This has got to be the most stupid post on this entire thread.

Have you ever actually tried to write a robot?

If it was a easy as you naively claim do you think there would be an on line poker economy at all? The world and its dog would have done it years ago and all the sites would have northing but robots extracting whatever they could from the few fish that appeared.

Yes, there are robots and yes, the problem will only get worse but your take on the subject is absurd.

It is much easier to write a 20bb bot for a 100bb game, as the short stacker has an inherent advantage in such a game. The program is much simpler due to that edge, and due to the push/shove 1 street poker that has to account for so many fewer variables. It is harder for a 20bb stategy to be successful with a 50bb max buy-in, but is still profitable when you calculate the $110K it can earn with SNE benefits.

It's not impossible for programming profitable bots at deeper tables, but they now have to beat other players without a natural edge. It is just more difficult to do and would reduce the overall # of bots. Most programmers will take the time/are skilled enough/understand poker well enough to program "IF AK, AA, KK, then "ALL-IN"", but not "IF 9Ts 120bb's deep vs. recent light 3betting reg in position, if on button or cutoff vs blinds, then call if 3bet is less than 5bb's, if flop is wet (program what that means), then raise cbet x % of the time, IF 4bet then fold, if called then ..........you get the idea. The bot has to account for a ton more variables including, board texture, opponent type, recent history, potential tilt of opponents, number of tables opponent plays, ect.


Why not do that, while at the same time making the buy-in something that the majority of poker players agree is a better game?


btw, i am disappointed that bots will always be somewhat of a menace to us, but I am suggesting we do what we can to make it more difficult for them to proliferate successfully.

At least you don't even seem smart so your display of ignorance can be forgiven.

I'm really surprised at the number of winning grinders that were down to these guys over a significant sample

these were the most predictable rock stereotypes you could find

You basically want me to admit writing a bot, so you can then report me to all known poker rooms (before or after asking for stats?).

The poker economy is still going, because there are only some few hundred people on earth who have all combined the poker skills and programming skills and knowledge to avoid detection who can actually do that. But once you get the idea, it's really a matter of some 30 hours of uninterrupted programming.

Sure thing, 20BB winning strategy can be implemented by any 12 year old kid, but 100BB isn't that much harder once you spend enough time reading papers (and there are lots of them from UoA (they mostly study LHE, but the concepts work on NLHE too), plus some other great ideas scattered over the net).

So we have hundreds of thousands of fish, tens of thousands of regs, and just hundreds of bots (... growing...). So the economy is ok. For now.

So what you're saying is it's really easy to write a sophisticated bot. All you need is years of accumulated knowledge and experience across several fields.

Most things are easy when you already know how.

Only if you are so animal stupid (sorry animals) that you write robots and then come on here and admit it using the same screen name you use on the sites.

I call BS.

I've been programming all my working life an all different types of software and I'd estimate that even for a very, very, good programmer, implementing the most basic donkey strategy in a working robot would take a good couple of hundred hours.

It's interesting that you've already backtracked from a couple of days to 30 hours solid programming.

Someone has already explained just why the above statement is complete BS.

Pure supposition on your part and, tbh, form what you have written so far, you have negative credibility on this topic.

Kind of like a mute point does, amirite?

I can do that in two 15 hour sessions. Though as you say it takes hundreds of hours, so we can fairly bet on three 10 hours long programming sessions for me to create a working break even bot (+/- 1BB/100, so that it makes profit after rake back, and we also have full management over the bot to adjust it after some 100K hands and make it undoubtedly +BB/100). 100BB deep, SHNL.

I agree on video recording myself + screen recording all my work. I would start on an absolutely new project, using nothing but web browser to find/read the papers i may need, and my favorite programming interface, and would compile the final executable bot after 30 hours of pure work (that would be 3 days for 10 houirs a day, though as I said I could do that in 2 days working 15 hours per day if we raise the stakes).

I would probably get banned by stars along the way (I have never neglected the fact that bots are caught, and I would have also been caught if I had tried developing one), so make a reasonable bet, not some $3K. Let's say a SNE worth, or so. Waiting for your odds.

We can use escrow if anything, as I realize I don't have too much posts on here for you to take my word for granted.

EDIT: I would actually agree on providing live feed from my desktop screen AND webcam from where I'm sitting at that screen, so you could check it anytime online to see I'm not cheating somehow. Tell me you are willing to bet.

What I'm saying is it's really easy to write a sophisticated bot if you know what you're doing.

It's like you began telling me stories how one can't bring back the rock from the moon. Sure thing you can't, I can't, but it doesn't mean that it wasn't done multiple times.

Its the easier in a group

I guess the bigger problem is to find a high end pokerplayer that show the programmers how it works. But is he motivated to kill his source of income ?

So i guess there will be good bots but maybee the best play on the level of a
30-50K/ year Supernova..........but thats good enough for me !!

That's what I mean by calling most of the smart ppl in this thread "naive"!

What does a programmer writing a winning poker bot, and a player winning at poker have in common? Why should one learn anything from the other? I don't follow.
It's like doctor learning from a firefighter or vv. There are cases when their jobs get kind of interacted with each other (for the lack of better phrasing as English isn't my native), but it's not the reason to assume one would fail without the other.

A good programmer that does not currently play on Pokerstars could pay a good player for lessons geared toward bot play, and the good player may never use the bot and have nothing to fear. The bot programmer could then create his first account(s) and start reaping money with nothing to lose except the time to program the bot. He gets caught, he gets shut down. The risk is how much he can make before he gets caught. The better his programming skills and his teacher, the more he can potentially make. Win Win for the two. Only the rest of us lose.

Which is what I reckoned you were saying. The bolded part is the problem with your thinking.

No, it really isn't. I'm not denying the possibility. I'm rejecting the notion that it's really easy.

And your 30 hour count is silly. What you're describing in your bet proposition is the amount of time it takes to type in the code and iron out any trivial bugs from typos (which is a big part of why you'll never get anybody taking you up on it).

The player potentially increases competition at his level.

The bot maker has to throw money into lessons, time into learning the game, further time into making the bot for a highly uncertain outcome regarding winrate and how long it will take to be detected, and money for his initial deposit.

That's a very long way from a blatant win-win.