Bots At Ftp

[qyayqi 11]

I'm struggling with the whole "is using a bot really cheating ?"

poker tracker is cheating. bots are cheating. people gloss over poker tracker because it benefits them, and if everyone had a bot they'd overlook that cheating, too.take your laptop to the park & sit down with some old guys to play chess. start up your laptop & run the best chess program you can get your hands on. put every move your opponent makes into the laptop, and use the program's moves against the old guy. is this cheating?

[Fluffdog87 2]

FullTiltPoker full_tilting his p5's bio Very interesting! An assumed bot that a player sometimes uses.http://www.pocketfives.com/C18A38DB-A7C3-4...33D40D4C9B.aspxI started poker in 1999. My first 6 months was tragic losing $10,000 (8k on a credit card at paradise poker). I SUCKED AT POKER!! Knowing I loved the game and wouldn't quit playing I started to hit the books learning the game of NLHE. Sklansky was first, then brunsons book. After that I started to be a break even player. But that was not good enuff, I wanted to be a winning player. I then got a program called pokerstat to analyze my game and plug the leaks. And I did. I then switched over to Pokertracker and am still using that to this day. I started out at limit, and am now playing NLHE. I prefer the small stakes of $1-$2 no limit holdem. However, playing 3-4 tables of this wasnt reaching my expected hourly rate. So i trained myself to manage more tables. I added a table every week or so till i got to where I am at today, which is 10 tables. Just recently I took a friend in to teach him how to play. This friend owed me $1800. He didn't have a job and couldn't pay me back. So I decided to try something with him. I asked him to come over to mt house 5 hours a day to play online poker on a computer beside me while i'm playing (to be continued) Way to inadvertantly perfectly show us that him and his friends are doing this, lol.Somebody copy/paste this on to 2+2 for me so they can see this plan inadvertantly put into his own p5's bio! ty

[NoSup4U 0]

take your laptop to the park & sit down with some old guys to play chess. start up your laptop & run the best chess program you can get your hands on. put every move your opponent makes into the laptop, and use the program's moves against the old guy. is this cheating?

I saw that video too! :)If the old guy knew what you were doing, would he consider it cheating? That is your answer.Mark

[NoSup4U 0]

The reason I say it is a close call is that if they can write a program so simple that their statistics are consistent over 100K hands, they could just as easily write a script. Too complicated? Not really. Look at Rubik's Cube. Many people said it couldn't be solved, but I was one of those losers people who could consistently solve it in under 30 seconds. 95% of the decisions were routine, only a few were complicated. You learn the routine ones in no time, the others in a month or so. When I multi-table low-level NL, it's about the same. 95% of the decisions are routine, the remaining ones would be easy enough to write a rule for: "when in doubt, fold". And based on their win rate, a sub-optimal rule appears likely. The tough cases would probably average out over 100K hands.So that's why I say it doesn't matter. If their program is so simple that it can be written down as an algorithm that can be memorized, then what's the difference if they click it or have a program click it? The only way it would be cheating is if they were running more tables or more hours than humanly possible. So far, nobody seems to be claiming that is the case. Either way, what's the difference between that and a beginner who writes down simple rules for himself based on reading Sklansky?

I disagree with this very much. I do not agree that post flop decisions are 95% routine. There are just too many variables involved and they all match up EXACTLY. And it matters very much if a person or a computer is executing the decisions. Tilt much? :)I think you are assuming this is some 5 step check/raise/fold process they have and follow. Just to come up with competent post flop play would be pages of work.Mark

[BuffDan 0]

poker tracker is cheating. bots are cheating. people gloss over poker tracker because it benefits them, and if everyone had a bot they'd overlook that cheating, too.

I think I agree with the above, in that using poker tracker and using a bot differ only in degree, not in type. Both are simply using a machine to do a mental task more efficiently and quicker than any person can. For that matter, so is using a pocket calculator to work out the odds of hitting a flush if you can't do that calculation in your head, or using a strategy card for blackjack. The only question is where to draw the line, and the online sites and most players draw it somewhere between poker tracker and bots.

[qyayqi 11]

Both are simply using a machine to do a mental task more efficiently and quicker than any person can. For that matter, so is using a pocket calculator to work out the odds of hitting a flush if you can't do that calculation in your head, or using a strategy card for blackjack.

i disagree. a calculator helps with an immediate mathematical problem, and not everyone is good at math. people talk about 30,000+ hands data-mined, something you simply cannot do on your own.

[Sunny 0]

I'm yet to see a single piece of evidence that this is a bot.Everything can be explained.If full tilt bans this player it's a sad day for poker. It means the site is not banning the user for using a bot, but banning him to settle the masses that are on a witch-hunt.

