If you click on a poster's name you will get a pop up and you can search old posts by that person.

We already had people outing names who they thought were bots with nothing to back it up in the old WPN forum and in this thread. With nothing really backing it up you just have people getting all paranoid for nothing. Now when they started posting stats of 15 players all with almost the same stats over large samples then it actually was worth something and it didn't throw innocents under the bus like with what is happening here. We've already seen to much silliness from this imo where there was nothing to back up speculation and that gets in the way of real data showing that there is cheating whether it's cash stats with bots or Crazy high ITM stats like from Sharkscope with the late registration glitch.

WPN didn't even bother replying to a report that me and other regs filled out about the most obvious case of collusion going on in regular speed SnG I've ever seen. The ecosystem in their SnG is unbearable. You have it all: collusion; games filled with house bots specially in off peak hours; less and less recreational players because of the happy hours and the bots that steal tons of money from the micros and make it very tough for recs to build a bankroll and climb stakes; Jackpots are filled with bots and those bots are capped to the $125 tier to not attract too much attention from regulars. Other than that the customer support is non existent. WPN in its actual state is a disgrace for poker.

Do you have evidence of this?

How can I have evidence of such thing sir? But how do you explain that WPN keeps allowing those accounts in their games after so many reports? Because of the rake they generate alone? The other day, 5 PokerKing accounts dc'd at same time, all of them alleged eastern europe bots.

Ah, silly me, thinking you might have evidence of something that you stated as fact.

has there been any tldr resolutions posted?

Here's an example from the cash games on WPN. The stats are basically clones.

another 170k in overlay yesterday. u think they would atleast lower the gtd to 750k lmao

Next Sunday is the last Million and they have lowered guarantees on most of the MTTs that have been overlaying. I'm guessing they will most likely bring it back in the fall when numbers go up after the summer drop off.

Bobo I just am genuinely curious, what you think of this?

Those are absolutely bots. There is no way you can definitively say they are "house bots" without insider information. Regardless of who runs these bots, the fact that they are even allowed to play that many hands without being removed, even after complaints, is ridiculous. Accounts so obviously caught botting should be removed immediately. WPN rightfully deserves criticism for their piss poor handling of bots over the years.

Why would you want my opinion? I've got no expertise on bots. But here's someone whose opinion should be of more interest:

I assume the reason you're asking me is related to what I bolded. I'm really not sure why my question to mysticriver drew any interest beyond his fully expected answer. "House bot" is a very specific (and serious) accusation that would probably require some insider evidence to prove, and thus shouldn't make lightly.

I think it's a shame when threads about serious matters get bogged down by unsubstantiated accusations, and that's something I'll always call out.

I realize house bots and the accusation of is a greater evil than non house bots for obvious reasons, but they are still both completely unacceptable...and if the house is letting obvious random bots exist, I wouldnt be surprised if they have some of their own.

Thanks Bobo!

I'm no expert either as I've never been on the other side(a bot user) and haven't seen their inner workings. I'm just very familiar with tracking the type of bots shown in that screenshot, checking the bot forums, and dealing with websites unwilling to be proactive with the botting issue.

While sites appearing to allow bots strengthens the argument that they may be house bots, it doesn't make it a fact. Without evidence it should not be stated as a fact. If you have suspicions that something is wrong it's ok to ask others what they think, but people should refrain from making accusations without evidence.

This doesn't make their inaction ok. Let's criticize them for the things we know they're doing wrong and see if we can get them to improve those issues. When we start accusing them of stuff that we "feel" or "think" they're doing wrong, without evidence, it takes the focus away from the things we know they're doing wrong.

It's also a good idea to give them some props when they do the right things. Are they still issuing refunds for being cheated? I thought that was very encouraging news when we started to hear about those.

I'd say it's more likely just negligence than house bots. Their support is known to be braindead.


I could see maybe a smaller site using house bots but WPN is a size now that house bots could only hurt them more than help them.

I'm not proud and I apologize for stating it as a fact, I should know better. Of course, no one can say anything for sure without some kind of insider information to back it up. But I stand by everything else I said. Why banning those accounts is such a huge deal for them? Why bots are such a big taboo for them? WPN has a great oportunity to come out of the shadows and prove a lot of people wrong. And believe me, if that happens no one would be happier than me.

You're confusing the words evidence and proof. Assuming it is a rational and logical thought or suspicion, then those thoughts and suspicions can themselves be evidence. There are a million things that can be used as evidence that WPN uses house bots. There is a reason that both words exist in the english language. The fact that something is not proof, doesn't mean that it is not evidence. And before it gets mentioned, this isn't an American court of law, there is nothing wrong with chatting about even the weakest of circumstantial evidence on a public poker forum.

