Thanks for the info DasGebuesh.

I find the graphs shot of tauronka-rubanka-lenkomoff particularly interesting. Something obviously changed around Jan 2012 to make these slightly losing (rakeback profitable?) bots get super profitable.

By the way, if anyone wants to use the hand histories of samples A and B for bot detection then I am happy to pass them on.

Yeah they changed their profiles a few times. At first alot of them played a 17/14 style and after a while they switched to 24/20. The screenshot of higirl82 and juged666 shows a mixture of 17/14 style and the new 24/20 style because my holdem manager filter included hands newer than 12 months. If I set that filter to 2 these stats would be like 24/20. Overall its a mix of older bots playing 17/14 a few months and changing to 24/20 and new bots playing 24/20 from the start.

The first botlist back then on NL 4-5.



Every Smiley = Bot. Just look at the stats. I think a good Tablescanner(byebye TST beta ) is the best way to spot them.



It's written in german because my english obv. sucks but it shows the new and the old playstyle of the bots. Alter Style means older style and Neuer Style means newer Style.

Nice work!

By the way if you have a decent amount of hand histories for these games and have Poker Tracker and you want to test to see if these bots collude (as opposed to just being standard bots) then you can use the free download of the PT3 report to run the bad beat test.

I recommend looking at dominated hands (equity 68-83%).

@Laughing: The A/B hand histories weren't user submitted right? They were generally datamined? Because user submissions would have skewed the data towards the underdog since people responding to a request to investigate for riggedness would tend to be players running far below EV.


Its possible that the bots do collude, but your method of 'comparing stats' would not prove this. The only obvious thing would be that they are bots programmed by the same source or following the same strategy. But that is not the same as 'working together'...

Although if you are defining 'working together' as sharing a database, ok that is definitely plausible - but again probably has nothing to do with the same stats which would occur irregardless of them sharing a database.

But i'm pretty sure that op's #3 about bot collusion specifically refers to collusion by bots at the same table in the same hand playing differently due to knowledge of each others hole cards. Bots merely using a shared hand history database would not affect op's calculations. they would have to be in the same hand sharing hole card information.

Yes - they were datamined hands from PTR.

This could be the case if a lot of user submissions were grouped together to form a sample (assuming they've all chosen to test because they are running bad and not for some other reason) but a single user submission tested individually should be good.

The Pokerstrategy guy told me that they checked the players and a few of them played in the same cluster. He also mentioned that the bots in the same cluster dont play vs each other. I dont know if that affects op's calculations. In my opinion all this research is a waste of time because Ipoker just don't care. I reported alot of bots and william hill, titan etc. always said those players are clean. I also tried to send the a bot manual + description how to config the bot on william hill but all they say is like "we can't comment on this topic because of privacy issues." Its sensless - dont play on ipoker.

The results of the the tests would come out normal (unbiased) if there was no collusion (or other explanation such as rigging, freak variance) - the tests don't actually test for bots, it is the collusion part that would affect the results.

I think this may be the real value of the research but we probably knew that already

Good work OP

Indeed, complaining to ipoker is a complete waste of time, as is the case with all .com rubber stamp gaming commissions that license them, but what about the newly formed commissions in jurisdictions such as France, Italy, Denmark & Spain?

I've contacted Arjel (French gaming commission) questioning how they can license ipoker considering all the damning evidence in relation to bots that's been produced, I also asked them if they were aware bots were operating on ipoker.fr sites

Email has been acknowledged and I'm awaiting their response, I've also brought these results to their attention.

Why would a regulatory agency be interested in whether or not bots are playing?

This is a matter for the rules of the site, and you know iPoker allows it openly under their rules and they don't need anyone to "report it" to them. So you simply make a choice to play there or not. This isn't even an issue of cheating or regulation.

Ipoker do not permit automated playing systems according to their own terms and conditions, your confusing the WH support thread where support admitted to casino game bots, an entirely different matter

ARJEL are an independent body, if you have an issue with any operator they license, you bring your complaint forward to ARJEL, which is what I've done, I fail to see a valid point in your statement.

My complaint is simple, they are not enforcing their own terms and conditions.

/end derailment

As far as I know iPoker (Playtech) is just a backend network without any direct consumer relationships or skins of its own, and all the poker sites using the network servers are independent operators with their own T&C. And many of those skins indeed permit bots to play poker under their own rules. If you are specifically talking about the French operator, that could be different and perhaps is run directly by iPoker, I don't know.

Yes i'm quite aware of that, I've worked in the industry and indeed I've experience in dealing directly with ipoker and playtech.

Titan poker has ties with ipoker, or their parent company, Playtech.

http://www.ipoker.fr/

Good job - this could have better results than the other gaming commissions. Let us know how you get on...

Very good job LA. I hope you will do more testing as these results are way off where they should be. Maybe on other sites where the bot-ratio is not that big of an issue?

Can I ask how you run these tests? What kind of software do you have?