A somewhat simple method on how to distribute confiscated funds. Since accounting for actual losses/winnings is nonsensical, you can only refund people on a "hands played vs" basis. Short handed hands should weigh stronger than long handed hands.

Something like this is very easy to run, I could even do that for the hands I have access to.

The actual numbers could work out like this; I am just speculating though.

Total hands played by bots = 3m.
Total money confiscated = $100k.
Average worth per hand = 3 cent.

If you played 500 hands shorthanded with bots involved you'd receive $3.
If you played 5000 hands shorthanded with bots involved you'd receive $30.
If you played 50000 hands shorthanded with bots involved you'd receive $300.

If you played 100 hands heads up vs a bot you'd receive $3.
If you played 1000 hands heads up vs a bot you'd receive $30.
If you played 10000 hands heads up vs a bot you'd receive $300.

Now the question is, is it reasonable to pressure Ongame into payout that out. I am not sure if it is.

solid point.

Even if the sites pay back the confiscated money to players, they will still of profit from the bots through rake. I think a strong argument can be made,for them having to pay all the rake they have made back to cheated players too. I think part of the reason they don't want to refund players is because they'll have to email all the recreation players who have played against the bots, and explain everything to them.

When FTP caught the bots playing rush poker, the email I got just said I was being refunded for cheating, that FTP was always working to make the games as safe as possible, and that they couldnt go into further detail b/c of privacy policies.


I think ongame could come up with something along those lines to tell players, that acctually makes them think "look this site is safe, someone was cheating and they got caught" rather than "omg Im playing robots."

Bots certainly don't play SSNL on Ongame, because all the regs suck there.

errr.. if the regs suck as SSNL wouldnt bots play more with them?

I think he's trying to imply that SSNL-regs are worse than bots that got caught. However, I disagree, bots playing Ongame MSNL were decent I guess, but they're just one kind of bots, there might very well be worse bots playing SSNL. And for sure there must be at least a handful of very good SSNL-regs actually, maybe they just lack the desire to move up or have to frequently withdraw too much to move up.

yesterday a recreational player asked in chat: "are you all bots?"

fortunately almost everyone at the table responded to him very quickly.

A while back, just for fun I asked the same question while playing 5 regs on a 5/10-table. Nobody answered anything. Instead they sat out and left.

Sitting out is a bit of a giveaway. But IMHO chat is dubious.
I multitable and I have the chat turned off so people can't needle me or angle me and I get raw dealer messages.

If someone is playing on 24 tables and has time to chat it is MORE likely that they are using a bot. (even an auto folder is unlikely)

As for detection this is what PTR do
http://www.pokertableratings.com/pok...-detection.php

LOL if thats their A game. Bring it on.

need an ongame deal, pm pls.
thanks

what types of styles were these bots playing in particular that was alarming? or any link with that information on it already? thanks.

dude, read the thread.