So to be sure I got it right, they have banned you without any prior warnings and they did not even explain what was the reasoning (to me "catering recreational players explains nothing")?

Did you use some kind of possibly forbidden software?

No warning, only software i used was hem2 (not even a script)

While I do agree there are bots at BOL, many of the guys on Tigergaming accused of being bots are just ROW grinders trying to make ends meat and mass tabling pros that put in lots of hours. Since Tigergaming is for the Rest of the World, clearly they will be much better than their BOL and Sportsbetting.ag United States counterparts. ROW players in general are just much better than USA players.

There are, of course good USA players on there too. But almost ALL of the fish come from BOL and Sportsbetting.ag.

PanamonCreel22. He's apparently a scammer too or so this website seems to indicate. http://matthewcloepfilisatheif.com/

I don't know how they come up with this stuff. I got banned at Merge because I had a 7bb/100 winrate at only 200nl and 400nl. Never played heads up tables either.

There were guys that played twice as many hands than me that clearly weren't banned, at a similar or high winrates: Flapus, RayAllen, GiveMeHeads, SmellyCat come to mind. Maybe those guys got banned now, but for a while I bet they were just printing money because all of the other regs got banned.

I know so as this was back in the PTR days.

I have a 10bb/100 WR this year in about 100k hands, but wasn't much above break even most of last year. I'm afraid this might happen to me at BOL like it did at Carbon/Merge just because I'm running hot.

Has this happened to any Americans on BOL and Sportsbetting.ag skins or just Tiger?

All answered above apart from format, mostly 6m and some fr (nlhe).

I'm very aware of the dynamic of ROW players to US players who play on the network. I can tell the difference between a multitabling rakeback reg who plays all of the time and a bot account. The multitabling regs actually play way more tables at one time than the bots currently do. While I used to witness bot accounts on 10 tables regularly, it is now rare to see them on more than 6 tables at once these days. I don't know if this is a limitation in their botware or if they've been advised to do this as to not draw attention to their volume.

What you said is true, but what I'm saying about the 25-100nl cash game bots primarily being found to play on TigerGaming is also true. If you doubt anything I say I'm willing to provide evidence to back it up.

I'm sure other regulars of this thread could vouch for the accuracy of my information relating to the bots on this network. I've shared my list with several people in here and have probably convinced more than a few who were skeptical about my claims.

Oh, I believe you. I think there is a problem. But it's almost to the point where I believe it is starting to get overstated (at least the narrative on two plus two). Unfortunately every site nowadays has bots, and it is frustrating because all they should have to do is frequently update their software to annoy the bots & make them update their program.

I don't play below 100NL so I guess it could be more problematic at lower stakes. Games sure have seemed juicy this year to me, with less players I assume that could be bots. My hope is they have cracked down on some of them, some of the familiar names that are likely nit bots seem to be diminished to some degree.

I don't track any nit bots. If there is nit bots they are not of high concern to me at this time. They certainly aren't very common in the games I play. I know this was a much more common bot type in the past. I'm much more concerned about these loose and very agressive bots with advanced strategies.

You say the problem is overstated and that may be true of the mid-high stakes games. I don't track bots in games that I don't play so I will trust what you say to be true.

I don't exaggerate my numbers in 25-100nl cash games. I know of nearly 50 active bots. I've seen several more come and go. If there's nearly 50 confirmed by me in those 3 stakes of nlhe cash games then how many are there in total at all game formats?

I completely disagree that the problem is overstated. In talking with other regs I've realized a very small amount are aware of how rampant the issue actually is even if they know that bots exist. Recreational players are completely oblivious.

The issue is not understated, BW.
At 400nl+ the bots thin out, but assuming you're playing 200nl from what you said above, there are multiple bots that spawn numerous tables during their hours online, and they cover almost the entire 24 hour cycle between them. They're lifting a good chunk of money off the tables.

