I did not say it is a sure fire 100% way to indict someone. You are twisting my words. You have to look for evidence. This CAN (as in possibly, may be) be the same person botting across poker rooms. It also may not as well.

If you understand how bots work, all use Optical Character Recognition and they all have a delay in their actions to identify the actions taken, run through their code, then move the cursor and respond.

If you watch a bot play you would know that this all takes several seconds for a standard plug and play type bot. It will usually take the same exact amount of time.

So if a player is playing and the shot clock comes on and winds down to 8 or 7 for instance, on a very consistent basis then that is a possible bit more of evidence.

If you've played with a player and witnessed them get angry in the chat box after a beat, especially if they are regularly chatty then notice they are handling beats well and not talking at all in the chat box that may be a user who plays and bots. Possible evidence.

All of this is speculative but it's what you look for because ZERO bots will react instantly, chat, go on tilt, etc. One player's name being accused of being a bot on another site and being on a site you play on and you noticed the name AND every other possible sign then they MIGHT be a bot. It's not a 100% certainty but it is a possibility.

There are other things the poker rooms can do to confirm but as a player watching out for bots these are the only things you could see that would be consistent for bots across the board.

The problem is, everything you've posted is speculative except the names being the same. Can you take a video the next time you play with a suspected bot (or bots), showing that they take the exact same amount of time on every single action? That would go a long way towards proving your theory. People naming themselves after someone famous, or tilting off in chat after a beat, does nothing to prove your theory.

Plus they could easily find someone willing to run a bot from NJ, NE or DE and split the profits.

Anything about suspecting a bot is speculative. lol. Any type of accusation about anything in life is speculative. You look for more evidence but the speculative stuff is the starting point. I didn't say it is a conviction. I said SUSPECTED bots. Not "these people are 100% bots".

its funny with some of the content in this thread right now that my posts are the ones getting deleted...

loz maybe do yourself a favor and drop it

Don't you love it when someone comes into a thread and starts giving orders.

While we can discuss bots on 2p2, will will not allow back links to their sites.

Folks with half a brain know how to use Google and find stuff on their own without connecting 2p2 to them.

It's 3:00 AM and I put my name on the waiting list for the only three games going at my preferred stakes. I'm first up for all three games. I get into two of the games fairly quickly. After a bit, I go to the lobby to make sure I'm still up for the third game and now I'm 4th on the list. This is not an isolated incident. It happens all the time.

Am I the only one?

hover your cursor over the chips in the middle and it will show the rake

I didn't know that and it works. Thanks.

Yeah wait lists are buggy on WSOP.com, in addition to this itll do a bug where it pulls up the table, tells you its your turn to sit down, but won't let you sit at the table. At least it used to. I have been just playing MTTS for the past 6 months or so, but the bug I'm describing has/had been going on a LONG time

I just noticed a $500 tournament has a $33 rake. A $1000 tournament has a $50 rake.

Gimme a break.

Does it cost that much more money to administer a $500 tournament than it does a $1 tournament?

If you think the site makes sufficient revenues from the $1 tournaments it hosts, you're sorely mistaken. And it's the site strategy around total revenue and not its cost per tournament that dictates the rake.

Which legal regulated sites available in the United States charge less? Obviously none serving Nevada or Delaware, since they are only served by WSOP (NV) and 888 (DE). The unregulated, unstable, and potentially untrustworthy ACR charges $30 rake on its $500 mtts. The rake is $150 on the $2500 Venom.

^^ Agreed. This does not seem too unreasonable. Assume that someone deposits $1,000 to play that MTT. The processing fees will eat up about half, maybe a bit more, of that $50.

sooo more rake is better?

So the lowest rakes in the marketplace are better.

They aren't a charity. The tax is 17.5% in NJ and 6.75% in NV, so the theoretical tax is about $6 on $50 rake. The processing fee is probably around $30, but it could be more or less, depending on the method.

I estimate about $36 of that money disappears immediately to tax and processing. That's $14 towards operating expenses, and perhaps, profit.

It is a bit unfair that Nevada probably pays higher rake to account for the higher NJ tax, but there is no way around that if you want interstate online poker. They can't rake residents in one state one amount and those somewhere else another.

I've been a vocal critic of this site. However, this doesn't seem like something that is unfair at all to me.

Don't forget that a good % of that rake is being given back to players in the form of (healthy) rakeback--and a far higher % than Stars NJ

I didn't think about that. Also, any deposit bonus is 20% rakeback. If a player cracks 8% rakeback and has a deposit bonus, that covers the other theoretical $14.

yeah, all very good points ^^

Unless you're playing the highest stakes and long hours you're not going to clear an entire deposit bonus.

Also, shorthanded play, even with a capped rake, amounts to quite a bit of rake because you can get up to 100-200+ hands per hour. It's not unusual in a short-handed game for everyone to be losing with the only winner being the rake.

I'm trying to create an account from NJ. I receive the same error message for days now "Server not available".

Support is not replying, anyone a clue if the servers are actually down?

This post is so far off base in multiple ways. Just because you don't clear the deposit bonus doesn't mean it's not 20% rakeback. As long as you are playing under that bonus you are getting 20% extra rb. The amount of it you clear has no effect on that.

In addition to this I would be stunned to find a 6 max tables on WSOP nevada in which the rake was the winner. Do you even play on the site?

The bonus releases in increments. You don't have to clear the entire thing. Paying $50 in MTT rake would instantly release $10 of a pending bonus at WSOP.com. That equals 20% rakeback.

Thanks, you're correct, but my original point stands. You have to play in the highest stakes or long hours to clear an entire deposit bonus.

No. I just waste my time here talking about it in case I can ever work up a $25 bankroll to give it a shot.

I don't play 6-handed no-limit hold'em. It's polluted with "professionals", and for the most part, the games are not very appetizing. In fact, 6-handed caters to the pros and grinders. No thanks.

I would play $1/2 and $2.5/5 or even $5/10 occasionally if they spread it nine-handed, but they don't so forget about it.

I treat online poker like solitaire. It's something to do after I've finished for the day playing live or if I'm taking a day off from the casinos. There aren't enough states (players) to really make it all that interesting. There are very few (if any) limit games. Sit n go's are slow to load. I'm not interested in donkaments.

There are no stud games in town except for the very high mixed games, and that's too bad. Hold'em has become very boring.

That being said, I have been playing a lot of 7Stud and Stud8 online. There is a core group of players trying to get these games going. This means starting heads-up or short-handed, and on many occasions, (not always) there won't be any winners (or maybe one small winner) except for the rake. We play very fast. They cap the rake at 50¢ heads-up, but three and four-handed it's capped at $2.00. That's a lot, and it adds up very fast when you're playing 150+ hands an hour.

This alone is making me re-think this endeavor even though I would like to see these games fly.