PDA

View Full Version : I knew it...eventually a machine would take my job


MagnoliasFM
02-26-2005, 07:58 AM
I think I speak for all of you guys and girls out there when I say that this is a pretty sad day for those of us who make a living playing SNGs. There's now a bot playing on Party Poker that uses a simple all-in or fold algorithm and is winning at the $20+2 level. Sure, anyone who knows how the bot works can beat the crap out of it, but it's unlikely that the 10,000,000 fish on Party Poker (the same predictable ones who routinely give us their money) will ever notice the bot, nor care about it, let alone be smart enough to min-raise its big blind. It's ROI is probably not much higher than that of an average intelligent monkey playing at Party $20+2, but that's still greater than 0, and it's just a freakin' robot that takes 0 human energy to run.

By my rough calculations, a couple hours of my work 4-tabling $20+2 would be equivalent to about 24 hours worth of the bot working. That means I have to waste 2 hours a day just to make as much money as a robot. I don't think I can handle the emotional stress that this implication brings. In fact, my hands are shaking right now as I type this, and tears are beginning to cloud my vision.

We've already seen jobs like sewing and manufacturing being taken away by robots, and now this. Sucks. I'm going to bed now. I'll be sleeping for 7-8 hours, while some computer programmer's tight/aggressive robot will be doing my job, collecting money from Party Fish. Today, it's just a simple bot that isn't that good at making money. But who knows? If a computer can be programmed to play better chess than the best player in the world, eventually there will be a bot made that can 4-table and have a %50 ROI at the lower limits. Because I'll be the first to admit, my play at these limits is purely formulaic and robotic. It's more like data processing than poker. Oh well, I really do have to sleep now, good night.

TheAmp
02-26-2005, 08:08 AM
1) How come you are so sure there is a bot on party poker?

2) Why don't you report it to investigations team?

3) If you can beat the bot, why do you mind at all? are you jealous? Wouldn't you prefer to be a movie star instead of a bot playing on party poker?

Give us a break.

lorinda
02-26-2005, 08:10 AM
1) How come you are so sure there is a bot on party poker?

I think we're all pretty sure now

2) Why don't you report it to investigations team?

I don't think anyone is 100% sure and it's fascinating.

3) If you can beat the bot, why do you mind at all? are you jealous? Wouldn't you prefer to be a movie star instead of a bot playing on party poker?

If it's winning, it's eating our fish.

Lori

TheAmp
02-26-2005, 08:18 AM
[ QUOTE ]
1) How come you are so sure there is a bot on party poker?

I think we're all pretty sure now

2) Why don't you report it to investigations team?

I don't think anyone is 100% sure and it's fascinating.

3) If you can beat the bot, why do you mind at all? are you jealous? Wouldn't you prefer to be a movie star instead of a bot playing on party poker?

If it's winning, it's eating our fish.

Lori

[/ QUOTE ]

Your answers to 1) and 2) are contradictory.
Party poker should be worried much more than anyone else. They don't need to be 100% sure to investigate.

As for 3) - Party poker fish, or any other fish in the sea are not "our" fish to begin with. But in the worst case, you will still have the bot fish. Don't worry, be happy. Just make the correct play.

lorinda
02-26-2005, 08:26 AM
Your answers to 1) and 2) are contradictory.

Not really, I'm 75% sure.

The bot is, thankfully very beatable, but it's still going to scare an awful lot of players (or should that be a lot of awful players)

I would report this, but I suspect we'd never know for sure if it just went missing, and I'd like to know for sure.

Lori

the_joker
02-26-2005, 08:50 AM
Don't worry about bots, just focus on being better than any bot.

eastbay
02-26-2005, 09:03 AM
1) I'm quite certain this isn't new. It's probably just the most obvious bot out there right now.

2) Get used to it. The Party structure is a preflop game, and the preflop game is very beatable "by the numbers." Party is not going to change their structure unless this becomes an epidemic, because it makes them a lot of money.

3) If someone wants to write a long-lived bot, they are going to have to do a better job than this guy, because it's got the biggest bot tells you could imagine, starting with the binary strategy of preflop all-in/fold, and continuing on to very obvious timing tells. You almost couldn't write a more obvious bot. It took one game for me to strongly suspect it was a bot, and two to be certain that's either a bot, or a person trying to act like a bot, and doing a very, very good job at it.

4) Party screwed up royally some months ago on their countermeasures for this. I'm not getting into specifics, but they could make this _much_ harder to do with a simple client change. Of course, this barrier could eventually be overcome by the determined.

eastbay

ordinaryboy
02-26-2005, 09:50 AM
Am i the only one who is disgusted by this?

I couldnt care if the bot was successful or not they should not be in our poker rooms. Poker is a game for people not machines.

