Wow, I wasn't even aware of this software. Pretty sick.
How comes it is allowed PokerStars?

Here is my beginner's question, from someone in your not to be listened to seriously list (I get double plus points by being chrome/bronze too!).

Now obviously being a beginner I will explain how SpinWiz works first, just in case some other beginner does not know why I am asking it.

SpinWiz has three core bits of functionality.

First it forms a a queue of SpinWiz users so that the regs (defined as SpinWiz users) do not sit each other. The functionality of this feature is to - as far as they can technically deliver today given that they time out the first in the queue sometines to keep the queue responsive bumhunt recs. .

This function is to avoid other SpinWiz users. To get more recs and less regs.

The second functionality is the sitlist. This is pitched as a way to make the queue go faster, to stop disconnected users blocking it. This is probably partly true, but that's not what it REALLY does.

In this functionality SpinWiz users who mutually choose that they WANT to share a table with each other well - they get seats together. Now if there is a group of people who all mutually include each other on their sit list the software will only ever put two of you on to the table and will make sure the third is a non SpinWiz user. As a bonus, you get your seats quicker if you have mates you want to sit with.

As a special bonus, if you have a match then it is designed to default to get multiple games where you both want to sit with each other, where you both do indeed get to sit with each other. They do explain that you may not get all the seats together, sometimes you will get 2 non SpinWiz users, listen to the video, he is expaining why they did not get all three games with both of you together, turns out a rec might get the second seat, and sometimes there is a "user error" in that the guy you want lots of tables with has already maxed out his SpinWiz seat allowance (3 at $60, 5 at lower)

So the second core function is designed to get players who want to sit with each other to sit together - but only ever if the third player in the game is a non spin wiz user. NEVER three from the same group of mutually sitting players.

Third is the "Friends list" - a bit of a misnomer really. This is a list of players, including non Spin Wiz users that you do NOT want to sit with. It is the sitlist with an extra h really. Now this is quite a nice tool, it let's you decline to play people you think are better than you.

Now there is a bit more, you can set up groups to make managing your collective seat manipulation easier, to make them aware of your choices for your sitlist and not sitlist but hide it from others. Plus of course you can export then edit, reimport your lists just to make it easier for a group of Spinwiz users to have the seating settings they want to get to sit together most of the time but not against "friends" that they don't want to sit.

You can also switch modes, so when it is good traffic you can operate in sit the two recs mode, only switching to sitting with your "group" at times of lower traffic but hey that's just bells and whstles.

Part 1 - is getting non spin wiz users (recs) not spin wiz users(regs)
Part 2 - is a tool to sit with your mutually sitting mate in mutiple games against a single non spin wizz user.
Part 3 - is a way to avoid strong players who don't use spinwiz.


Now here is my question?

How on earth can anyone deny that this is a tool designed to facillitate collusion in Sit and Gos? How on earth can you pretend that the tool is just about regs avoiding each other given that sitlists are designed to get multiple tables for two users TOGETHER vs non SpinWiz users?

Don't believe me? I'm not playing enough to have a valid view? Well all this is from the viewing the sitlist tutorial - 17mins long, here:

http://www.spinandgowiz.com/

tl;dr

but is it me or are you not even thinking about banning seating script?

How on earth can anyone deny that this is a tool designed to facillitate collusion in Sit and Gos?


Have played around 800 spins
and never saw the colluding behaviour described here in fact it seems complete nonsense
due to the fact only very few players can be profitable long run in this format

If 2 guys invest 15$ = 30$ to win 15$ and theres rake i find it somewhat
illogical they can win because they will lose some % of the time
they will not win the 14$ everytime

+

I think Stars has showed it can track colluding behaviour and players would suspect if the same 2 play them 3,4,10,11 times

These kind of posts are way off and now some people seem in total dellusion thinking there is conspiracy everywhere

Im sorry its getting ridicolous , really!


-----


I dont mean to be harsh or offensive but u must understand collusion in mtts or hs cash or sng is much easier to do and logical

Please tell me how much do those players need to win in order for collusion to be profitable in spins ?


If u know that and the risk they take of being banned for life in stars + how easy it is to find out collusion u will probably delete your comment

.

Just checked that site out. Unbelievable.

