BOTS on PartyPoker

[Avatar]

Does anyone notice a serious influx of bots coming on party. I have.

Is partypoker doing anything to stop this?

Are these programs as they get more advanced, going to ruin online gaming in the future, for us that actually play ourselves?

[bisonbison]

Yeah, I asked dozens of players on party today if they were bots and they all said yes.

[Avatar]

you have trouble telling which players are bots bison after playing several sessions with them, or perhaps several tables at a time with them?

[bisonbison]

there is no bot population at my 2/4 tables that could possibly worry me.

How can you tell?

[Tosh]

I remember playing a multi last week where some guy came round after 3 mins asking all the big stacks if they bots. I thought it was hilarious.

[Webster]

Of course there are BOTs - just LOOK at them - they LOOK like BOTS!! How can it be more obvious!

last night there were over 40,000 of them!

[David K.]

How do you know they are bots?

[ctv1116]

1. How do you know they are bots?

2. Why would you be scared to play them?

[Warik]

This is too funny.

[mrpurple]

once in a while, just for fun, I like to type something like "stack/overload. process corrupt/reboot sequence init.////ready////"


Then I just watch the chat.

[Warik]

LOL!

[rloftin]

I confess, I am a BOT.But i am better than most because i read this forum.I am calling all BOTS to come clean and make yourself known.Do it now!!!

[LikesToLose]

OH, I've just got to try that!!!! /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[cardcounter0]

SQL error. Stmt #: 1450 Error Position: 0 Return: 30036 - ORA-30036: unable to extend segment by 4096 in undo tablespace 'PSRBS'

Process 87275 ABENDED at Step PC_PRICING.MN90CA90.BPA_RATE (SQL) -- RC = 30036 (108,524)
Process %s ABENDED at Step %s.%s.%s (Action %s) -- RC = %s

[nykenny]

I am a mindless hold'em sent back from the future to save the human race...

[Pistachio]

I run a bot I wrote myself on Party and believe me you have nothing to worry about. They have just as many problems as human players.

[Siado]

I ran a bot till he started keeping a percentage of the take...

[tech]

I have no idea if they are really bots or not, but the bot-ish players (the ones everyone accuses) are by and large some of the easiest opponents to play at all of Party.

[gonores]

You owe me a new keyboard...one that isn't covered with Mountain Dew.

I have to stop drinking and reading posts at the same time.

[Bob T.]

Maybe we could use this, instead of 'The brown trout sleeps in the closet.'

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
remember playing a multi last week where some guy came round after 3 mins asking all the big stacks if they bots. I thought it was hilarious.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have been asked if I am a bot several times. I always answer that I'm programmed to say "No".

[Tosh]

Its best to say nothing because, according to them, that PROVES you are a bot.

[jasonHoldEm]

110100100

[Nomar]

have you ever played a game, nintendo or hoyle or any other video game where the bots were tough competition ??

I wanna play the bots !!! Bring em ON !!!

[astroglide]

if bots can beat the fish, it signifigantly harms good players even if they can beat the bots

[Mayhap]

010101010111101010101010101010101010
(I hear what you're saying)
Plus when bots sit out for the bathroom and you hear this sound like rivits hitting the deck .... dead giveaway.
/M

[Tosh]

[ QUOTE ]
110100100

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats gibberish, I think you meant 110011001.

[Equal]

[ QUOTE ]
once in a while, just for fun, I like to type something like "stack/overload. process corrupt/reboot sequence init.////ready////"


Then I just watch the chat.

[/ QUOTE ]

LMAO!!! Mind if I borrow this idea???

[Mayhap]

Don't tell anyone but last night on Party, I saw a robot getting a bolt job under the table.
/M

[Punker]

Chess /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]

have you ever played a game, nintendo or hoyle or any other video game where the bots were tough competition ??

I wanna play the bots !!! Bring em ON !!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Bots are better than almost all human players in many games, including chess, checkers, othello, backgammon, Scrabble, and most first-person shooters. The challenge in many games is to try to give humans a fighting chance.

People used to laugh at chess programs. "All I have to do is open 1. a3, and the computer is lost!" Now, no amateur has a chance and most pros are clearly outmatched. Instead of whining about bad beats, on chess servers people accuse each other of using bots to cheat. I'd bet that something analogous will happen in poker.

As far as I know, people don't play chess online for money. People are afraid of bots, and don't even want to risk rating points when their opponents may be cheating.

People do play backgammon for money online. It's relatively easy to check whether someone is using a bot consistently, but almost impossible to check whether someone is getting help on individual decisions. Some people have been caught cheating.

Unfortunately for poker, I don't think there is a good way to test whether your opponent is a bot or is using a bot. As poker programs improve, online poker games will probably be significantly less profitable for good human players. People will be less happy to play online for money, and bots may suck most of the profit out of the game.

[dogmeat]

And just what makes you think another player is a bot? I have many hands on Poker tracker (and others here have mentioned that they have 200K+) and I would think there would be some similarity in their play that would be recognizable in the VP$IP and PFR percents - No?

Dogmeat /images/graemlins/spade.gif

[TeeVeeDude]

I saw a Bot in Trader Vicks, and his hair was perfect.