This is the case imo and I think the simple solution outlined above is the direction sites should take. Constantly changing the code in one way or another on a very regular basis is what seems to give them the most trouble because they have to update every time. I understand it may be an annoyance to most players (when table sizes stop working, etc.) but it certainly makes life harder on bots.

True but imo they're specialist. That's weird to say about a bot but I get the feeling a lot of accounts are there for that very reason. Playing off-hour sessions, I constantly run into players that I think are bots just trying to get heads up action at 6max, 9max tables. I honestly have no idea off the top of my head how to stop them when its so obvious to sites they have no intention to play ring. They abuse the 6max & 9max tables only to play 3 handed or less when there are clearly tables to fill. It's probably a contrarian opinion but I prefer closing tables with open sitters when there are tables at that stake that have seats to fill.

I agree with you and BW that a slight software change would be an annoying way that may work in deterring bots. I honestly doubt measures that drastic are even necessary. I would be surprised if there isn't more efficient methods available to sites that wish to be proactive.

The problem is obviously the sites' desire to deter them. I regularly provide BetOnline support with my bot lists and they have never reached out to me or asked for more information. They are unwilling to provide you with any information when you try to follow up. Bots I've told them about a year ago are still active to this day.

The solution to this problem in a technical sense isn't all that difficult for these sites. How to get these sites to be proactive with this issue is the real problem that we need a solution to.

We're assuming they actually want to get rid of the bots, which is obviously a false assumption. They've already shown that they can ban people whenever they feel like it without even giving a reason. If they cared, they could have banned some of the bots long ago under their "fair, fun, ethical play" BS and been done with them. The ones at 50/100 PLO are beyond obvious for example and I'm sure have been brought up to support multiple times.

As was mentioned, they probably have a soft agreement with the site. I.E. don't play super long sessions that will draw attention, don't win the cash rake leaderboards (usually they finish anywhere from 3rd-10th but never win), don't play more than 4-5 tables, etc. All these are meant not to draw too much attention, I guess from the casual player b/c at this point any long-term reg already knows who they are.

The bolded seems like a bit of a reach. I think the botmakers follow the rules you listed on their own to avoid drawing lots of attention. I think it's a mix of BOL just doesn't care and not enough players are complaining about it. Having someone like kahntrutahn making them aware of the issue might help as well.

Unfortunately I think this is a lost cause. If BOL does ban any of the bots (unlikely), they will just make new ones. Rinse..repeat. I guess confiscating all of the money in their accounts is nice, but BOL would just keep it all anyways.

Yeeeeeeeeessss, that was his name! He was so insanely bad. When I played him (I was GermanyWonWWII, idk if we played) it was on the 6max tables because there were no HU tables anymore. Good times.

Ontopic: I have a pretty high winrate too and am now ****ting my pants everytime I get an E-Mail from Tigergaming.

Chico no longer accepting australians

Did Australia pass some kind of law in the last month? Are gambling laws there more restrictive than US laws?

Back in August; I think it took effect in September:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...poker-1366296/

In this case, I believe so.

Thanks for the info Bobo. I recall hearing about that, but I wonder why, if it went into effect in September, it is just now being enforced by the site more than 6 months later? I just assumed they were dismissing the law since Australians continued to play there. What changed this week?

i got the same email today too

This could explain pontylad's banning. Are u in Australia ponty?

My account has also been locked with around 20k in there - I am from Australia. Have you guys been given option to at least withdraw?? I havent received email yet..

Surely they can't confiscate funds if they've just decided they aren't accepting Australians?

Yes, however the 2 other players i know of are not from Australia, so this isn't just an Australia thing.

they won't. I was locked out of my account too, had to get the withdrawal processed manually through support, took about 48 hours.

I've been banned as well, received emails just now. No explanation, but I too am Australian. Tiger and Betonline sent me the exact same email at almost the same time.

spoke to customer services, they are no longer accepting Aussies as mentioned and arr reopening account for 24 hours so I can withdraw. Any of you guys with funds I recommend calling CS. Very annoying.

Any other good sites for Australians that offer Omaha games?