The point I'm making is that he would be good enough to replicate his play with a bot such that most regs (except about 10 in the world) won't be able to tell the difference (and ofc anyone in stars security).

The key imo is to at least give the best regs little incentive in playing with assistance. For instance, with hu hypers, all other sites except stars have pretty much permanently lost the confidence of regs, and there is a huge incentive to use a bot there.

Eventually software/knowledge will get to a point where even in games like 6max cash the best regs will have incentive to bot (less likely being caught with improved technology, their lower edge etc).

It's basically an arms race where stars have little incentive in making a lot of investment for. At least for games like spins (and hu as part of that), stars are incentivised in making the games clean for now.

500+ games vs list of banned players using illegal software, $30K in buy-ins over 2 years (of course difficult for me to know if they were actually botting/doing anything else illegal during the time)

stars head of security tells me i didn't play any games vs botters and am not eligible for a refund ... somewhat difficult to believe but "ok"

and again winner on winamax leaderboard for 25s "grinded" 4k games last week
its ridiculous

u mean on 10s right? because 25/50s was 2712 last week, but yeah, try sending a mail to wina about anyone, they won't even bother to read the whole thing, wina is sadly a bot playground for quite a few months now

yeah sorry my mistake meant 5s

Link this thread an specifically the posts about botting imho. While unlikely it has any effect it's worth a try

There are 2 types of banned players. Stars firstly have the power to bar someone from playing without proof of guilt- in which case they will just be banned and no refunds given.

In the other case, there is proof (good enough in a court of law if it goes down that far) and funds are confiscated.

Also stars will never confirm nor deny whatever account was botting unless it is a clear case, and even then they would only reply to affected players, or players who reported the guilty accounts.

You cannot say so easily say that you played over 30k in bis over 2 years vs accounts that were cheating the entire time. I also think that refund values in games like spins are extremely difficult to calculate.

For example sir whiteman did use a bot any time before september 2016 for sure (might have not cheated well into 2017). How much should ppl get refunded for playing vs him?

^sir whiteman didn't* use a bot before september 2016

Also some accounts may have no money in them so he could play vs players that got banned and not get any money.

Also a few players that get banned and funds confiscated he might've won money vs (and Stars could choose to just send to players that lost funds vs bot accounts).

Yea they're actually no.1 in France and incredibly have consistently beaten pokerstars.fr in terms of traffic. Way better promos as well. They'll be going for the Europe-wide market that's set to open in 2018 or w/e.

Pretty funny that all the leaderboard results are on their site, actually enough material there for an article about how winamax is bot-infested.

most player use supervised bot cause very cheap and crushing on $30 and under

https://www.pokernews.com/news/2017/...hers-29136.htm

Time to wear the tinfoil hats sheeple


"Interestingly, the (AI) roles are described as being part of PokerStars' poker innovation team, and thus, are likely to not be part of the PokerStars' Game Integrity team efforts to combat the use of prohibited software on the site. "

I think that's a pretty baseless claim. Of course AI researchers aren't needed to work on their anti-cheat systems if those are currently not AI, developing an AI that is good enough to reliably identify "hostile" AI would certainly count as work for the innovation dept (i.e. "this might not go anywhere but your job is to work on it and see if it can").

Alternatively they may simply be interested in having a beast AI to learn GTO for random new gametypes they come up with, to see if any are surprisingly easy or hard.

"Use in a tutorial for new players" seems incredibly wasteful, all bots are not AI and a simple script is what a tutorial needs.

I'm pretty surprised this is written by Josem tbh.

Yea agreed I didn't know what to make of article tbh so I went for humor Lot of firms are investing in AI. I know the CEO of unibet is on 2plus2 would be interested to hear his view.

Yea prob to do with the new games - balancing power ups etc. could be massively streamlined - as opposed to running a beta version for months

Hi guys,

Anyone here who makes or knows someone who makes costum Spin&Go huds? Am willing to pay a small amount for a good hud.

Cheers!

These guys have pre-made HUDs for Spin&Gos...
husng.com
SNG Master

And this guy can make a custom made HUD as per request.

Has anyone of you ever played the Fortune Spin at Natural8? Is it possible to collect multiple duplicates of the Cookie Cards?
If so then the rake is extraordinary high, isn`t it? Not sure how you can calculate it this way


https://www.natural8.com/poker/fortune_spin

Yes.

Not that high.

I don't know what claim you think is "baseless". The key base of the article that I wrote was PokerStars' own job advertisement, which, as I post this, is still available online here:
http://www.starsgroup.com/careers/jo...ineer-oWL65fwC

PokerStars has previously talked about how they have experts on combatting bots who work as part of their Game Security team. These new staff appear to not be part of that, which is a significant -and interesting- change in direction which might be interesting to readers.

In the past, I understand that most of PokerStars' research efforts on AI and bots went to combatting them and stopping them from operating on the site. I imagine that most readers of the article would have thought that if PokerStars was employing AI researchers, they might be expected to stop AI being used on the site. Instead, however, these staff are being hired to produce "AI programs which will learn how to play".

I do not think that hiring new staff to combat bots or AI on PokerStars would be newsworthy.

I do think that the world's largest poker company building their own, in-house, bot or AI is newsworthy.

Cheers - I've only started writing a very small volume of stuff for PokerNews, but if you've got a story that you think might be newsworthy, feel free to drop me an email anytime.

I think stars is just keen on not making new games that are easily solved by computers. This wasn't a design issue back in the day, but is prob the most important thing for a new gambling game today. When nlhe was "invented" back in the day, I'm sure no one even thought a HUD was possible (, or online poker, or a computer where the HUD runs on), but before any product that stars brings to the market today they need to explore what sort of software ppl would likely create for the game, and obviously the game complexity.

For example, imo one of the biggest reasons that they didn't introduce open face chinese poker (which was the big thing a few years ago) was that it's easily solvable.

I'm looking for staking in spins 100s, i would publish in the marketplace but i sent a request several days ago and i get no answer, any advice on where to get staking for spins 100s, let me know.

SpinLegends
SmartSpins
EvolveStaking
SpinBeast
SpinDegens

Among others i cant remember right now

The sponsor of this forum, HUSNG.com has a good, long-running staking program that certainly covers $100 spins. I suggest you apply there!

There are several other large stables you could apply to also.

You don't need marketplace approval to post in staking threads, only to create one of your own. See here: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...fering-stakes/

I'm somewhat sceptical of that explanation, 'cause short-handed, small-stacked SNGs were solved a decade ago, but then Spin & Go tournaments were introduced.