This is really just moving the deck chairs around on the Titanic dont ya think?

Outrunning bot/ai technology (soon to be cyborg tech) at this point is a fools errand.

The real answer is private groups. To play you have to be invited in. This is where poker is headed. Back to its origins.

Poker, as we know it, with every game and stake readily available in public settings online and live is a recent development. In the late 90s I had to travel and play in private games to play No limit Holdem! (nlh wasnt commonly available in 99.9% of card rooms before 2002)

Another answer for online poker, could be games with small rule changes monthly? "super mix" i would love that.

I respect your answer, but being invited to a private group to play (especially PLO) sounds inherently risky.

Agreed, but thats how poker was for centuries. you got invited to a game by a friend. "Rounders" got around. They got invited to many games by many friends. Public card rooms existed in some places but the idea theyd have the game you wanted at the stakes you wanted all the time was ludicrous.

This is the guy who is up 75k in last 300k hands at 1/2 PLO.

Horrendous play. I can explain why if you want.

File: HH20150123 Diotima #15 - $1-$2 - USD Pot Limit Omaha.txt
PokerStars Zoom Hand #129163103221: Omaha Pot Limit ($1/$2) - 2015/01/23 10:26:33 WET [2015/01/23 5:26:33 ET]
Table 'Diotima' 6-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: barog88 ($182.04 in chips)
Seat 2: ljugarn ($934.38 in chips)
Seat 3: jasjas11 ($200 in chips)
Seat 4: pla5te ($472.21 in chips)
Seat 5: 4somniare ($272.95 in chips)
Seat 6: NinoPino ($1481.45 in chips)
ljugarn: posts small blind $1
jasjas11: posts big blind $2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to jasjas11 [Td Ah 2d Jh]
pla5te: folds
4somniare: raises $4 to $6
NinoPino: calls $6
barog88: folds
ljugarn: folds
jasjas11: calls $4
*** FLOP *** [7c Tc 9c]
jasjas11: checks
4somniare: bets $10
NinoPino: raises $26 to $36
jasjas11: folds
4somniare: calls $26
*** TURN *** [7c Tc 9c] [As]
4somniare: checks
NinoPino: bets $64
4somniare: raises $151 to $215
NinoPino: raises $151 to $366
4somniare: calls $15.95 and is all-in
Uncalled bet ($135.05) returned to NinoPino
*** FIRST RIVER *** [7c Tc 9c As] [Qs]
*** SECOND RIVER *** [7c Tc 9c As] [8d]
*** FIRST SHOW DOWN ***
4somniare: shows [Kc 5c 7s 6s] (a flush, King high)
NinoPino: shows [5h 9d 8c Ac] (a flush, Ace high)
NinoPino collected $275.05 from pot
*** SECOND SHOW DOWN ***
4somniare: shows [Kc 5c 7s 6s] (a flush, King high)
NinoPino: shows [5h 9d 8c Ac] (a flush, Ace high)
NinoPino collected $275.05 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $552.90 | Rake $2.80
Hand was run twice
FIRST Board [7c Tc 9c As Qs]
SECOND Board [7c Tc 9c As 8d]
Seat 1: barog88 (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: ljugarn (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 3: jasjas11 (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 4: pla5te folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: 4somniare showed [Kc 5c 7s 6s] and lost with a flush, King high, and lost with a flush, King high
Seat 6: NinoPino showed [5h 9d 8c Ac] and won ($275.05) with a flush, Ace high, and won ($275.05) with a flush, Ace high

There is only one solution ban ALL software install spyware for security as per terms and conditions and ban these Russians, simple although the last one may prove problematic as they make up such a big % of player pool no matter how filthy these scum are.

Fulltilt was almost sponsored by shankly bots at one point! there were that many on the site,probably still are although at less saturation!

Svensk Spel had a 500k winning bot ring at the time of capture.

I-Poker is riddled with bots!

One can speculate the blind eye that is turned by Poker Networks is solely in reference to the bottom line I.E. rake bots produce insane amounts of this!