[DoinSublime 0]

Can someone break this down for me somewhat? NoSup or Qyayqi maybe?

WTF, I'm rusty on my statistics, but are you going to tell me that a .5% difference in VPIP over 100,000 hands is 3 SD's? [censored], post your math. (14%)*(1-14%)/sqrt(100000) = .038% = 1SD Of course it's higher than that because all 100,000 decisions are not independent identically distributed. I think the test statistic formula is .005/sqrt(.14*.86/100000) = 4.6 Assuming independence, and I'm just using a textbook formula for population proportions. We just went over this last week at work.. (sigma) = squareroot( (sumation((x-change of x)squared) divided by n-1I'm not sure what this refers to.But can't we also use the Goodness of Fit test for this?We have 4 suspected bots in the OP's screenshot:VPIP1: 14376/105366 = 0.136438699VPIP2: 15840/112514 = 0.14078248VPIP3: 11683/82577 = 0.141480073VPIP4: 5721/41414 = 0.138141691The total VPIP is 47620/341871 = 0.139292306So if they are indeed botting, the expected hands played of the 4 bots should be:14676.6715672.3311502.345768.65respectivelyThrowing it into my calculator for GOF, using 3 degrees of freedom, we get a p-value of .0108, which means there's just over 1% chance that this happened by chance if we assume the 4 players were using a similar strategy.

[BuffDan 0]

i disagree. a calculator helps with an immediate mathematical problem, and not everyone is good at math. people talk about 30,000+ hands data-mined, something you simply cannot do on your own.

If the calculator solves a problem that a person cannot solve on their own, than it is the same type of thing: using a machine to perform a mental task that the user could not perform on their own. Now it may be minor, but that is the point, we are arguing whether a given act is a major offense, as many consider bots to be, or a minor offense, as many consider pokertracker to be. A calculator is just a very very minor version of this act.

[hblask 1]

I disagree with this very much. I do not agree that post flop decisions are 95% routine. There are just too many variables involved and they all match up EXACTLY. And it matters very much if a person or a computer is executing the decisions. Tilt much? :)I think you are assuming this is some 5 step check/raise/fold process they have and follow. Just to come up with competent post flop play would be pages of work.Mark

I think you are thinking of the levels you play at, compared to the ones I play at ;)These guys played at a pretty low level, where strategy is pretty simple:1) Use a hand chart PF based on position. Account for raises in front of you.2) On the flop and turn: -- If you have top pair or better, bet. If someone bets pot or less in front of you, call. -- If you meet resistance, you need 2P or better to continue3) On the river there are a few more choices, such as adding a "slowplayer finally bet" algorithmIf you size your bets consistently, you would crush at 0.05/0.10 with this simple plan. How many more levels of thinking do you need for a couple levels higher?The bigger question is how consistent can you be, and that seems to be the center of the argument. Notice their BB/100 varied quite a bit, so maybe they can't get the bet sizing very consistent, but the rest of their play could average out if it were simple. In fact, just a gut feeling, but it seems to me a simple algorithm would "average out" better than a complicated one on the stats.So is having a script cheating? What about having a computer do part of the script? I don't have an answer, I can convince myself of both sides.Probably a bigger issue: any bot that is a threat to the game will play well enough to be undetectable. Only the crappy ones we don't care about will be noticeable.

[Marchione 0]

i play 1-2 stud and 2-4 and sometimes 3-6 on ftp and there is a very well known player there who is a bot ~ Just cause there a bot doesnt mean they play perfect !!!

[Marchione 0]

can i also add the customer care at fulltilt is the worst online ~

[Fluffdog87 2]

FullTiltPoker full_tilting his p5's bio Very interesting! An assumed bot that a player sometimes uses.http://www.pocketfives.com/C18A38DB-A7C3-4...33D40D4C9B.aspxI started poker in 1999. My first 6 months was tragic losing $10,000 (8k on a credit card at paradise poker). I SUCKED AT POKER!! Knowing I loved the game and wouldn't quit playing I started to hit the books learning the game of NLHE. Sklansky was first, then brunsons book. After that I started to be a break even player. But that was not good enuff, I wanted to be a winning player. I then got a program called pokerstat to analyze my game and plug the leaks. And I did. I then switched over to Pokertracker and am still using that to this day. I started out at limit, and am now playing NLHE. I prefer the small stakes of $1-$2 no limit holdem. However, playing 3-4 tables of this wasnt reaching my expected hourly rate. So i trained myself to manage more tables. I added a table every week or so till i got to where I am at today, which is 10 tables. Just recently I took a friend in to teach him how to play. This friend owed me $1800. He didn't have a job and couldn't pay me back. So I decided to try something with him. I asked him to come over to mt house 5 hours a day to play online poker on a computer beside me while i'm playing (to be continued) Way to inadvertantly perfectly show us that him and his friends are doing this, lol.Somebody copy/paste this on to 2+2 for me so they can see this plan inadvertantly put into his own p5's bio! ty