Terrible stuff from stars allowing that, let alone telling lies about allowing it.

I cant open that link but 1 general comment.

Theres is one thing called NOTES u can color code 1 player

So this means someone can manually sit you because he wants to play with you when he sees you are registered in the cash game or sng whatever

Once again if people are against automatic registering they wont gain anything because someone will indeed sit you ANYWAY manually

these programs are not a secret and anyone can use them if they wish

although some things like scripts and persecutory behaviour are cert. not good
we must be logical and have certain notion of things

If lots of people mark u U WILL BE SITTED NO MATTER WHAT .

With or without softw. dont be naive to think all will change thats just lol.

Of course weaker players will get targetted, but if we do better at blocking data mining and so they are harder for regs to spot, if we make it so recs get to sit at tables at the same speed as regs so the recs have some chance of seeing another rec then the game improves for recs.

Now that is a zero sum game in some ways - if you ignore the longer lifetime and greater total deposits as a result by recs - it does indeed make things harder for regs using these tools today, they might have to find the fish themselves, they might have to rely on their own data, taking away or restricting the reg tools that make it virtually impossible for a rec to get to play a rec will be short term painful for regs.

Long term, taking that extra work now, increasing that barrier to entry for profitable regdom might just be better than the alternative.

Disappointing that PS represents its Spins as random seating whilst approving software which, in effect, makes them not so. To the ordinary user, random does not include allowing my 2 opponents to have chosen to sit with each other. It appears PS either (a) is being deliberately misleading (presumably for the purpose of generating more spins/rake); or (b) is showing recklessness/incompetence in approving external software. Uninformed users should be able to assume the site protects them from this kind of stuff.




I would also like to hear the answer to this and to the more general question: "In what ways does PS benefit from allowing or supporting external software?"

Just to make sure you know, at small stakes and higher, the seating process isn't so much 'sit next to someone you know is a rec', as much as 'sit next to someone you don't know because they're probably a rec'.

Still does the job - the lack of data on them either legitimately or via a data miner guarantees they get targetted by regs and so don't see recs, as the regs have the s/w to do it almost instantly.

If you honestly think the micros are swimming with newbie one/two tabling recs rather than multi tabling grinders then that impression might be because you aren't using the best scanning software :-)

I agree Stars should analyse all possibilites i am particulary against
cartels or scripts for different reasons

Its a lie that the best players are in cartels , some players CANT put enough volume or just want to play HU as a side game they cant cause a group of players feels its entitled to and makes rules

However maybe i will contradict myself but i do find auto registration tools
efficient because they are practical , u dont have to repeat the same boring actions when u want to play some games for 1 hour so i guess the problem is not in the tool but in the way it can be used however stars can change that
because its actually quite easy to warn players part of cartels they will be banned for life , trust me cartels will last 5 seconds more and its over.

I consider this to be a quite complex subject , there are several software programs radically different from each other

i hate when i must register for a freeroolll and forget or when i have to clik several times in hu register its actually convenient for some tools to exist

they save time!

Also words recs and regs are too vague , there are many types of recs and regs and subtypes , and probbly small minority or recs is even better than some regs as strange as this seems

Very hard to take conclusions when programs are so different or even give opinions when i dont know 90% of those programs

I do think analysin program by program is the best option although it will give some work

Putting everything in 1 basket is the recipe to make huge and expensive mistakes.

My point is that recs are only ever going to sit with regs as long as seating software exists whether or not the regs datamine. Datamining isn't a good thing, but I don't think you should conflate the two.

This is true. Beyond a certain stake level just being unknown is enough to be a target. The real problem is that having third party software just makes the whole thing a lot shadier though. It means that playing at a high level online is not something to aspire to anymore.

On Pokerstars I would count as a rec - however this August I plan to play live poker professionally for one month before school term starts and hopefully make 1K euro - above the average wage for poor Slovakia. Now perhaps that's silly rec fantasy - there will be a 1M1K PG&C thread for people to gloat in anyway - but it's possible for me to have it because it seems that the live pros are doing the same things as I've been doing - playing poker in person - and I think I can do it as well as they can. There's no real chance I would aspire to that on Pokerstars because I know the pros are doing something different to what I'm doing with all their 3rd party software, which is not worth buying for one month, I also don't want to become as shady as them. And also the VIP system stacks the odds against someone like me who wants to play seriously just one month.

