose job it is to know these things, there aren't any bots yet capable of commandeering the internet poker software for their own ends.
Maybe there are. Are you in a position to know? Is anyone?
Here you give a fine example of how your casual arrogance is so reflexive that it actually blinds you. You miss the very point of the discussion and render your observations fatuous. This isn’t even about poker, it’s about computers. How many hands I play at any given limits—information you couldn’t even have a clue about—has nothing to do with the question at all. As for my involvement in the “online poker community?” If you are its typical member, exactly how much involvement do you think a normal person could bear? We suffer your presence here, Supra. You should rejoice at our forebearance.
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:51 am GMT by ki_cz
What an awesome reply. Unfortunately the enormous egos of *certain* members may be too big to see the truth in your post.
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:56 am GMT by supafrey
I fully understand that you have some sort of expertise when it comes to computers, but your generalized white washing of "IMO there's lots of cheating" hardly points one way or another. Roaming the internet's seedy underbelly of poker forums there's no lack of people who seem to be entirely lucid in otherwise normal situations that seem to blindly - and quite irrationally - assume that there "must be lots of cheating". These hasty and rarely thought out statements are the reason WHAT I DO FOR A LIVING has been constantly under attack for the past couple of years.
When there's an everpresent but completely illogical distrust for the intarweb just because of some unseen faces and sketchy characters that are apparantly on the otherside of the wires, people find it all too easy to brush off their own inability to beat a game as little more than being swindled a few dollars at a time. You yourself have made nostalgic comments about the "old school" nature of b+m play - I wonder if (despite your understanding of the technology) that has anything to do with your opinion as well, perhaps? It's not really poker, right? Just a "game" on a computer screen? Well.. there are plenty of cheats for THOSE aren't there....
To say that I've played a fair bit on every major poker site isn't an understatement. Never in my experience (limited, but far greater than most) have I seen a person that is entirely unbeatable. My winrates have been consistant, the sites have played out the hands just as one would expect, and colluding and shady "cheating" has been a negligable idea that I've never even had to concern myself with.
Everything I said in my previous remark is entirely warranted in relation to your comments. Despite providing NO evidence of any sort, you felt it was warranted to provide a quick and possibly damaging opinion about something that you have little experience with. Nowhere in that little box did you write "I work with computers and security, and I think that the site security could be a little lax in areas X, Y, and Z, leaving issues such as A, B, and C as significant concerns for the online player..." You simply wrote that there's alot of cheating, IYO, and left it at that.
Now what would the average nub who's surfing on the #1 google hit for "Poker" think when they read that?
I'm only dismissive when it's warranted - if you think I'm blindly rude for the sake of it, you're deluding yourself.
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 10:42 am GMT by MrDarling
well written supa.
Problem is, your normal one line reply's are rarely as insightful and usually can be taken the wrong way.
I also can't see any reason or even means for people to cheat on poker online, and have to admit that comments made about cheats bugged me as well, but not enough to start calling names.
You're forgetting that on an online forum, people can't see your face and can literally take your somewhat harsh replies to hart. Also , don't forget most american simply do not understand good ol' British dry ass humor.
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 11:36 am GMT by UrAteUp
I been doing some reasearch into this bot issue. There are bots out there. Countless of them to be exact. What the one thing all makers are saying though is there bot is not unbeatable. The users of the bots are finding out the same thing. For example:
| Quote: | Hi, i have tried the improved TA 3, and it's playing well, unfortunately trash players seem to beat it all the time, due to the fact that i can't catch anything, this has being going on for too long, and i hope that in the future Holdem memory will support other sites, as PP seems to be a trash players paradise.
Best regards
Val |
There were other sites I found that mentioned bots and playing with them. All have the same gerneral bit that they are beatable. These bots are only running statistical logic (doing the numbers) and making descisions based upon those numbers. Since the human brain can function outside the realm of statistics and probabilities, people are finding bots are highly beatable.
Till someone designs a bot that can pick the next cards that will fall to each player, then I think there is little to worry about from bots. It's donks that are the biggest threat. You know that occassional player who kills you with K3o .... 
