lol... if you want to spiral around in some nihilistic universe, go for it, but I'm going to go ahead and try to treat others well... except when they frustrate me on forums.

There are things much more important than advancing technology... like each and every person around you and treating them with respect. Maybe it's just me, but I don't think life would be all that fulfilling if I was alone on this planet and I take that as a sign to embrace those around me.

And while we're throwing out random nonsense, haven't you ever heard that GOOD always triumphs over evil?

[QUOTE=indianaV8

You try to motivate, that something a player can learn - worth allowing. Well - players can learn to develop bots. They can learn programming, and combining their programming skills, with their poker skills, allows them to implement a bot. It's the same as learning to use a HUD, isn't it? It's just a bit more effort. Please tell me the difference, otherwise.[/QUOTE]

I don't know if this has already been responded to, as I've only made it this far in reading, but what I think the people just don't understand is the fact there viewing this whole bot thing as some shady people sitting in a dark room scamming people out of there money like some dirty credit card skimmers or something. The way I have looked at it is imagine yourself a "winning poker player", but have now discovered that you can program a bot that is gonna play your winning style and can give you the same win rate that you were making before you had made the bot, but now it/you can play much longer sessions and increase your win rate by doing so. As Indiana said what's the difference between you/us learning programs like poker tracker and such. I don't want to get into to much detail here, but the bottom line as I see it is, anyone who was gonna beat Indiana when he was playing himself is the same as anyone whos is gonna beat his bot. It's his program playing, to me that's pretty much the same as him playing. The ones looking for the quick fix on getting a bot are usually because they have no game and need something to compensate there loss. I'm a 12k loser online, I play very well live, but Hey if I was a winner online and had the brains to program a bot to play my winning style while I could still go to work every day and do my true profession I'd be crazy not to. It's the same as having all the poker tracker info except you don't even have to be there. Any way I think the man is a genius, and I think most should just keep an open mind. After all I bet if you could you would.

WTF man!?! Put a phucking warning on your link next time!

Mods, please edit this or at least make him put a warning on it. Some poker sites are now looking at Internet traffc by users. I was playing on Tilt when I clicked that link, and I'm going to be really pizzed if my account gets closed.

I think some poeple already have had trouble merely by viewing Sharkscope.com while playing, this is potentially a lot worse.

I'm sorry that you clicked a link about bots while reading a thread about bots. The only site that was admitting to checking your browser has said it would stop(pokerstars). You are needlessly being paranoid imo.





and wtf are you doing reading about bots while playing on one of the most bot infested sites on the web?

IndianaV8 is a known bot operator. I realize that it is a big thing to accuse indianaV8 of being a bot operator, but I have concrete proof in the form of PM's that any mod can inspect. I can also cite his postings on a known bot wiki. He has some sort of strange desire to masquerade amongst his targets, as shown in his posts in this thread.

I view bot operators and their activities as a criminal enterprise. There are many ways to deal with them. They should know that it is not likely that they will succeed and either give themselves up voluntarily or stop botting.

ok....so I've always seen this thread sitting there at the top of the list....thought it might be interesting........never really read it though.

Just read the first 6 pages....seems interesting enough and now have a few questions.

I'm more or less a winning player on stars....nothing special though.....played about 10,000 sng's, $18 average buy-in, ROI about 6%, (about 20% at MTT's) total profit about $3k (greater for MTT's though)

So as long as I'm not losing money I guess Bots aren't really bothering me.

But I'd be interested to know :

1. What games are the Bots mainly playing?....cash or sng's?
2. Am I likely playing any of them in 45's and 180's ($12 to $55 buy-ins)
3. Has my bottom line profit possibly been affected by bots?
4. Title of the thread is 'get to know your bots'.....so what are their names then so i can look out for them?


dumb questions maybe.......but I'm only a simple man

I do develop bots, and use them for real money - it's only enough to read this thread, no need for major investigations. The term "bot operator", however, sounds funny for me.

