dunno why u guys thought it would be a good idea to put the bot up against this guy

Machine is rake-free right?

one of the post above details the bot playing worst against bad players? does that mean it can differentiate between good/bad players or adjust to a user's playing style? i.e. make some calls it might not normally make

I think it plays worse at low stakes and better at high stakes. So if durrr played against it while set on a low stake and crossbooked huge vs the corporation then he got way the best of it

Gaming regs prohibit a game from using a different algorithm against dif players. Algorithm has to be fixed (read the NYT article linked ITT).

Something sneaky it DOES do -- and why some LHE players have sworn that it has leaks -- is occasionally play poorly on purpose. Or as the NYT article states:

IOW, yeah it has leaks. Except the "leaks" are built into the bot intentionally (a) so that it doesn't fleece opponents, esp rec players, too quickly, which it would if programmed to play at its strongest level 100% of the time, and (b) in order to convince opponents that it might be beatable in the long-term. They don't realize that the "leak" is just a trap...you're quite literally getting hustled by the poker bot equivalent of a bowler throwing a few gutter balls to convince you that every once in a while he throws one sideways, in order to get you to give him more action. That bowler still beats nearly everyone in the long run, even after taking into account that he intentionally throws a few gutters.

It's all pretty brilliant.

correct

Do people actually grind on these machines?

You can play up to 20/40 I believe so if it was beatable you could make a fortune since hands play so fast.

A leak is a leak....all the player needs to do is play GTO and not intentionally give up a few hands and the player will win long term.

^^lol.

There is only one person quoted in that NYT Times artile who is an expert Limit Holdem player, and that's not the machine makers (who used Mike Matusow to test LOL), it's Michael Reed, and he claims he's beating the machine.

I think there is no doubt the machine is a tough competitor, but it's interesting to read an article on a HU LHE bot that doesn't ever reference it vs. state of the art bots in online competitions, or interview top HU LHE specialists. That makes me question how tough it really is.

when ppl say the machine is never check calling does that means its constantly donk betting on the flop right?

Confirmed: Durrrrr crushed the bot.

I'd of paid good money to watch Matusow test the machine, getting more and more mad as it slowly took all his money.

Think somebody read that Times article and overestimated the difficulty in beating that machine? Also, seems like it would be hard to really trust the effort level of a pro player testing the machine.

God posts like this are so ironic haha this stupid logic is why these machines will clean up.

NVG poster - Well no worries! The 1000's of pro Limit GTO Hawrilenko masters will just play flawless GTO and pick off the every once in awhile deliberate mistakes the bot makes! EASY GAME.

LOL So funny to me that the high and mighty sklanksy's were condescendingly posting "mistakes" these machines were making when they were just playing exactly into the machine makers hands.

Here are some fun hands a friend played vs. machine.

I'm not saying it's not tough and not better than 99% of opponents, but some of its plays are clearly poor, and a solid HU LHE player should have an edge vs. it.

Nothing in that article made me think it's makers knew anything about state of the art HU LHE. Of course, they might be sandbagging the interview and actually used bot competitions and top LHE HU specialists to hone the machine's abilities, but not revealed that. But if they didn't do those things, then the machine almost certainly isn't as good as they think.

It capped that flop with Aces when you had 1010?!?!? ZWAAATT????

I've never played it. And you only reference the one hand that's a bad beat story, and not the others where it played poorly?

Oh, and capping turn in that hand is likely bad. A decent human player who played against my friend would quickly learn he's an excellent hand reader and not a spewtard, he's unlikely to 3b the turn there if he can't beat Aces.

So the cap can only be good if machine thinks it's own lagtardness is causing my friend to 3b turn lightly and even then it's occasionally chopping.

DesertCat, you've been around a while, surely you're not about to fall victim to the leveling machine that is maximose?

Yo maximose, please give your assessment of how well triple range merging will fare against the bot from hell...

I'm not leveling actually here - those hands aren't examples of leaks necessarily. It 3 bet with J7....PREFLOP HU?!?!? ZOMG AND I HAD JJ?!?! Do you see why this isn't an example of a leak nor does it matter that you had JJ?

But going to excuse myself from this headache - Carry on Hawrilenkoesque live limit pros - Destroy the slight mistakes it makes on purpose while you play perfect GTO.

I wonder if Kevin Spacey will reprise his roll from 21 - Playing an old Sklansky - teaching kids to crush the every once in awhile bad play it makes on purpose with perfect nash equilibrium inducing GTO. DONT THINK THAT THEY'LL LET YOU KEEP YOUR FINGERS WITH HOW MUCH EQUITY U HAVE BOYS!!!

(Shorting Caesars stock as we speak) (Not sure if shorting MGM stock because they will lose 9 figures to limit specialists, but will maybe make more from Kevin Spacey Movie. Very Tough Call)

My buddy has played more hands vs this bot than anyone in Vegas and has beaten it considerably.

But he claims the software has changed and it is nearly unbeatable now. When did Durrr play it?

Hasn't chainsaw played on this thing too? Recollect him posting about it. On the phone and can't look it up atm

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that maybe part of your genius is that maybe you don't always realize you're leveling? heh.

Anyway, obv I completely agree with your point, what does it matter if villain has JJ... things happen.