It's not always because you are a winning player is true. That it is never about you being a winning player is a lie. The most valuable players in the game are the ones losing money. What you are doing makes you useful but a table full of you clones breaks very quickly. A table full of splashy losers without ANY sharks lasts a long time.

I like hearing your perspective on it because mine says that after reading the botfarm article is that online poker is not what it seems. Some people have a passion for beating the game in another way - I don't think public or private really make much of a difference if that's the persons goal. Most players know that it all depends on the arena you play in/game selection. Once you understand how to navigate that then it's easy to win at the game for yourself. Your goal as a player is to find a place to win. Creating the game yourself and inputting your software into the game then using marketing to attract people into the game vs using real players to simulate the game seems to be a real strategy people are using out of the box. This might be exclusive to micro/small stakes events but it's just as easy to deploy at any stake.

I think when you're winning at poker and around other people winning at online poker its easy to have the perspective of everything is all good - I'm paying attention to a pretty wide array of places and I think it would be fair to say that there should be some public med/high stakes games that are able to create that environment w/ the help of the players and the best tools the operator has should be safer. Long standing good reputations could be an indicator of that for sure. If I'm going to work together with someone in the industry having some type of long term relationship with that person and believing they are trying to do things right for the players is something that I use to decide.

I would look at the operators of the game as players themselves of the game instead of someone overseeing the game for a fee - the fee is anything they want it to be up to 100%. Some operators have a great reputation of charging a smaller fee while letting the players withdraw based off the depositors. That can be changed on a case by case basis.

There are a lot of new investors in the poker game who seem to want to create a secure game that so I am optimistic about public games remaining a real option for players. Some investors want their own GG now and are willing to spend to get it.

Posted in HS thread from innerspy (not sure if he is still ambassador of the site)

When I play on chess.com, I get messages like every day or every other day that someone I played against has gotten banned for cheating and my ELO has been adjusted. When I play online games like Counter-Strike, I regularly see people get banned for cheating. I've never once got emailed about being cheated on ggpoker and getting money restored to my account, and I'm 100% sure I've played against bots/RTA users on the site.

All of the stuff about 10bb/100 rake and GTO play is incoherent as well because it's implying all of the losing players are players that you can exploit players for a winrate much higher than 10bb/100 but they're also all good enough that playing an optimal strategy will only win for like 3-5bb/100 against them and I just don't believe that's true. All losing players definitely don't exist in this goldilocks zone.

It doesn't cost chess.com anything to adjust your rating and speaking frankly they don't really have to be 100% accurate about detecting it because the consequence of banning some random account for computer use is nothing.

It costs poker sites money to reimburse you for cheating and they also risk facing regulatory scrutiny if they make a mistake.

Basic math is hard.

At HS the other 4 seats are top pros where a gto bot will win at 1bb/100. So to beat a 5bb/100 treshold the bot needs to win >20bb/100 from the rec, not 3-5bb.

Would be very surprised if top pros are only -1bb/100 vs GTO (unless they are cheating)

On chess.com what do you think their accuracy is in detecting cheaters? Closer to 25 or 90%? Closer to 90 or 99%? I just mean true positive vs false positive not catching all the cheaters in the field.

Also again I just don't believe that HS is this goldilocks zone of rake and winrates where the best regs lose 1bb/100 to a solver and the worst fish only lose 6bb/100 to a solver but out of this group of regs who lose to the solver, and presumably by this line of thinkng win or lose at an additional 1bb/100 vs each other, some of them can crush the 1 fish for 20bb/100 so in actuality the fish are all -100bb/100 losers and for that reason a solver is -EV playing in these lineups because of the rake. What?

****ing imbecile.

Can play them in standard High Game, not only private so its fine.

GGpoker isn't bad idea, but let Standard VIP .. For everyone ..

First given that poker sites when they give you back money from cheaters take that money from the cheaters first the cost is the same. Second ROTFLOL at fearing regulatory scrutiny from trying to prevent cheating as opposed to ignoring or participating in cheating.

bro what an embarrassing post. stick to live poker you clearly have no clue what youre talking about

how do you stop RTA cheaters in poker though? in chess it is easy to a certain extent because you can confidently say that players hitting 100% accuracy or close during game are cheating, even at the highest level, and there's often only 1 "best" move no such as thing as an equilibrium across multiple strategies

in poker on the other hand, I have no idea how it can be done. There's infinite possibilities, as if you just change some parameters to your solutions slightly like ranges or bet sizings that will imply a very different equilibrium for any detection tool to compare against etc. Even if you managed to get something remotely accurate, it would take you hundreds of thousands of hands to be able to comfortably confirm someone is cheating.
If you use public solutions like gtowizard they can inform the cardrooms but for people with their private solutions? I'm not sure how it can reliably work in practice to be honest

Sites should just install RTA into their games so that all players can choose to use it or not.

yeah it seems regardless of where you play, poker will always be an incredibly selfish endeavor

I really need to move away from this

would be burning tens of thousands for misha to do the moral thing. don't see why he has to rub it in their noses though

The game is great and will outlive all of us. GG is temporary.

Pretty twisted comments by innerpsy. Removing most players from nl2k+ is not rivalry, but just protectionism or a form of crony low capitalism.

Also he talks like streaming or creating media is a sacrifice and it wasn't a personal choice, like he isn't getting payed for it.

And attention I'm not criticizing streamers in any way I think they do great work promoting the game. And the fact that they still compete in reasonable stakes just shows their skill.

But they aren't better or worse than every player just because of it.

If you ever watched innerpsy on stream this response shouldn’t come as a surprise tbh. The guy seems very competitive and just got his sweet revenge on all the regs he’s been losing to for the past 5 years.

Props to him for not giving us some bot generated pc-like response.

Based.

I dont get why people whine about this.

Go and focus on media/content as well, and become someone who brings new players to the game.

If the objective is bringing new players to the game, it's not some random HS games with Elky, inner or whomever that will do it.

With all the corporate mumbo jumbo and shitting on regs in this thread, I still didn't see any argument for the objective of the move.

If it was to promote or bring more revenue, they could hire someone to make some highlights of HS games like there are some channels in youtube for example. Bcpoker replays and others.

Or some sort of league or competition with promotions that incentivised action like once pokerstars had with Allstars. Just a couple of examples, several things could be done without restricting games above nl2k to a smaller number of players.

They are doing it because they believe they will make more money by doing it. In simplest terms by making sure favored players get given access to the whales with favored meaning the site gets a cut/uses access as part of a pay package. Access to the whales has value which is why the HS regs are whining that they are being restricted; why should the sites give away something that has value?

Yeah why should pokersite offer poker at all, when it has value for some part of its customers. Can you just stop posting your utter nonsense takes?

That's not Doug, and 'live poker' isn't the diss you think it is

It’s not that hard. I only play at the 500-1k level and I know within a few hundred hands if someone is playing at a level of aggression across all lines that they could possibly be using RTA. Yea it’s not possible to distinguish cheaters from highly skilled players (sometimes just spewy players) in that hand sample, but that’s why good sites have multiple layers of protection. Once players have identified themselves as highly skilled the sites can just verify their identity and require them to do a play and explain filmed from multiple angles. This process alone is enough to get you to the multiple 100k hand sample you thought would be required.