I'm with ***, don't think they're bots [deleted], I just see nothing to support that.
oh rly? because that's all i see.
i) it is nearly impossible to specify a strategy well enough in any natural language to enable this sort of statistical convergence. think about how many marginal/ambiguous spots there are (tens of thousands, many non-overlapping w/indistinguishable ev differences b/n options in isolation) when youre playing very loose. there will ofc be a ton of variation in how individuals respond;
ii) even if i) is false and they are all being taught the same super specific style somewhere (where, exactly?) by some super smart teacher, then:
a) why arent any of them playing on stars? random player from player population will be a stars customer.. i dont know.. 10-20%? dont know if it's lower for dudes from these sub-pops but given that they are on ftp..
b) why dont some of them play more tables? think about the distribution of # of tables played by a random 5/10 pro. now, why are all of these guys playing 3? think also about their 'volume distribution' across sites. very strange if it's just one guy or a handful. what's their motivation?
c) why are most/all from countries representing a small proportion of the player population? % chance a random player is not from North America/Scandinavia/Germany? how about from portugal? new zealand? italy?
e) why arent any of them playing lower stakes? % chance a random 'student' on a forum, at a seminar, or whatever would only have monies to play lower stakes is, uhm, high!
f) why dont any of them respond in chat? probability of a random non-english 5/10 player responding in chat to 'hey, PLAYER' has gotta be 10% or more. 0.9^55 is what?
g) why doesnt anyone here know any of them? % chance a random 5/10 winner is known by someone on this forum is really high.
and so on. there are rebuttals and nits to pick with each point above (stars is tougher, maybe its only a few guys from russia using proxies from multiple countries and alternating through accounts on diff sites, they only allow 5/10 players into their cabal, your questions offer inconsistent alternatives, etc.) but they all kind of suck. in any case, taking all of the above in the aggregate, this looks highly suspicious
and concluding 'nothing is up' is an epic reasoning fail. think like poker players.
the only problem i have w/concluding 'bots' is that anyone smart enough to make a winning 5/10 poker bot has much better things to do with their time (or so i thought?). secretive cabal of eastern euro experts is my favored alternative atm! that'd be pretty cool. less cool somehow if they're australian.