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 11:36 am GMT by UrAteUp
I been doing some reasearch into this bot issue. There are bots out there. Countless of them to be exact. What the one thing all makers are saying though is there bot is not unbeatable. The users of the bots are finding out the same thing. For example:
| Quote: | Hi, i have tried the improved TA 3, and it's playing well, unfortunately trash players seem to beat it all the time, due to the fact that i can't catch anything, this has being going on for too long, and i hope that in the future Holdem memory will support other sites, as PP seems to be a trash players paradise.
Best regards
Val |
There were other sites I found that mentioned bots and playing with them. All have the same gerneral bit that they are beatable. These bots are only running statistical logic (doing the numbers) and making descisions based upon those numbers. Since the human brain can function outside the realm of statistics and probabilities, people are finding bots are highly beatable.
Till someone designs a bot that can pick the next cards that will fall to each player, then I think there is little to worry about from bots. It's donks that are the biggest threat. You know that occassional player who kills you with K3o ....
Edit:
Doing further research I was able to find out the best bot out there right now is called WinHoldem. The gaming sites have discovered this and how it works. They have now taken steps to stop it's use by software upgrades and patches. From what I have found posted in the RGPs the company who makes this product is not faring so well. Due to the massive changes by the poker sites, the amount of updates and changes ot the bot software were getting enormous with updates and changes coming slower then the poker site changes.
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:31 pm GMT by Jefecaminador
the poker sites have more money and more people working for them. Therefore, they win.
The real reason why cheats don't work on poker sites is because of the money. The companies running these sites are making waaay too much money to allowing cheating to occur.
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:27 pm GMT by UrAteUp
| Jefecaminador wrote: | the poker sites have more money and more people working for them. Therefore, they win.
The real reason why cheats don't work on poker sites is because of the money. The companies running these sites are making waaay too much money to allowing cheating to occur. |
actually in a report I read Jef. One person who worked for Party said they didn't cast a second glance unless someone complained or they saw something unusual like marathon table times. Rarely would they even look into things till a customer complained and brought it more out into the light.
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:49 pm GMT by mooseontheloose
I won't worry about it until a bot is able to penetrate the server-side data and either influence the cards as they're dealt or provides the user with a view of all hands at the table. Til then, bots are simply for the lazy and not for those who want to make big bucks.
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 1:51 pm GMT by mindgame
Well let me be clear. My throw away line at the conclusion of my earlier post was just that—something you are free to discard. It is my opinion that there’s a hell of a lot of cheating going on. That’s based on my experience of poker in general: people cheat. What keeps it in check (if it is at all) are consequences. Not a lot of consequences for internet cheating except losing the money you stole in the first place.
Who’s got hard data a cheats? Not me. Not you. The sites do, I don’t doubt, but they sure as hell will never share it. Why would they? It would hardly inspire the confidence that is fundamental to their income stream.
I have talked on several occasions to people who cheat online. It’s all collusion. I have no reason to doubt that they are doing what they say they are doing. I personally don’t think collusion is beatable. You sit there and give me three hands to play against your one and there is no way you can beat me. But that’s anecdotal evidence, not data.
Everyone has a vested interest in this discussion that colors his opinion. I am certainly no exception and I may be more biased than any of you. My bias comes from my experience of busting live cheaters on numerous occasions over 3 dozen years of poker, my home grown paranoia, and my encounters with those who say they cheat and were happy to disclose just how they did it. Supra makes a living online and he would just as soon believe it’s all straight. The poker sites would have us believe that cheating is impossible (hardly the case with collusion) or insignificant. Well it’s only insignificant when it’s someone else’s money—and it’s never theirs.
That last post is really onto something, btw. I think the reason I get my poker software is updated once a week is the same reason my windows program is patched once a week. There is stuff going on out there that no one is ever going to tell us about, but the sites need to fix it, and fast.
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 2:08 pm GMT by UrAteUp
Collusion is real and I am assure it is still around somehow. This software I mention in my previous post....WinHoldem...actually came with collusion mode and allowed teams to set at the same table in ring games. It would show you the cards you and your team had but nothing any other player had who was not a memeber. That is the big way this company and it's software got caught. The poker sites picked up on this and found these players out. They also found out how this was happening and got that hole fixed fast. It is so hard for software makers now because since the sites are on to them, they know how to block holes or security issues.
