What's the "good number" -- suggestions and sites?

Well yes. You see the commercially supplied software would be compliant and have an API identifier for the sites and any illegal software used would carry a maximum 51 weeks gaol and a fine for the maker/supplier and twice as much potential gaol time for the user (cheater).

Taking the market leaders out of the non compliant arena, including the core tracker software, makes life a lot harder for the illegal HUD user. You can't stop all cheating but you can have a system where detection is possible and criminal sanctions can follow.

There is nothing technical that will stop a burglar but getting them done deters some and punishes some. It is the same with the rules here. You are quite right, some will still cheat, catching them and punishing them is possible, stopping them 100% of the time is not.

I think you're confused. Using a camera + OCR from a second machine is undetectable. He's proposing a method where the cheat cannot be caught other than by showing up at his house and proving that he did it. All this stuff about burglars and detection is wrong, you've just had someone present an actual impossible-to-catch method to get around your proposed rule. So, do you prefer to create an environment where cheats have the edge and we pretend that they don't exist, or do we reconsider making rules to clearly disfavor those of us who don't cheat?

This is why I'm concerned about all of these well-meaning people proposing good-sounding ways to make "poker better". The simple technical workarounds tend to beat the "licensed software vendors will detect cheating by magic". You can easily set up rules that favor the cheaters. Since you now know that the rules are not that hard to get around, do you favor presenting the false impression that sites are HUD-free? The fish will feel better.

Extradition usually requires a similar law in the reciprocal country. A law that particular is unlikely to be found elsewhere so it instantly loses its ROW teeth.

And the other point, since we're already "cheating" why not go all the way?

Doug, I discussed this ad infinitum with Richas in another thread and he's never going to get it. He'll just continue talking about UK regulations requiring all software providers to acquire a license, which is a big ****ing lol because nobody cares about the UK. Another reason it's dumb is because it allows the gov't to play kingmaker w.r.t. related software products.

showing up at the house with a warrant is precisely what a criminal charge allows. Use your magic eye camera on the multitable screen, whatever. I concede it will be possible to produce illegal s/w to do this, possible to use it but it would be impossible to openly market it and if other evidence exists suggesting it is being used a knock at the door could (theoretically) happen. Indeed if the knock happens for some other reason the computer still gets taken and analysed, adding a gambling cheater check would not be hard.

In practice I think the UKGC will be bottling this until at least 2016 but hey ho.

Making burglary illegal does not give burglars an extra advantage as some now don't rob houses. Making supplying burglars with data on empty houses or lock picks illegal does not prevent them getting info or picks, it just makes it harder. Making it illegal deters many burglars compared to just saying - take it.

The master cat burglar is never caught in the movies. So what? Does not mean th rule/law should be abolished and sometimes by bad luck or malicious intent the master burglar goes down anyway. Good.

Yes extradition would be an issue. For the rest of the EU it just needs raising the maximum term by a week to make it applicable under the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) and you americans can only play in Nevada now anyway.

Asking other to follow te UK legislative lead and so make extradition possible is of course possible too.

richas you are a ****ing imbecile

The UK will regulate pretty much every(significant) ROW poker site by Dec 2014. They are passing the law now. The Gambling (Licencing and Advertising) Bill.

Imposing licencing on software to consumers is not so imminent, it has less obstacles, all it needs is a change of view by the UKGC.

The UK is significant to ROW sites and the UK can influence the whole EU to a similar line. meanwhile, you are right the UK is irrelevant to Nevada.....until the UK actually prosecutes an online poker cheat and Nevada go hang on, why can't we do that as the tightest regulator in the world?

Well I have heard worse.

You're painting this rosy picture of fantasy gaming enforcement. The idea of HUDs on sites that disallow them is a reality. I played mid-stakes Cake games, thinking the site was HUDless. Your idea of marketing the HUD is silly -- why would someone who had an advantage that no one else had want it spread widely. The model would be a few mid/high stakes regs getting together to hire the software written. They would use their extra profit to pay back their initial investment. That's reality as it happened on Cake. Those of us playing them? We mostly just didn't know about it and profited less.

You really think that the police come through that many doors to matter? Once they are in, they confiscate computers to look for gaming offenses? Really?

It is so easy to present fantasy as a way to prevent real-world problems. Do you know why Stars doesn't enforce OPTAH? They were ethical enough not to create rules that they couldn't enforce. It is one of the reasons they are the best -- they chose not to play pretend while writing rules.

You are probably right, we are all doomed so we should let cheats cheat.......[sic]

It probably is a utopian fantasy that a regulator will act to stop poker cheats but I intend to do my best to make it happen and that includes forcing HEM and Pokertracker to have an API that stops them working at the same time as a site that bans them.