Well, if you see bots as criminal then you are on a wrong track. Bots are not only not criminal (as otherwise the whole University of Alberta would be in jail), but also perfectly legal and moral. In other similar industries - like stock markets, or online chess, they are also well accepted. In chess, on the biggest venue, bots are marked as such, and player can choose if they want to play against bots, or not. Most (at least the most serious) poketsites that do not allow bots already distinguish (separate) botting from cheating (despite that they don't yet allow bots, i.e. they forbid them, which makes botting a cheating from the standpoint of violating the ToS).

Bots are great hobby, they are intellectually challenging, they are fun to develop, and as what poker is all about - there is some chance that you even get a winner. I did get one. I hope bots are soon allowed on the major pokersites.

You are correct. You are not allowed to have Sharkscope open
while playing on PokerStars.

The rule is unenforceable since stars is no longer checking

Heads UP LIMIT HOLDEM BOTS may/may not be true.

It IS TRUE that Universities (Phil LAAK and others) have funded studies for students to make these bots.

The matches ended up 2-3 Laak I believe. And he said that the bot was insane, one of which psychologically the thing bet INSTANTLY upon your decision. Was like you were ALWAYS at a decision every moment.

To then believe that one of these SOMEHOW found its way to the mainstream and is being used... Get real. Of course something is out there, please do some research for the evidence, I did. From what I have read about university studies, underground stuff, semi-underground stuff e.t.c. smart people can/will develop a decent one but it will be like BIG BLUE. I even get e-mails about poker bots for sale (I dont follow up)

MORE IMPORTANTLY:

Cheating at cards has been around since cards have been around. Like life, it finds a way. I love to see some of the old antique card cheating devices (Smithsonian Magazine did a great article about 10 years ago) And I believe some of it is in the Smithsonian Museum. Genius ways. Most of the times when they got caught, they were taken to backrooms and forced to show them how they made/used the device and then robbed and sent on their way to another town.

Cheating at cards will continue in ALL forms live or otherwise. I am not surprised, nor should you be. I am confident however that a Human could beat ANY COMPUTER. In regards to poker; The electrical forces in our brain, its data processing capabilities, FREE WILL, ability to create an IDEA, and a host of other wondrous things will keep us on top.

JC

This is nothing but a pathetic justification of cheating other people.

Can you figure out why you sound stupid here?

In case he can't, or won't I'll take a shot. Let's look at this from a tournament perspective.

Poker is about playing the cards, and playing the player(s). Part of that is game and table selection. I try to always play on Saturday night, because I know that I am more likely on Saturday night to find recreational players, and players who are mentally impaired and/or tired due to partying, or impaired just from staying up all night Saturday, because they can.

That is the difference. Poker is not about playing bots, who never get tired, never drink a beer, and never go on tilt. Part of the trick to doing well in a MMP tournament is not drinking alcohol, getting enough sleep, and otherwise being more prepared than your opponents to play an 8- 10- or 12-hour session.

A bot therefore has an unfair advantage over a human who thinks he is playing against other humans, and that advantage increases with playing time. If the human is game selecting, knowing that he might be playing against bots, he would make different decisions, such as playing tournaments with smaller fields, where the bot advantage would be much smaller.

@PokerClif - If I use the same line of argumentation that you used - I can say it is unfair to the fishes on Saturday night that they don't play against other fishes on a beer, but instead they have to play against multitabling, HUD enabled pros?

Pros therefore have unfair advantage - they don't drink beer when they play.

I don't want to be offensive - but this was basically your line of argumentation. When we discuss what gives unfair advantage, we need to be much more precise. From my point of view, there are two lines where one can draw and classify unfair advantage consistently:

1) Unfair from game theory point of view: This makes collusion, shared databases, hacking client/server unfair - which is fine. This does not makes botting unfair.

2) Unfair from computational aid point of view: This makes any software support unfair. If you start to draw a line between different softwares - you hardly can make a sustanable point, believe me. Even using simplistic software can be massively unfair and give big advantages against the people that don't use it.

