now you have me confused. plan was to keep clueless recs around longer by making it easier for them to play. don't worry, they said, there is no cure for stupid. they'll take shots at stakes they can not handle. software is a good thing for us [high stakes forum, a couple of years ago].

Except the SpinWiz developers conveniently "forgot" the game integrity protection that a staking group should only know about its own members. Players should not know about the strength (reg or recreational) of players they have not personally played against.

You keep making the logic error of assuming that if something is legal for a few it must be legal for many while conveniently relaxing/violating the key assumption (personal knowledge or same staking group) that made it legal for the few.

SpinWiz should have a mechanism of isolating distinct staking groups (don't sit due to collusive conflict of interest) each from all other staking groups and isolated from individuals not proven known by personal playing experience to other individuals. Then a mechanism for ensuring added (both non-sit or pls-sit users) to a given individual's lists only happens based on personal player history.

Secondly, Spinwiz's logic should differentiate between these two distinct non-sit reasons: non-sits due to same staking group should always ideally never allow a common sit (to avoid collusion temptation at all costs) where as a non-sit based on player personal preference may be a mandatory non-sit but may alternatively/optionally be agreed to be a sometimes sit (to get more play due to faster registration). Members within the same staking group should never get the maybe-sit option no matter how much it slows their registration.

Blanket access to names of all regs (all SpinWiz users) is a clear sharing of information not knowable without personal play and hence a violation of Pokerstars game integrity.

Technically, in SpinWiz perhaps each staking group would have to be defined by the backer not the stakee members of the staking group. The backer would define the userids of his stable and SpinWiz would then ensure they never sit together. This list definition and alteration could be changed only by the backer who may or may not be part of the stable list (perhaps he doesn't play Spin&Go's). The stakees would not be allowed to alter this list and the stakees would not be able to request a maybe sit or a sit on any member of the staking group.

Technically each individual user would personally define their sit and non-sit lists (starting with a blank list) by reference solely to their own personal playing experience but no individual would ever be able to see the names of any other SpinWiz users.

WDYT?
Targeting other regs seems fine as long as it is based on provable personal playing experience not on collusive ganging up because some division boss said so or by simply reading a list of all SpinWiz users or by any other means than personal playing experience.

Do u know that u can donwload and share the color code notes in Pokerstars ?


(its illegal ofc but it can be done)


The argument used " they can share" is true FOR EVERYTHING

HUD stats , color code notes , all programs , charts





I go crazy when i see these posts cause its clear people are not actively thinking
about arguments

Blanket access to names of all regs (all SpinWiz users) is a clear sharing of information not knowable without personal play and hence a violation of Pokerstars game integrity.

----

I understand this logic but

1 - You dont know if they are all regs

2 - If i see a lobby in a sng 6 max i can before i sit go to a site like sharsckope and see if they are regs without playng them

same for mtts , same for cash tables

Tim I don't think what should be legal for a few should be legal for many.

I personally think sharing info/reads even within staking groups should be illegal, but everyone does it. If you have been a midstakes 6max reg for more than a year I would put money on it that you too have shared reads on players with someone else who has never played those players. Banning this behaviour is unenforceable.

You can make those suggestions to spinwiz yourself, but spinwiz does not encourage this behaviour.

Whether the seating software itself should be illegal is open to interpretation.

Quite obviously Stars made spins lobbies, and were happy with the fact that ppl tell each other when to register to manipulate who they are sitting. This extended to spinwiz itself, and pokerstars I assure you must have thought about banning it. They haven't, and the lobby structure is not blind.

So if u want to get worried imagine this

U have a guy who has played 15000 spins , he has written notes on all players + stats
he decides to sell those notes , wich means who buys them when the game starts will see many important info about players and how to beat them



Nobody talks about this




We are all worried with VERY IMPORTANT things lol





Digital world means this , ban everything and get relentlssy raped by BOTS or even the site because players CANT TRACK STATS and see if they are being stolen

or

authorize decent programs WICH HAVE RISKS like all things in life and lose to the best players


Your choice


ofc u can go to the casino thinking they are really honest and theres no corrutpion there
nobody swaps information , cards arent marked , theres no collusion...


right.... gl

How can u say this with a straight face? There is no way staking groups wouldn't share their sit/avoid lists.

Adding this feature would give groups who work together the edge, and much more incentive to actively collude (completely undetectable- they could all say they decided to have the same sit list on their own) lol.

Meanwhile there are already sites selling spin and go HHs...

Exactly! You see my tarp is designed to show that there is only one reasonable answer:

* a zoom-like genuinely blind registration process that could not be manipulated by third party s/w as I outlined earlier (+ I have had feedback that list of players in registration pool (as in Zoom cash) should be blind as in today's Spin&Go lobby, but showing only number of players in queue).

It would be folly to expect SpinWiz or individual players with collusive conflicts of interest to follow game integrity rules unless they are forced to.

SpinWiz didn't conveniently forget to follow the game integrity rules. It was way too tempting to bother when they could get away with it. Self-regulation never works as self-interest always overrides the greater good.