[James D 0]

I'm still not sure 100% whether these guys are bots... having read the 2+2 thread, about 'sweatshops', friends playing a system identically together, and they even have a mod over there who is stating for certain he knows they are not cheating.But anyway, is it actually possible to have three different human players, playing on three different accounts, producing these stats? (There are others in the thread too, but I just chose these):Continuation Bet:2997/3127 = 0.9584266071104/1144 = 0.9650349652757/2850 = 0.9673684212205/2274 = 0.969656992 Bet Turn:1151/4596 = 0.250435161480/1801 = 0.2665186011230/4857 = 0.253242742961/3681 = 0.261070361 Bet River:2497/575 = 0.230276332961/216 = 0.2247658692403/538 = 0.2238868081836/411 = 0.223856209

[psujohn 0]

The difference between Poker Tracker and a bot (and where I think the bot crosses the cheating line) is that the bot is making decisions while PT is merely providing information. If you say PT is cheating where do you draw the line? Is it cheating to refer to a starting hand chart? Is it cheating to refer to the a chart of your odds given a certain number of outs? Is it cheating to memorize such charts? Is reading a book about poker cheating because you didn't discover the information on your own?Honestly for me PT is more a tool to track my own sessions and replay hands where I lost money or feel like I misplayed. I will use it occasionally with GT+ to see other players VP$IP/PFR% numbers but I find that's of limited utility. Honestly (since I only play one table) I think I can gather a read more quickly and accurately without PT. The only advantage is when I see a player I've played with before but don't remember his tendencies. If you take away PT I'd just take more notes. Is note taking cheating? It's using a program to remember details on a player that I couldn't do on my own. And yet it's a feature that the sites themselves provide.I'd reject the idea that a bot's lack of emotional response makes it cheating. If that were true then a person who didn't ever tilt would be cheating everytime they played. What makes a bot cheating in my mind is:- the ability to play more tables and more hours than a human following a strategy script could possibly do error freeand more importantly- the ability to have multiple people using a bot they didn't design/program

[DoinSublime 0]

I'd reject the idea that a bot's lack of emotional response makes it cheating. If that were true then a person who didn't ever tilt would be cheating everytime they played.

I'm gonna have to go ahead and vehemently disagree with this.

[psujohn 0]

I'm gonna have to go ahead and vehemently disagree with this.

And are you going to provide reasoning behind your disagreement or just register the fact that you disagree?

[DoinSublime 0]

And are you going to provide reasoning behind your disagreement or just register the fact that you disagree?

I'd say controlling human emotion is a big part of being a successful player, and should be.

[Fluffdog87 2]

I'd say controlling human emotion is a big part of being a successful player, and should be.

BOTS CANT TILT=MAIN DIFFERNCEIT'S A BIG ONE. BARRY G says 80-90% of wins and losses are due to you or your opponent tilting.

[psujohn 0]

Ok what about Dexter? That showtime serial killer dude who experiences no emotions. Is it cheating for him to play poker? What about a man-bot like Chris Fergusson? Bot has superior tilt control to most/all of its opponents = advantage to the bot. Not the main advantage. Not the reason why using a bot is cheating.

[NoSup4U 0]

Ok what about Dexter? That showtime serial killer dude who experiences no emotions. Is it cheating for him to play poker? What about a man-bot like Chris Fergusson? Bot has superior tilt control to most/all of its opponents = advantage to the bot. Not the main advantage. Not the reason why using a bot is cheating.

By your argument, you don't consider using steroids in football cheating then?(I know you're not arguing that using a bot isn't cheating. Just saying that the tilt issue is a big one for some of us, and the steroids analogy is why. bots allow 'you' to play in both a way that you naturally couldn't, and isn't widely acceptable, and wouldn't ruin the game if used by everyone else.)Also, I would venture to say that nobody would consider a bot to be cheating IF THE OWNER WAS HONEST AND UP FRONT about it being a bot that was playing. Because then, just about any player, even the worst ones, would know and be able to easily exploit it. A bot cannot win without misrepresenting who you are playing against, and this is 100% cheating in my opinion. (Again, John I know you weren't actually arguing that bots weren't cheating, I was just throwing that in there)Mark