What i was trying to say, and I very well could be wrong is that if Indiana is programming a bot wouldn't it be programmed with all his poker knowledge? everything that he is already doing to be a winning player just put in a program? If that's the case then wouldn't be the same as playing him. After all it would be his same style. I don't know I haven't a clue about bots let alone programming one, but if you know the correct answer CRUDEFINDER next time maybe just clarifying it instead of being an arse would help a great deal.

I don't know what is so hard to understand about the difference between bots and HUDs. With a HUD, the human is making the final decision. A human, for example, will fold that QJos from EP when he is sharp, but those same two cards look so much better to a tired bored player while looking the same to a bot.

If you can't see that as being advantageous,then you are deliberately being obtuse about the whole situation. I wouldn't mind playing a bot IF I KNEW IT WAS A BOT.

DUCY?

You have a stange idea of what is fair and unfair. If Clifton chooses to play sober and rested on Saturday night, and Clifford chooses to play tired and drink a six-pack, there is nothing unfair. We both made a choice about how much rest to get before we play, what beverage to drink, what virtual table at which to sit, etc.

Making smart choices is not unfair. If Jill makes money than Sue because Jill table selects and stays sober, that is not unfair, just as it not unfair if Joe makes more money than John because John dropped out of high school and Joe has a master's degree.

Economics tells us that a free market cannot exist where there is not equality of information. If I don't know that there are bots in the game, I am unable to make an informed decision, and that's when it becomes unfair.

Exactly! I made this example to associate it and show that your line of argumentation was flawed in a way this one is. Because it was flawed exactly in the same way, as the example with sober/drunk.

Now to get out of "strange definitions of unfair" - get back to 1) and 2) above. These are meaningful ways to define fair/unfair. Anything outside these will be vulnerable to a lot of practical examples that can show their infeasibility.

Well what about the guy who is using HUD and keeping track of what I've been playing,what my patterns/tendencies are? Wouldn't that be advantageous? I'm really not trying to be "obtuse" here, I'm just trying to understand what makes one more fair than the other? Also bro I don't really understand what's up with DUCY? I just hope It doesn't mean what I think It means, or that maybe your trying to imply something.

It's simple. For anyone who cares enough and is industrious enough to look - they can find what programs, such as huds, are legal according to the site TOS. If you use a program that is not allowed, you're cheating the other players, plain and simple. If you can't see the difference in the advantages/disadvantages of not having to physically be at the table, you're a moran imo (and I'm pretty sure some obvious examples have already been pointed out).

I do believe you know a lot this.

this is hilarious this has to have been brought up before but I just played the most obvious robot ever And anybody who wants to make some money his name is Lowneherz except he has a happy face above the o. I have a winning record agianst him in sng ln 10 but this is so ridicoulous I have to report it. What is so funny is that I called the Moderater and the moderator which is also a robot told me that this was not an issue for the moderator to take care of. I even told the robot =modeator i was going to inform 2+2 about this isue and it somehow reported me for a vialoation. Like I said I have a winning record against this bot but this is so obvious plus ps insulted me by reporting me as a violation this bot needs attention.

SNG NL HU

Well that's about the only thing that I can see wrong with the bot. The fact that the poker sites don't allow em, but that still doesn't change the fact that someone using HUD over someone who isn't still has a huge advantage over their opponent. Why not do away with every program and bring it back to a level playing field? After all aren't online poker rooms trying to simulate live B&M? When you are playing live you have nothing to help you other than your experience,poker knowledge and whatever math you might know to carry you along.

I agree with the core of what you're saying here - people using huds generally have an advantage over those who don't (assuming the hud user knows what he's doing) - you may have a good argument for banning all user aids - however this doesn't change the fact that using a hud is not cheating and using a bot is.

And for your info, the general argument supporting huds claims that they're similar to mentally/physically taking notes on a live player you have many hands with. This is why it's only legal to use hud statistics from hands you actually played. There is no argument for bots that simulates B&M play... last time I was at a B&M I'm pretty sure a robot didn't sit down and play my hands when I got up to use the restroom. They didn't even deal me hands when I wasn't there.. bummer.