But the sad cost will be the death of the Spin&Go games unless Pokerstars steps in to ensure game integrity.

there's a simple way to avoid timing tells, and most software users use it already - it's called playing enough tables that you autotimebank every single hand

No response from Pokerstars? Says 10 days in OP but can't find another post from any of the reps about this.

There isn't one to find.

At this point it would be helpful for stars to come on and either confirm that they want this discussion to continue longer or if they've heard enough.

Well I think a high rake, high variance, 3 seated, short stacked, hyper turbo format like the Sits has considerably more incentive for collusion that "6 max" but hey ho, let's ignore that for now...you show me the dedcated 6 max collusion tool and I will happily condemn it.

If you are right and 6 max has more cheating - well yeah, and your point is? What relevance does his have to Spins collusion software?

If you really want to stick to your second claim, that inefficient, non software assisted cheating can happen even without sophisticated (approved) cheat software and so claim this DOH point has some relevance to the ban/not ban decision on the cheat software would you care to follow through and expain your point in full. Is it stuff happens let's not worry about the tools used to do it, is it don't worry rape will happen or is it just a general plea on behalf of lazy rapists to let them keep ther tools?

It's not the death of spins just yet lol. Currently you can beat the games at any level without spinwiz anyway.

I still see nothing wrong with this sort of seating software. Imo stars created the format thinking about how regs will grind it. If they wanted blind lobbies they would have made blind lobbies. Spinwiz does not create collusion in the form of sharing sitlists, the players do. All spinwiz does is make registration easier.

Stars can take your suggestion into account and make a decision (I suspect they already have by not implementing it).

..........

I was trying to disconnect spinwiz etc with in game collusion. You said that people would sit together using spinwiz- but I say it's way easier without it.

You say spinwiz encourages in game collusion- I say no and the incentive is not even there for colluders to tackle this variant on stars.

You keep bringing up points that are completely irrelevant to the discussion. Either talk about what registration software would be fair, or talk about how to tackle collusion. Don't make everything out to be the same thing.

If a cheater uses a HUD when he plays poker he can improve his success rate.

If a 2 cheaters use spinwiz- they will be able to do it more efficiently.

But what does not happen is that people who use spinwiz are more likely to cheat.

And anyway- this is a completely different issue, and stars has ways of dealing with collusion in spins, sngs, cash or any other format.

Sorry, are you only just catching up that most of it is core HEM stuff but customised, repackaged and sold to lazy regs? Are you still only just getting that the tools that can bu used on legal data are also essential tools for data cheats? - Conveniently they make the data cheating as easy as possible :-)

This might be why the cre tracking HUD cooperating with the site is the only way to police datamining and in gae data abuse.....

You mean apart from being irritating as **** and destroying poker for anybody who is not playing roughly 2 more tables than he has time to deal with, you know the recs, the customers, your clients, the people paying your bills?

No apart from killing poker and reducing your income medium and lng term I can't think of anything against it, well you asking the question suggests that incipient paranoia is not the realm of rigtard recs after all it has a home in the reg camp too, you may want to let your counsellor know o that you can discuss it.

+1
boy the notecaddy guy's are so so desperate to keep their cheating software.

IT'S GOING TO BE BANNED GUY'S, I SUGGEST YOU SPEND MORE TIME LEARNING HOW TO WIN WITHOUT ALL THE SOFTWARE AND LESS TIME POSTING ITT

Have regs been awarded the poker equivalent of a Darwin Award yet?

If you're top of the food chain, it's a fundamental evolutionary mistake to welcome the introduction of a destabilizing rival that possesses superior intelligence. By welcoming AI/robot technology into your games, you're helping to kill the prey (fish) you rely on to feed and clothe you. Ultimately, you're killing yourselves. That's not very clever really, is it?

Better if every "approved" app being used by a player is declared o the client and displayed for all to see like mobile and tablet users (non hud) are highlighted in the client :-)

Each app can have a brief cliffs style video associated with it to tell everyone what their opponent is using. After all, its approved, why hide it?

The best form of collusion is

Skype group
% of profits
payments throught netteller
some rules

This is harder to trace and if the group has 50-100 players they will be effectivnly colluding

U DONT NEED SOFTWARE (except for pt4 ir hm2)

GROUP WILL SHARE NOTES (This means 1 member enters the game and he knows yr game inside out)

People want to be raped by BOTS and collusion my conclusion after reading some posts

Interesting post

I play diff formats for the last 6 years

IMO although this varies because of formats etcetc i would say only 15-20%
of what u win is because of the more advanced software

I dont have reliable data to support this but my experience only

80% is done with note taking (writting notes when u play) and a simple hud

It is naive to think there will be a big change is theres a massive ban of softw people will adapt , ideas will come
the big risk is that massive ban opens the doors to other problems

so in order to in theory save 20% of losses u risk probbly a new series of collusion and advanced bots that will make u lose 50-80% more

AND


all this software that allows for 20% edge is FREE FOR EVERYONE TO USE

this makes a big difference becayse u wont imagine collusion is happening or that u play against a BOT