As for bots. Anyone wanting to use a bot feel free. From most of what I have read about them a strong LAG player will befeat a bots logistical reasoning more times then the bot will make a good play. Also TAG players reap huge rewards when the bots fail to calculate correctly.
Bots to me are for the lame. Why bother learning poker if you are going to use a bot. Collusion I think is possible. Not sure if it is as profitable as one might think. I could see how it could be in the right circumstances. Either by playing with a bot or by colluding, you might as well take up bankrobbery too if your that big of a low life peice of crap that you have to cheat to play poker...
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 2:22 pm GMT by mooseontheloose
I think Colluding is possible or maybe likely as it's easier to pull off online than in a home game. If 2 friends deposit $50 each and say all profit will be split down the middle, collusion is possible.
Say they sit at a table and the one with a weak hand raises to build the pot while the guy with AA waits to rake it in. Out of 2 players, 1 will likely have a good starting hand pretty often and with a lot of practice I'd assume you could make some good money, especially if both players always enter the pot when one has a monster. It also gives you an advantage in that if Player1 has KhQh with 3h on the board after the river, he can be informed that his buddy was pushing up the pot holding AhXc for example and is about to fold so Player1 can take down the pot when the villian bets/calls.
I've never colluded myself or know much about it, I'm just speculating. However, poker still involves luck and chance; I think it would take a lot of work, practice and teamwork to collude for a big profit and even then unless you hold the absolute nuts you're not winning the pot for sure every time.
Besides collusion, while wrong, doesn't require software - just need 2 people playing at the same table within speaking distance, on AIM/MSN, etc.
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 2:22 pm GMT by mindgame
NOTE: I've updated my signature to reflect more accurately what kind of nut bag you're dealing with!
I don't know how much anyone can actually make colluding--I think what it does best is tilt the odds nicely your way and keep the negative fluctuations to a minimum. I've been invited on a few occasions to collude online. Can't do it. That's a different game and I can't respect those who play it. I do, however, play only low stakes limit and turbo or speed tourneys, because the money in the first case and the pace in the second makes these venues unattractive to the cheater.
Posted Mon Aug 07, 2006 3:51 pm GMT by gumbie
Active collusion is quite easily identifiable. I have witnessed it on a couple of occasions and the colluders have used a hit and run tactic precisely because what they do is so obvious. It's effects on my long term results are negligable.
Passive collusion is not something I believe gives anyone a significant edge in a game like texas holdem. If I played Omaha it might worry me a little bit more.
Posted Wed Aug 09, 2006 8:08 pm GMT by Jauron
| mindgame wrote: |
I have talked on several occasions to people who cheat online. It’s all collusion. I have no reason to doubt that they are doing what they say they are doing. I personally don’t think collusion is beatable. You sit there and give me three hands to play against your one and there is no way you can beat me. But that’s anecdotal evidence, not data.
|
That would be my guess as well. You sit down unknowingly at a table full of people who are sharing info and are only after your money, thats one hell of a game to crack.
Far as poker pots go, unless they are able to get information I cannot (cards coming or other players hands) or influence the cards about to come (still risky unless you know the card is available) I'm not too worried.
I'm more intersted overall in how/what determines what cards get dealt. Even though it shouldn't, it bothers me greatly that the instant I made my decision might have had some impact on the outcome (if I'm last to act and all things being equal). I'd hate to think if I'd clicked the button a half a second later a different card would have come off, it just introduces a "No whammy, no whammy, STOP!" feel to the game where I don't want it.
Posted Wed Aug 09, 2006 10:02 pm GMT by vyni
From party gaming, and we'll go ahead and assume all major casino software is operating in the same fashion...
| Quote: | Whether it's for a tournament, a cash game or a play money table, before each hand is dealt the PartyPoker.com Pseudo Random Number Generator (RNG) shuffles the 52-card deck into a unique ordering.
Every effort has been made to ensure that the PartyPoker.com RNG produces as close to a random and fair result as possible. |
What this says is that the next card to be dealt has already been determined. There is no 'no whammy', time of action has no impact on what card may be dealt next. All the randomizing is done at the start of the hand, and the cards are then served in the same fashion as from the deck in the hand of the dealer at the casino.
