OK

It appears to be quite the conundrum.

great news!

Hello Steve,

Does that also apply for Full Tilt Poker?

I think this is a bad decision... How will you solve the problem, if someone uses a second computer? Maybe the tool of Skier... I think the difference between scam and not scam would now bigger....bye bye pokerstars...

There are so many opportunities for scam. What is, if someone writes a program/script which sent the hand history automatically instand from one computer to another computer . And on the second computer, there is analyzing tool...? The difference between scam and not scam would bigger.....

Stars go further please. Ban ALL software including huds. Make poker pure again.

+1... or have a hud built into the software

Bigger difference makes cheaters stand out more and easier to detect for stat experts like Schwein
Some will always find way to cheat, e.g. via screen scraping methods or voice controlled app for in game advices... but a locked down PS client would make many methods of cheating and botting much much harder and give online poker back some time.

I honestly would prefer that no one uses charts, but on some levels (charts including preflop stack depth) it is impossible to enforce and it is completely unfair to anyone following the rules.

Please only implement rules that you can actually enforce or it only makes the situation worse. Edges at high stakes are extremely thin and this rule simply rewards players not following the rules and hurts honest players.

You made the best decision under the circumstances.
I like the fact that you mentioned/warned that there will be further restrictions on 3rd party tools in the future, eventually most tools will have to go but you can't just do that overnight.

So after all that the original changes will be implemented but at some point in the next few years further changes may follow.

Opportunity missed.

exactly this

Just make a list of allowed software and anything that is not on the list is banned, so if a new software comes out the developers will have to contact you to get it added to the list if you think is within the T&C

What you did, is just calm the communty... now no-software users feel that they have win, while the outcome is much worse... cheaters are going to cheat more.
If you want to ban something, make sure you can enforce it. I'm really interested how you are going to enforce Skier's software

I don't see enforceability as an issue. Once software has been deemed bad for the game, a ban will cause fewer people to use it, and that in itself is a good result.

You can't enforce a ban on the generic category of voice-activated software: one can simply run it on a second computer where it is technically impossible to detect it.

I expect Pokerstars is instead planning to enforce the software usage ban by banning players who exhibit near identical stats for a subset of the game (eg pre-flop shoves/calls in HUSNGs) as a result of inferred use of known banned voice-activated software.

Yes, I imagine that's exactly how they're gonna do it. That's how they detect cheaters in chess too - statistical analysis. Yeah, I know, poker is not chess etc, but the point stands - a statistical analysis can detect if a player is playing bot-like, period.

So to whoever intends on using this kind of programs on a second computer - good luck trying to convince PS that you just have some kind of freak superhuman memory when they ban your ass after they see that pattern in your game.

GG PS, heading into the right direction. The first step is always is hardest.

I agree completely. This move is just putting cheaters at an even bigger advantage.

And if the software happens to not be known and is used by one person? How do you propose they police that?

so basically at this moment, nothing change except skyer's program is not allowed anymore. All other programs are ok while giving time to adjust for s/w suppliers?

As predicted - this is largely a holding statement. The mess is just too big for solving in a week or two.

I know you do not want to add more Steve but in your discussions with third party provders will you be looking at how to

• verify data used by approved apps?
• restrict dynamic elements within HUDs (different data for different players based upon the player data)?
• get approved apps to sign up to social reponsibility(anti cheating) conditions
• co-operate/liase with regulators (primarily the UKGC)?
• explore UKGC software supplier licencing for approved third party suppliers?

In addition will we have greater clarity on the relationship between Stars and approved suppliers, ie technical support provided, payments made by either party, development deals for future products (like Zoom, launched with a HUD)?

Without a bit more detail it bolis down to - we have changed our mind on Skier's software (because it is effective and pissed off a cartel) but have chosen to completely ignore that SpinWiz is a tool designed for cheating.

no way to police that, but damage will be reduced by factor n with only one person using it instead a group of n persons i guess

Well no, you simply have to show them a picture, or send them a copy of the hard-copy you have in a ring binder. Or are printed charts easily accessible (see PS Team Pro blog pic earlier up thread) now also banned? We have no idea, of course.

And what if you do indeed have a freak memory? Or don't, yet have learned how to play by rote over many many hours of training? Should you also be banned? Simply for playing "too good" ?

This is a mess, and if ever there was a perfect example of a rule made for selective enforcement this is it.

That is possible, but it is also possible that said cheaters will make an effort to make their charts different enough so that they may escape detection. It's also possible that the individuals who are using charts to cheat will thrive and thus a large portion of the player pool that survives will be using charts as well. Let's not forget that in the case where charts are allowed, everyone can use them and this alone can mitigate 'damage' since there are charts publicly available which provide a very robust preflop strategy. In the case of creating a very restrictive chart rule, the gap between non cheaters and cheaters will be much wider, and also the gap between professionals who have a solid grasp on their preflop strategy and part time players who do not have the same amount of time at their disposal to study their preflop strategy will be even bigger. This gap narrows should the part time players be allowed to use some charts.

Kinda seems like we're (implicitly) heading towards a situation where it's like, 'You can make your own software, up to and including a bot, but just don't share it with anyone or run it on multiple accounts.'

+1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_enforcement

I really think it's more constructive to not use absurd made up examples as a form of counter-argument. There's nobody on this planet that can memorize that sort of dry-as-Sahara-desert info, tens of charts with different stack sizes for every conceivable situation, so I would ease off on the "what if you do have a freak memory" argument.

I agree that the subject of charts is a nasty one, but the point is to not let players use too much info that is simply dry as fk and not based on human poker logic.

See chess end game tables, for example - ALL chess positions with 7 or less pieces on the board (including kings) have been solved (Nalimov, Lomonosov tablebases), resulting in sequences of hundreds of moves in some cases, that no human can ever come up with, on his own. So the game is essentially solved for all positions with 7 pieces at most and this number (7) will continue to increase as computers become more and more powerful. But at that point that doesn't "feel" like chess anymore, although it's played with the same equipment and following the same rules. You don't really understand why a certain move is better than another one, as that end result is miles away, so to speak. The move simply is better than any other move, because the computer analyzed all possible scenarios and picked the best one.

The same goes for these damn charts - can anyone in the world actually explain why a push with 96o is +EV for 2.6-5.9 bbs and -EV outside that precise interval? I think it's obvious the example I gave is bs, I have no idea about the specific calculations, but I think my point is clear - it's info that drives specific action on your part, but the info is not based on human poker logic, but simulations and calculations that no human will ever be able to do on his own. Yes, I agree that with a lot of work and a lot of experience, players can develop that sense of knowing when it's better to push with 96o instead of folding, but the point is no human will EVER know what to do with all possible holdings in all possible effective stack situations, regardless of how much he works off the table and how much he plays. And he will come to a somewhat wrong (or not perfect) decision enough times that he still shows his humane nature, which is prone to error, unlike skier's program or a whiteboard fill with A4 sheets or a neatly organized binder or w/e. And I am convinced some sort of smart statistical analysis can detect if someone is using (or let's say abusing of) these sort of tools.