That's why I play live with 50-100 euros on the table and online with one dollar on the table. In any case I'm arriving in the casino 1st August will a pile of cash to win or lose and I'm not depositing anything on Pokerstars. That should be a problem for them but they made it themselves by tolerating shadiness.

It is a hugely complex area but I disagree that a program by program approach really works that well. The complexity is that you cand have many apps that are indeed useful, eductional, enlightening, timesaving....I know I have an anti NC rep for instance but the note taking part of the product is clearly a fantastic app that all poker players could have and use.....the trouble is that we get app upon app upon app, package on package, then we add datamining and collusion in to the mix so tools that can seem entirely legitimate actually end up helping what everyone agrees is cheating...

It is the whole suite, the combined package that is the real disaster not any one of the components. Each bt can have its defendes and advocates, many of them can be used perfectly ethically (even data mining, see bot scandal) but combined...total disaster Cybot central, death of poker and it will not be one app that did it, but the combination of them all.

The accountants making the decisions don't care about the long-term viability of online poker.
It's broken, and it needs fixing.

Well if u think casinos are more serious than Pokerstars ....

I would really think again

When doint individual analysis u obligatory have to do interaction analysis with other software also imo 1 of the real dangers are bots and those need to be tracked using software that analyses hands + frequencies etc
and players MUST BE ABLE TO DO THAT THEMSELVES

that being unavailable is even worse for the credibility of a site because i can also think Pokerstars or any other site will use bots wich know the cards...and print money i know this sounds silly and i do this example on purpose

In order for people to know the RPG etc is clean they need to be able to analyse themsevles theyr own hand histories etcetc and that is made using software

I repeat that imo only individual analysis will work on this looking at all uses the program can have and is interaction with others.

Can you recall a situation where Stars has done something against professional data-mining (PTR not counted as the reasoning for action was not primarily the data-mining)? Me not and i guess you neither. I have somehow a problem to believe that it's technically impossible to prevent data-mining for a company like Stars and that they can't do more than cease and desist letters.

+1. Well put, gets annoying seeing a rec portrayed as an idiot willing to throw $50 every couple of days away.

Those that they know to have done it, for example saying in public forums that thry have bought Xmillion hands get a warning email, their login is suspended.....until they tick a box saying they have read the TOS and agree to abide by them.....so about as close to stuff all as you can get.

Though they should get some credit re the cease and desist letters and trying to get to a player opt in to tracking....maybe a 2 out of 10?

Will the live casino tolerate a separate wait list for "fish" and regs?

Will the cards I muck at showdown be viewable by those in the know?

Will the the casino provide technical help (i.e non-anonymized hand histories) to help pros collect and share stats on my play they can see live in google glass or on a tablet?

Will they tolerate people using software to select from a vast quantity of pre-calculated advice as they play me?

No such casino would deserve to be licensed.

Of course I am posting this because I believe Pokerstars thinks its games should have the same or higher level of fairness and integrity as live games do and I believe they'll do the right thing.

I'm curious to know if these changes would still be proposed if the US was still in the market? Diminishing profits have to be what's driving this. If these changes go into effect, I doubt they will have the desired results. Sure super smart players use these programs for maximum effect, but so do the wanabes who will be less likely to play without them. In other words losing players are more likely to play when they think that these programs will instantly turn them into winners. Take it away and you take away some of the player base. Great players will always win, fish will always lose, but the the players in between can go either way. These are the players you will lose.

The cat is already out of the bag. If you can't run these on the client running pokerstars then somebody will just figure out a way to run them stand alone, totally separate from the main computer.

I can't play on Stars so it will be interesting to see how it turns out.

----

i like his. bulls eye on what software like this effectively does. big questions: will stars take action? do they have candidates for a solution? if not, will they drop a spec + bounty to crowdsource it?

should be augmented to:

So a seating script that simply automated dialogs, pressing register+confirm+Ok would be legal and allowed as it simply speeds up the game registration, making it more fun for recs and regs alike.

But an advanced seating script that:
* advantages certain players over others such as any group seating script

would be banned.