^^^ The other thing you are implying is that an online poker site could, in their TOS, determine what constitutes a crime punishable by up to 4 years in prison with a possible fine.

Sure, be as sarcastic as you want. You understand that HEM and PT have always honored sites requests for being HUDless, right? Your bold step is to maintain what always exists.

What I'm saying is to not make rules that can't be enforced. Just that. Collusion? Josem and the Stars guys catch that all the time. Multi-accounting and other cheating? That gets caught, too. I known that all the NVG-Illuminati love to say "ban them for the good of the game". I'm saying please don't, because it won't work. If you put this effort into stopping botting as best you can, that would be something worth fighting for.

Not 4 years, 2 years.

This position already exists. The Ts and Cs of a poker site are the rules of the game. if you break those rules - by running a bot for example, you are cheating. In the UK that is a criminal offence with a max of 2 years and a fine. Yet to have the case law but it is pretty clear that cheating at gambling in the UK is a criminal offence and it is pretty clear that the Ts and Cs are the rules of the game.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/19/section/42

@Ducy

Ducy why do you think some posters injected AGE into their opinion/replies here?

There is a big difference between not providing (open) support for and preventing operation with.

Isn't it true that you could change your screen name every week at Cake? That should be enough to keep the HUDs guessing.

Gee, I played against Fish420 last week and now this week I can't find him.

For cash games I assume they don't. I'm surrounded by casino's now. If I want to play cash I'll go play live.

They could get me back to play in some tournies, though. Stars always had great MTT's.

I'm a REC player and I don't like your ideas. You'll kill any incentive for the better players and you'll discourage REC players from becoming serious players.

Also creating a scrapping software and database a baby project these days.
You can "take leading vendors out of the market" crippling majority of poker playing population. Meanwhile people like me will have home built database up and running in a week.
I am not programming genius, but free scrappers are possible to find on the web right now and building HM like software isn't big challenge either, especially if you just do it for your needs.
I wouldn't even need to bother for datamining myself, Russian friends from existing (despite opposition of poker sites) datamining sites will have the setup running very next morning after the ban is introduced. The difference will be that instead of HM authors making 100$ a piece dataminers will make a killing.

Also your legal framework, as elaborate as it can be won't make writing home project illegal. I mean c'mon, do you really think you can/should stop people from writing software to analyse text files in their own home ?

Also this. Take chess for example. There is significant market for databases, training software, playing programs (engines). Why do you think that is ? Because top grandmaster pay for that to get an edge vs their competitiors ? That would be small market. Most customers for books/databases/playing programs/videos are amateur/recreational players willing to improve. Same is true for poker training sites, PT, HM, poker books etc. etc.
Humans like learning and improving. Existance of those things make it possible. The promise/possibility of improving attracts many recreational players as well.

I'd introduce 3 pair beats 2 pair. Rec players seem to get counterfeited a lot.

1) online poker needs to be regulated by the US and EU jointly. Breaking the law should result in serious fraud charges. If a country is not willing to enforce the laws of regulation, their players should be banned from online poker.

2)As part of regulation, somehow ban huds and bots (I don't know how this can be done.). Using HUDSs or Bots while playing should result in Fraud charges. Rec players believe they are playing against humans. (FWIW, I use a HUD and would love to get rid of the thing.) Also, getting rid of HUDS would limit the number of tables someone could pay attention too and should help get rid of mass multi tabling.

3)Regulation needs to limit the rake a site can take. The current situation where a site takes the profits and gives some back if you play enough hands is total BS. Rec players have no chance of turning a profit because they don't play enough to get rakeback or bonuses. It's possible banning or greatly limiting rakeback and bonuses could have a more positive effect then banning HUDs.

Well, fair enough ..... though it was posted in the Mortar and Brick forum which is meant for casino discussion and was not posted in the Home Poker Forum.


Anyway, the rest of the post that you didn't quote, particularly the Aria thing where they are even trying to make it a feature of the table (not that any of this matters or is necessarily relevant to this thread):





I've seen people mention it here on 2+2, but don't recall specific threads or casinos.

I recall seeing/hearing about it a few times in AC a few years ago, but I don't remember what casino(s) I was at .... probably either the Taj or Harrah's. My memory is hazy and I can't state anythign with complete certainty here.

Coulda happened at the Turning Stone in upstate NY, but I don't remember for sure as I haven't been there in almost 10 years.


Also, in Vegas the Aria started (a few months ago I believe) a poker table that has 2 dealers and two hands are played at the table simultaneously. Here is a link to a thread:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29...table-1273141/

I strongly insist on banning huds online and hoodies in live poker