lmfao youre an idiot

lmfao another rec with no arguments.

yes im a rec who plays poker for a living. if you honestly believe that the people who are saying NC is bad is 5/6 "recs" itt, then you are well and truly an idiot

Yes, NC will have to be changed to be compliant. PS Steve already said that himself in the op.

"• NoteCaddy as is would require changes."

In the end, NC wont be like it is today and thats the point isnt it. Hopefully NC gets chopped to being a glorified HUD.

But lets just wait and see what PS announces and what they require NC to revamp. As for you saying for both sides getting something... that doesnt makes sense at all. Whats right is right, it isnt a negotiation. Also just because PS doesnt chop software aids hard doesnt mean its not wrong. As you said PS is a business looking at its self interest. Rake is how PS profits and software allows mass multi tabling. they will decide whats in its best self interest which will obviously allow software with conditions. That doesnt make it right/fair though; the world goes. life isnt fair is it?

But lets play what if scenario. If no other factors mattered, like PS only profited by subscription and no rake. PS without a doubt would chop software as there are more recs than regs to keep the games going.

I think people have started to cool off, so I don't see any reason to restart those flame wars Since pretty much everything has been said, resaid and reasoned by both parties. It's obvious the nerfing of super tools is not supported just by "5/6 recs" and PS can see that clearly. Chill pills for everyone!

THIS!!!!

Now you are speaking in the name of Steve from PS and making him lie...Unfortunately, you forgot a few words he said :


Please STOP to try to manipulate people with all your lies.

Not participating in visionary what-if talks. I like to quote in this context the former German chancellor Helmut Schmidt:

This could be because of the VIP system but it also could be because WPN allows internationals. Same with Chico, it could be the high rakeback but it could also be the international players.

Pure american sites are always extremely soft no matter the VIP system. Party nj, WSOP NJ, WSOP NV, Bovada, Merge

It's pretty much the same in Italy and france. No matter the VIP system, if other euros (german/swedes/russian etc) can get on the network, the games suck. If they cant they are amazing.

Canada, USA, France and Italian networks band together with only basic HEM and PT4 and online poker is saved for poker pros.

edit: thinking of it there's skypoker in UK that's also extremely soft. Any site that doesnt allow swedes/russians/germans/eastern euros is amazing.

It's not rocket-science to conclude that ringfenced pools with players from countries with high disposable incomes will be softer.

Btw, are you not one of those calling for a ban of NoteCaddy? Because you care sooooo sooo much about the future health of the game? You care about your bottom line, that's all!

Im calling for a ban on everyone earning from poker players.
Affiliates, script makers, poker tools.

As one of the 5/6 recs who give a stuff enough to post here please consider how you might get a reunited US player pool, never mind a global pool again.

We have three states that let US players play poker online.

Oh look, Nevada, bans HUDs and tracking and data on hands, New Jersey let's it happen.

Now if you want shared pools that means shared rules on this. NJ/Nevada - nah, unless the shared pool always goes for the maximum restriction. If you want some s/w take the compromise hit, otherwise every regulator adds to the restrictions for a shared player pool. Yo can have compromise or you can have the most restricted regime dictating for the whole pool. Your choice.

LOL, you are calling for a ban of tools which you don't use because you expect to improve your position in the food chain. Nothing wrong with that, just pointing out your reasoning.

I use those tools quite a lot. I don't need them to win though. Removing them will make the games more fun for me and the recs.
Those that NEED those tools will move down 2 to 5 limits when they are gone.
Almost every winning player that wants the tools removed are good winners and almost every guy for these tools are small winners. There's a patern. Find it.

i don't think it's that simple. All decisions are a matter of trade-offs. While the ability of the PLO bot ring to continue operating for so long is a worrisome development, does Pokerstars not have a decent track record in this department? I thought I read somewhere that Pokerstars claimed to catch 95% of bots on their own. If that is true, then the impact of removing players' ability to catch bots may not be that high. Sure some money will be taken out of the game by that 5%, but how much is taken out by people cheating with datamined data or population tendencies? I reckon it could easily be an order of magnitude more than that 5% of bots take out of the game. Consider team Cardrunners vs Isildur. How much extra money did those guys alone win by sharing data? Data and population tendency cheating is done at a massive scale. The sheer frequency of it could dwarf the money made my bots.

How do you determine the percentage of an unknown number? Do you expect Stars to say: "Hey, no clue, maybe we catch 20%, maybe 80 or 95". 95% sounds good and is pure PR. To state "We catch xy percent of all bots" is utter nonsense as it would require to know the number of bots.

Yeah, I agree. The MTT point is especially good.


That's a great point and better imo.

I don't mind that either, but was offering it up as an option as in case Pokerstars believes some formats receive benefits from a lifetime screen name. I would argue that in MTTs sample sizes are lower (and more situations unique even at similar stack depths) and it's harder to control who you play with as well.

I believe that of the bots caught, they were saying 95% were caught by Pokerstars without player intervention. I agree that it's unknowable how many bots are actually caught compared to how many there are total. However, since the uncaught bots are operating in both scenarios {lifetime screen name, anonymous} their existence has no impact on the decision between the two.

That's not the point. Point is out of the total number of cheaters caught, 95% of the cases were caught by PokerStars. At least that is what they claim. Only 5% are from ones such as the current scandal brought about from the players.

Both of you are right

Nailed it. Hard.

The following is surely the post of a genius!

Pokerstars - please, please listen to the considered thinking of an extremely clever man, and not just, without disrespect, to the emotionally inspired clatter of the crowd:

And yet that 5% could have taken millions out of the game. And that's only the ones we know about...

No, it's complete nonsense. Read the whole thread and if you know some mid- to high-stakes REGs you'll see that this statement is nonsense. And don't tell me that those people only play these stakes because they have NoteCaddy

its a stars quote. i remember claim being 90-95% (ish). obv not a meaningful number in isolation.