[threeonefour]

A lot of you have asked how you could spot a computer that is playing poker rather than a human. I think the only conclusive way would be to look at session length.

if a player plays a 40 hour session without sitting out at all and without modifying their play at all and just playing consistently good/decent poker, then I would be inclined to conclude that that entity is a bot.

I haven't seen any player play a session like this and it would be easy for people running bots to have them play short sessions so maybe this isn't very practical.

the other indicator is if a player plays some absurd number of tables simultaneously. Like 5 omaha and 5 stud tables at the same time, without their play being affected. Again I have never noticed this.

I don't know if there really are any bots out there but I hope their population doesn't grow because I think it would ultimately be a bad thing for poker.

Poker just wouldn't be the same if it wasn't against humans. I am really into chess (its actually a higher priority than poker right now) and most chess players will tell you that playing against computers is empty and basically boring.

And for people who say computers are much stronger in chess than humans. This may be true, but most 1600 level players can be taught how to beat 2300 level computers in just a week or two using anti computer methods.

I personally have a decent, nonzero, score against several computers that are rated 2400-2600(on FICS) in blitz play. I am a 1750 blitz player.

[gibs]

I don't get why lots of people are so freaked out by the possiblity of bots playing on online sites. I think it would be easy to play against a table of all bots. Just think of playing against a full table of average to good players who play strictly by the book with no creativity. Maybe you wouldn't be able to beat the game for as much as you would with a table full of the typical party crazies, but you wouldn't lose as much on bad beats either. Kind of like playing Wilson's Turbo Texas Holdem. The bots there offer a little bit of competition but are easily beatable.

[joker122]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't get why lots of people are so freaked out by the possiblity of bots playing on online sites. I think it would be easy to play against a table of all bots. Just think of playing against a full table of average to good players who play strictly by the book with no creativity. Maybe you wouldn't be able to beat the game for as much as you would with a table full of the typical party crazies, but you wouldn't lose as much on bad beats either. Kind of like playing Wilson's Turbo Texas Holdem. The bots there offer a little bit of competition but are easily beatable.


[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is not that a good player won't be able to beat a bot, because they probably will be able to. The problem is that a poor player won't be able to beat a bot. The fish will go broke quicker thereby eliminating the weak players that a good player (such as the ones on this forum) profit from.

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

I would think that playing a few bots at the table would be sorta like playing against four or five retiree rocks (albeit with a more inventive and varied playing style). You'd beat them, but what's the point of playing against them if you have a choice?

[Jake (The Snake)]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem is not that a good player won't be able to beat a bot, because they probably will be able to. The problem is that a poor player won't be able to beat a bot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the problem will eventually be both.

Although presently I do not beleive there is much bot activity, I do not see any reason why a very strong bot program could be created.

Many have said they would prefer to play against bots as they would have no creativity... who says? Bots most certainly can be programmed to play creatively. Not only that, but bots could theoretically be programmed to play creatively at certain times based on the play of other people at the table. In this way, a bot could be much better than a human.

For such a bot to be created, the programmer would have to be an extremely strong poker player himself. The strength of chess bots comes not only from the fact that it can see many more moves ahead, but it also has the ability to adjust. Lastly, a bot will never grow tired or be prone to such human error.

I predict within a few years online poker sites will require that it be the only window open during playing time.

[Matty]

[ QUOTE ]
once in a while, just for fun, I like to type something like "stack/overload. process corrupt/reboot sequence init.////ready////"

Then I just watch the chat.

[/ QUOTE ]I've been trying this out at Paradise.

My screename there is "Bodot".

I figure I'll get an email or two from Paradise soon. =]

[Baulucky]

Contrary to the bullshit posted above, this comes from someone that knows what he is talking about:


From: Abdul Jalib (abdulj@posev.com)
Subject: Socialist Poker


View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.gambling.poker
Date: 2004-04-01 06:19:10 PST


As I posted previously, I have been living in Ljubljana, Slovenia for
much of the last year. The winter was a bit hard to take, with the
last snow less than two weeks ago. And this language is so hard for me
to learn. But I'm living the dream of a professional nomadic online
poker player, and I look forward to some balmy nights playing poker by
the Adriatic. I don't even bother with travelling to Vienna for live
poker any more, because of the opportunity cost for three hours travel
time each way. Plus, Europeans smoke like there is no tomorrow. So, I
much prefer to play online.

It's kind of old news, but in case you haven't heard, the Slovenian
government is sponsoring a program to train poker players. Slovenia is
a socialist country, at least by American standards, and the government
seems to like to waste money. The government also sponsors billiards
players. The Slovenian poker players have funding for computer
simulations. They get free airfare to travel to tournaments. When you
see them in big games you can be sure they are playing with government
money. The whole thing strikes me as a bit like fusion... sure it
works, but the amount of money the Slovenian government is investing is
far more than the money they get out.

That could change, though, since a big part of the research is bots. I
know at least one bot here is ready for action. Someone here showed me
figures suggesting that as much as 1% of the Slovenian GNP could come
from poker bots playing online poker in the future. I am concerned
that a country (albeit a tiny one) would so aggressively pursue money
that is for some a fun pasttime and for others a serious career.

Are we moderated yet?

--
Abdul