And stop any suggestion that a player could access that order from the application servers and therefore know the hole cards and next cards in the deck. If they had the access, they absolutely could. But you've been watching way too much tv... the servers are more secure than your bank is. Nobody with ability, and inside connections (cause it would require them) to access that data is intrested in your bankroll.
With the amount money in the market, a security vulnerability on a casinos part would destroy its bussiness: almost every player would cash out within a minute of learning of it. They know this, and they've secured themselves for exactly that reason.
Hollywood and the media, through their lack of understanding of technology, have scared the public into believing some of the most unreasonable bs I have ever heard.
Original topic: poker bots?
Oh lordy I'ld love to play against a table of bots.
They don't work. Prinicple alone, an overbet is going to push them off. If they're setup to adapt to players styles, who cares. A bot calling a bluff? A bot bluffing? Again very abuseable. Granted a bots design could get very intricate in 'reading' players and adapting, but simply changing gears would throw it off. Why fear a bot.
Posted Wed Aug 09, 2006 10:07 pm GMT by supafrey
I'm pretty much 100% sure that Jauron is right.
Posted Thu Aug 10, 2006 6:44 pm GMT by turkeyspanka
I didn't read any other posts besides the 1st few, and I don't know if someone already mentioned this...but hmm. Maybe you could LEAVE THE TABLE? Ah...there's an idea... 
Posted Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:36 am GMT by TheKaiserTheKaiser
there is something you are forgetting, except maybe for our programmer friends:
bots, much like robots and any other form of (unsophisticated) computer, may be able to calculate odds precisely within a quarter of a second, and analize every possibility at the same time, but, and mark my words, THEY CANT THINK.
As poker hero Doyle Brunson says, poker is a game of PEOPLE. Sure, Gary Kasparov lost to Deep Blue in a chess match, but chess is very different from poker.
Why being afraid of playing with a player that can only make a decision based on odds and (only on a very advanced bot) your hand history?
After all, a human can do that, provided that he/she is a good player and possess pc programs to calculate odds and see other people's hand history, wich is not uncommon, and even more, since a human can understand the behavior of another person considering the circumstances.
All of this provided that this bot does not have access to other people's hands or the community cards before they are revealed to all players.
(if so, the game is unbeatable, or close to).
In general, bots are used by lazy cheaters who use them to play 24/7 in freeroll tornaments or free tables, while they are at work or sleeping.
That way, they can have some cash to play the non-free tables.
I play at Everest Poker and this is (presumably) common.
Just check the poker bots ads on Megaupload. bye
Posted Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:44 pm GMT by Loonbat
Give me a bot that uses the AI that the video game "Stacked" has and I'll run it whenever I'm sleeping (or whenever I don't feel like personally playing). maybe I'd even run it while I was watching, just to see how it played in various situations.
We have seen various poker softwares which classify players, identify the ways they play specific hands, etc. I'm positive there are quite successful bots on the marketplace which integrate data from the ongoing games, and use this additional information in decision-making algorithms.
Posted Fri Aug 18, 2006 1:00 pm GMT by tame_deuces
A buddy put together a limit bot on his own which could probably beat lower stakes fairly consistently. It is fairly unimaginative stuff , so prolly wouldn't be a big winner but it doesn't tilt which is probably the big problem for good lower stakes players anyway.
To avoid account bans we've just tested it on play money tables where it has no problems whatsoever beating the game and we firmly believe it could beat low stakes FL without any problems.
His desire is to include datamined databases into the decision making process of the bot, simple stuff like how often a player wins when he raises flop etc. If he does this in a good manner I think it could beat low/medium stakes, and it could without doubt clear bonuses and similar quite easily.
As for poki (as used in stacked)- poki isn't necessarily always simulating _good_ players, but is also used for simulating bad players. A finely tuned poki bot can play FL quite nicely.
I'd also assume that a simple NL bot made for playing short stacks could probably use game theoretical approaches and most likely make a profit.
I don't think bots are problem, the best bots aren't as good as the best humans - but make no mistake...they're not bad either.
Sites should attempt to find bots and ban the accounts though, anything else is silly and gives online poker a bad rep.
|
|
