3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes
11-25-2015
, 03:51 PM
11-25-2015
, 03:52 PM
11-26-2015
, 07:25 AM
Hello all,
Just a few follow ups since last time:
We are not going to publish a list of players who are being caught using banned software. In our opinion, such a ‘Wall of Shame’ would not really be helpful in any meaningful way. There are also privacy issues that we have to take into consideration.
We continue to invest into building our Game Integrity team as it is both in our and the players best interest to offer fair and secure games. We are very confident in our capacity to catch bots and other banned software. A lot is happening that is not immediately visible to the players. For example, by a wide margin, most of the users that are caught using bots on PokerStars, are detected by our own methods and not by reports from players
In my post, I wrote:
The colour threshold restriction placed on HUDs is only applicable for the in-game retrieval of statistics based on a player’s historical play mid-session.
The statistics you mention fall under this category, since it is based on the player’s historical play. The same colour restrictions apply to this stat.
We are reviewing case by case and for non-bot software we will as usual warn players before taking more direct actions.
These are the kind of specific questions I was thinking of when I referred to questions that needed to be sent to support. The e-mail will be sent to our game integrity specialists, who have a lot more detailed experience with all the various types of software, and will be able to give you a lot better information than I can in this thread.
I think it would be a mistake to refer to specific numbers in these rules. The main thing is that we are trying to indicate that what you are not able to recall from memory should not be available to you through advanced charts.
This way, we can make a judgement call when we see what kind of tools the players come up with.
If we did refer to absolute values in the rules, I am pretty sure that players would find a way to get around them.
I think that what ‘makes sense’ is a matter of perspective, really. The number in the rules was chosen because we wanted to effectively restrict the HUDs from giving advice to the players during play. The colour coding is a way of reminding the user that he or she should make adjustments against a specific opponent, and can therefore be considered as giving advice.
Just a few follow ups since last time:
Quote:
Will there be any information released about catching people breaking these rules and the punishments they receive? Are we supposed to just blindly believe that the people with the most sophisticated software aren't using it undetected?
Millions of hands played by bots only caught when players themselves noticed they were suspicious doesn't give a lot of confidence in your ability to keep the games "fair".
Millions of hands played by bots only caught when players themselves noticed they were suspicious doesn't give a lot of confidence in your ability to keep the games "fair".
We continue to invest into building our Game Integrity team as it is both in our and the players best interest to offer fair and secure games. We are very confident in our capacity to catch bots and other banned software. A lot is happening that is not immediately visible to the players. For example, by a wide margin, most of the users that are caught using bots on PokerStars, are detected by our own methods and not by reports from players
The colour threshold restriction placed on HUDs is only applicable for the in-game retrieval of statistics based on a player’s historical play mid-session.
The statistics you mention fall under this category, since it is based on the player’s historical play. The same colour restrictions apply to this stat.
Quote:
Is displaying VPIP, PFR by player stacksize in SNGs permitted?
Is 3 colors for stats by stacksize permitted?
Is a different trigger point for color change for different stacksizes for say VPIP permitted (resulting in let's say 12 different trigger points for VPIP depending on stacksize)?
Specifically, is CoffeeHUD permitted?
Can you pls comment on the various stats in CoffeeHUD whether they are allowed 3 colors or not?
Is 3 colors for stats by stacksize permitted?
Is a different trigger point for color change for different stacksizes for say VPIP permitted (resulting in let's say 12 different trigger points for VPIP depending on stacksize)?
Specifically, is CoffeeHUD permitted?
Can you pls comment on the various stats in CoffeeHUD whether they are allowed 3 colors or not?
This way, we can make a judgement call when we see what kind of tools the players come up with.
If we did refer to absolute values in the rules, I am pretty sure that players would find a way to get around them.
Quote:
Would you please consider lifting that limit to at least 2 two raw-values thresholds. In the current model you cannot combine low and high end ranges into a single non-base color.
It does not make sense that you're able to do so with the base color but not with the other two colors.
As an example, please allow something like that.:
0-20, 81-100 = color1
21-40, 61-80 = color2
rest = base-color
It does not make sense that you're able to do so with the base color but not with the other two colors.
As an example, please allow something like that.:
0-20, 81-100 = color1
21-40, 61-80 = color2
rest = base-color
11-26-2015
, 07:37 AM
11-27-2015
, 09:38 AM
Quote:
Hello all,
Just a few follow ups since last time:
We are not going to publish a list of players who are being caught using banned software. In our opinion, such a ‘Wall of Shame’ would not really be helpful in any meaningful way. There are also privacy issues that we have to take into consideration.
We continue to invest into building our Game Integrity team as it is both in our and the players best interest to offer fair and secure games. We are very confident in our capacity to catch bots and other banned software. A lot is happening that is not immediately visible to the players. For example, by a wide margin, most of the users that are caught using bots on PokerStars, are detected by our own methods and not by reports from players
Just a few follow ups since last time:
We are not going to publish a list of players who are being caught using banned software. In our opinion, such a ‘Wall of Shame’ would not really be helpful in any meaningful way. There are also privacy issues that we have to take into consideration.
We continue to invest into building our Game Integrity team as it is both in our and the players best interest to offer fair and secure games. We are very confident in our capacity to catch bots and other banned software. A lot is happening that is not immediately visible to the players. For example, by a wide margin, most of the users that are caught using bots on PokerStars, are detected by our own methods and not by reports from players
Phrases like "we are confident", "a lot is happening" and "bots are detected by our own methods" sound great but you need facts to back this up and build confidence.
Here's an example of how Banks report fraud - something similar from Pokerstars would be much appreciated. Btw, when card fraud occurs in the banking system, Banks almost always cover the cost of the fraud to the victim, regardless of whether Banks's have been able to recover the cost from the perpertrator....