[psujohn 0]

I think a better analogy to my argument that tilt control != cheating is more like tall people playing basketball. Shaq had an advantage as a basketball player because he's 3 feet taller than me. Doesn't mean that Shaq is cheating if we play one-on-one. A bot has superior tilt control over humans. I have superior tilt control over Hellmuth. It's a thing where there are variations in people. I'm not arguing that a bot has better tilt control and that is an advantage.I'm arguing that that's not a bot's MAIN advantage and more importantly that's NOT what makes using a bot cheating.Have you ever tried playing Smash-strat? It's a super simple set of rules and any 3rd grader should be able to do it. It's also mind-numbingly boring. Play Smash-stat on one table for more than an hour and I'll bet you start to deviate from the strategy. First you just can't resist playing that AK in late position. Then it's open raising that TT from MP. Suddenly you're not playing the strategy anymore. A bot doesn't do that. A bot plays the strategy without variation, without error and without getting tired. That's a bot's real advantage.Barry may win most of his money when his opponents go on tilt. I win most of my money when my opponents make fundamental mistakes due to their lack of understand of the game. Sure I'll lose money every once in a while when I tilt but mostly I lose money when I either lose focus or just plain make mistakes. They're not emotional tilt based mistakes but lack of understand/lack of application mistakes.A bot is cheating simply because the sites say NO BOTS. If there were a choice of sites that said NO BOTS and a site that said BOTS WELCOME I'd likely choose the NO BOTS site. If I site said BOTS ALLOWED but identified them as bots .... I'd be awfully tempted. As you said if you know it's a bot it shouldn't be too hard to identify its tendencies and exploit it.

[HermanKahn 0]

BOTS CANT TILT=MAIN DIFFERNCEIT'S A BIG ONE. BARRY G says 80-90% of wins and losses are due to you or your opponent tilting.

Yeah, so what? I don't tilt, and if you were more in control of yourself you wouldn't tilt either. It not cheating, it's called "self-discipline." Not everyone can be a genius, but even a dullard can develop patience and inner calm. In fact, I daresay a dullard with discipline will whomp the *ss of a genius on tilt anyday. Seriously, all jokes aside, it's that important. Now is the fact that I'm a winning player significantly correlated to the fact that I don't tilt? No doubt. Once you accept that bad beats are just part of the game and turn your chat off, I can almost guarantee your stats will improve. Small changes, huge results. Seems like every time I crush a NL game, some sore loser accused me of being a bot. God only knows what they've been saying since I turned my chat off altogether... I don't have time to humor irate nobodies over b*llshit. Any site representative who probes my system can see that not only am I a real person, I don't use any helper-software whatsoever-- my game is 100% my own. Personally, I'd love to play bots for money. Why? Predictability is the kiss of death: Once I mentally "reverse engineer" the algorithm, I can exploit the sh*t out of its weaknesses. However, I do know some DARPA-funded AI modeling-and-simulation think tank geeks who could probably write a NL bot I couldn't beat, but I haven't seen any evidence they've done it. Actually, even if they have, we'll never detect it: it will be so much like a real player in every respect, the kinds of coincidences the 2+2 poster offers as "proof" won't even register. In other words, the perfect DARPAbot would be identical to the adaptive, unpredictable play of the research analyst who designed it. Something to think about!

[rgold79 0]

It's not just a question of tilt. People are subject to any one of a number of factors that affect the way we make decisions. We may be tired, hungry, cold, angry at our girlfiend, angry that we don't have a girlfriend or just plain bored. The are an infinite number of other environmental factors that come into play. When presented with something as dynamic as a hand of poker, which literally can play out in hundreds of millions of ways, is it really believable that a person could make the exact same decisions each and every time without ever deviating? It's hard enough for one person to somehow accomplish this, and in this situation we have three people playing together for hours upon hours together, and some of their statistics match to the thousandth of a percent. It doesn't cross into the realm of impossibility, but it would appear to stretch the limits of human capability to be sure.

[HermanKahn 0]

When presented with something as dynamic as a hand of poker, which literally can play out in hundreds of millions of ways, is it really believable that a person could make the exact same decisions each and every time without ever deviating? It's hard enough for one person to somehow accomplish this, and in this situation we have three people playing together for hours upon hours together, and some of their statistics match to the thousandth of a percent. It doesn't cross into the realm of impossibility, but it would appear to stretch the limits of human capability to be sure.

I say if it's making the same decisions for hours on end, it's a non-adaptive piece of sh*t and 100% beatable by any nuanced player. Hell, bring them on. I'll have a whole table-full, please.