They are on EVERY poker network this is fact.

very likely true. can't hurt to dedicate some brain cells to the problem though. i am still interested in hearing more about detecting human play by its deficiencies. the reverse CAPTCHA if you will: humans can't solve reliably, only AI can.

http://poker-ai.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=2666 All I know is some of these guys have the knowledge to potentially beat midtakes cash without a bot. Seems like they'd rather put more time into destroying the game than actually playing it themselves. Guess if you're gonna do something might as well do it the easy/lazy/cheating way (I am in no way saying programming is easy, it just seems less difficult than putting in tens of thousands of hours online and seeing millions of hands in real life) Been going through that forum for an hour or two. Makes me sick.

progress shouldn't make you sick...it should make you think.

Seeing my future potentially going down the drain is making me think about being sick.

your future is right in front of you. adapt or die. the idea that a human computer hybrid is "cheating" will be a micro-blip in the history of the human race. holding on to what exists wont serve you. its over. The idea of the human brain being aided by AI will be "standard" before you stop complaining, its inevitable, its good. move on. find the weaknesses.

I dont like russians either bc they r tough as hell, but no need for xenophobia

It might be good if you can figure out how to implement it without blowing the ranks of the economically superfluous out to unprecedented levels. If it results in continuing mass net job loss, decreasing economic mobility, and a sharpening divide between the technocratic priesthood and the peasantry, it will most assuredly not be good.

On a practical level in competitive games every effort should be made to ban it, particularly in this case where it poses a certain existential threat.

idk about you guys but i'm looking forward to my wall-e like lifestyle. i wouldn't mind rolling around in a chair drinking, eating, smoking, and banging virtual pornstars. technology is great. i bet the horse breeders weren't too excited about the invention of the automobile either. overall, progress is good.

Would anybody be surprised if Poker Stars themselves was running the bots?

If not that, then the employees could have them on their own time.

wouldn't it be -ev for them to run bots on their own site? they make so much from rake why risk losing customers and reputation just to make relative peanuts with bots?

It would -ev, and surely such a small island as the isle of man you would notice an individual living beyond their means.

However, who is to say that a gang of criminals haven't blackmailed someone within the integrity team?

This is common practice that banking clerks are warned to be wary of, ie approached to conduct some fraud for criminals, clerk does it as a one off as they need the money for whatever vice... and then the criminal organisation blackmail the person into continuing to do it with little financial return.

Well live casinos have "bots" (kinda sorta). They're called "prop players".

The FAR more worrisome aspect of Poker Stars is their pseudo RNG. I call it an "action RNG", because that's what it promotes - action, bigger pots, and thus, higher rake for the site.

Worry about the honesty (or lack thereof) of the RNG algorithms. That's where it would all happen. We never get to see their code... so how can anyone say they don't manipulate the cards that come out if nobody knows how the software actually works?

All we can do is keep good records, save every hand history and analyze the database of them to see if there are statistical irregularities. And even then, I have a strong suspicion the sites can do their own statistical analyses and pro-actively prevent any tells from leaking (about the pseudo-random nature of their dealing algorithm).

not sure why people think "action flops" are good for poker sites. if anything I'd imagine the reverse it true. the less often the rake cap is hit the more rake the site can take from each deposit. action flops would result in more fish getting stacked and less of their deposit being raked and more of it being withdrawn by the reg who stacked him. dry flops would result in a whittling away of that deposit with the rake cap getting hit less often.

I agree that it would be -ev. Say for arguments sake they had a handful of bots designed to win a bit at the tables... this is peanuts compared to the damage that would be done to them if an insider blew the whistle.

do they stop rigging the rng at higher stakes where the rake hits the cap everytime a flop is seen?

I guess the downside of having such a thread in NVG is that one has to filter out a lot of noise.

THE RNG IS RIGGED EVERYONE

Maybe why staff are more concerned with responding on the regular in that thread than this one. 100% agree with this post

When did this become a rigtard thread?

You're special