I don't know about you, but it doesn't require 100% of my focus to know and understand the things that WPN does wrong. I have plenty of focus left over to speculate with. And now that you mention it, their years worth of inaction could itself be evidence that they use house bots.

Ffs, you speak of them as if they were an 18 month old child learning to go potty in the big boy potty. They allowed cheaters to steal money from people for years on end and now you want those same people to praise them because they finally decided to return a small fraction of that stolen money to a small fraction of those people?

No, I see it differently, I see the refunds as a diversion, designed to distract everyone from the possibility that WPN is using house bots. Do you believe that it's simply coincidence that for years bots stole money from people while WPN ignored and even belittled complaints while never returning anything, but as soon as people started talking about house bots, instantly, some refunds were issued? Yes, even the refunds could be evidence that WPN is using house bots.

PS: For the record, no, I don't believe that WPN uses house bots. In fact, I don't even care if the bots on WPN are house bots or not. That has nothing to do with my current opinion of WPN. What I do believe is that WPN has been extremely negligent for far too long. It has gotten to the point where I do absolutely believe that at the very least they knowingly ignored the botting problem on their network for years. And from my perspective, the result of them knowing the botting problem exists and doing nothing, is exactly the same as the result of them using house bots.

I also believe that similar things can be said for the way they've handled software problems, as well as a variety of other cheating problems on their network. They never did anything, they ignored every complaint, they ignored all of the evidence, they even designed their hand histories to make cheating easier while simultaneously making the proof of cheating nearly impossible. They simply did not care the slightest bit about their honest customers having their money stolen. So forgive me, but there is zero chance that I now praise them for taking years to finally decide to do the absolute minimum.

wow thats about as obvious as it gets. what stakes are these players on?

I think it was somewhere between 10-50 nl or plo. I can't remember. It was posted in the old WPN forum 6 months or so ago. There were bot threads for nl and plo cash as well as sngs. I think both cash game threads had screen shots like that.

those ones were from 25nl IIRC


few more obvious ones posted throughout this thread too

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...-bots-1696587/

this so hard. wonderfully put. awareness on these topics is the idea. if it's able to reasonably enter our heads as something they could be up to, then why are people so anti mentioning it? stating it as fact is wrong, but count me in the camp of if you think something is up, please do share

For the most part, I agree. The problem is that there are, there have been, and there will always be so many tin foil hat nutjobs posting so many random nonsense things that it's very unreasonable to expect people to disprove what someone else claims to be true. I'm certainly not saying that we should be giving credit or wasting our thoughts trying to argue against every random new account that appears here with the same ol' same ol' conspiracy theory nonsense.

However, when someone like Joe Ingram publicly states that his intuition leads him to believe that he's facing superusers, or some other sort of similar cheat that he can't explain, ...then imo, that is evidence, solid evidence imo.

Joe has played for several years. Joe has been through all of the ups and all of the downs associated with playing internet poker. Joe knows what to expect from variance. Joe has been one outered so many times that he can't possibly keep count. Joe has tilted away thousands of dollars. He's done it all. He knows what each of these things feels like as they happen and after they've happened. He knows when something was a mistake on his part. He knows when his opponent simply did something better than he did it. He knows when things were just short term luck. He's been through it all many many times. So when something else happens, something that doesn't fit into any of these types of categories, then there is something wrong. It could be his perception, or it could be someone cheating. Given his experience and his success over the years, I tend to believe that his perception should be pretty damn good, so I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume his intuition is accurate until proven otherwise.

Especially in today's environment for American poker players, where you really can't prove anything because the sites either produce no hand histories at all, or they produce a worthless hand history that makes it virtually impossible to prove anything, or the sites are anonymous which makes it absolutely impossible to prove anything. It's as if all of these sites were designed by cheaters, for cheaters.

The intuition of players like Joe is the best evidence that we can possibly have in this environment. I don't care about most people's intuition on these matters, but I'll gladly listen to someone that's been studying, working and grinding for as long as Joe. The fact that he faces such cynicism for stating these beliefs absolutely mystifies me. He should be more trusted, more praised, more thanked. Instead we're asked to praise WPN and Joe's asked to prove things that can't be proven. It's all backwards imo.

Yes, while it may have been prudent initially (years ago) to give WPN the "benefit of the doubt" on these issues, it has become clear that they deserve no benefit of the doubt at this time.

So expecting/demanding proof or mountains of incontrovertible evidence is no longer an appropriate standard at this time.

Sure, wild speculation can be annoying and counter-productive. But speculative views can also provide useful guidance to other players and to the sites themselves.

This seems to be where we are.

I appreciate your point of view. I have no intention or desire to defend WPN. Overall I agree with most of your points and I still feel good about the points I made. If you're ok with others posting more liberal accusations and want to take a more hardline stance against WPN that is fine by me. I feel slightly differently, but not enough to argue. You clearly have stronger feelings on the subject.