Why dont people start a list of the names of supposed bots so the others can watch out for them. Then when enough people have witnessed the bots confront the poker support staff with a more assertive argument.

I just think this is plain wrong and should be stopped.

obeythekitten
02-26-2005, 10:55 AM
how wide a range / what are the hands that it will push with preflop?

is it a simple issue of pushing with any group I hand and folding everything else?

i'm currently watching it play a $20 sng, and it hasnt played a hand yet...i'll update when i see something

obeythekitten
02-26-2005, 11:13 AM
and wouldnt the bot start getting the [censored] beat out of it once the game went to 50-100 and was 5 handed or less?

lorinda
02-26-2005, 11:13 AM
Range changes with level.

Lori

1C5
02-26-2005, 11:15 AM
I just watched that thing get first place. Interesting.

david050173
02-26-2005, 11:30 AM
Someone want to PM me the name of the player. I would like to see this bot in action

lorinda
02-26-2005, 11:32 AM
I wouldn't normally post it, but it's all over the forum anyway /images/graemlins/blush.gif

saabpo

Lori

obeythekitten
02-26-2005, 11:34 AM
unreal, him/her/it just made the money in the first $20 sng i watched it play....knocked out in 3rd when pocket deuces ran up against pocket 10's

shejk
02-26-2005, 11:40 AM
Posted this in the other thread about this guy, but I'm so proud of it that I now post here as well:

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, I've followed the guy for a short while. I don't know if I'm the only one who've noticed this, but he uses the exact same time for every fold (17 blinks by the small yellow arrow), and the exact same time (23 blinks by the small arrow) every time he chooses to go allin. A few of the decisions were really easy, like calling an allin from a shortstack with KK with 7 players left in the tourny (blinds 100/200).

[/ QUOTE ]

adanthar
02-26-2005, 11:42 AM
I hate to admit it but this (coupled with a bad streak and a very nice discovery elsewhere) is a reason why I'm not playing at Party* anymore.

It's not that I couldn't beat a bot or that I'm scared of bots being successful, it's that I see the future and Party's not it. They're both the biggest site and have the worst customer service, and that's scam artist and bot writer heaven. In the long run, if Party stays this easy to exploit they'll lose fish, and the rest of us will have to migrate to a site where we have to actually play poker rather than follow a strategy guide.

Besides, lately, I've realized I can win more by being a bigger shark in a smaller pond.

*Much. You still can't beat the limit games, and the higher limit SNG's are still bot proof. It's just that there's so little real postflop skill involved at Party that if and when the inevitable happens, I'd rather have developed the game to succeed elsewhere.

apd138
02-26-2005, 11:48 AM
[ QUOTE ]
unreal, him/her/it just made the money in the first $20 sng i watched it play....knocked out in 3rd when pocket deuces ran up against pocket 10's

[/ QUOTE ] Yeah I was watching that personally I think pushing the 2's was wrong but maybe im dumb.

obeythekitten
02-26-2005, 12:13 PM
i'm elliot_o watching the game right now if anyone cares...i think i have the bots strategy completely written out now

gasgod
02-26-2005, 12:17 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Posted this in the other thread about this guy, but I'm so proud of it that I now post here as well:

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, I've followed the guy for a short while. I don't know if I'm the only one who've noticed this, but he uses the exact same time for every fold (17 blinks by the small yellow arrow), and the exact same time (23 blinks by the small arrow) every time he chooses to go allin. A few of the decisions were really easy, like calling an allin from a shortstack with KK with 7 players left in the tourny (blinds 100/200).

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

23 blinks is correct, but at lower levels he folds in 9-11 blinks.


GG

SuitedSixes
02-26-2005, 01:13 PM
Anybody got PokerProphecy numbers on this thing?

apd138
02-26-2005, 01:17 PM
13 of 52 27%

rbilabronze
02-26-2005, 01:25 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Anybody got PokerProphecy numbers on this thing?

[/ QUOTE ]

Player saabpo
Games played 62
Wins 18 (29.03%)
Losses 44 (70.97%)
Average value wagered $20
Players with better winning percentage 78047
Players with worse winning percentage 136397
$20 Table: 18 wins / 44 losses

Although this probably doesn't mean much as all of our numbers are currently not 100% accurate on that site.

SuitedSixes
02-26-2005, 01:29 PM
Small sample size, but I won't be worried until its ITM is over 35%. I have played it once, and I knocked it out with 99 vs. A9s (6th place) when I flopped a set. I just watched it finish 7th with AQs. I don't mind playing this thing as long as I know what it is, and I think I'll try to follow it for a while. I can't decide if I want to sit to its right (steal its blinds with min-raises) or its left (to see the all-in coming). I think once we get its range figured out it will be useless.

The best way to combat this thing is to know it exists.

apd138
02-26-2005, 01:38 PM
Im playing next to it apd123 right now table 13827

gr8vertical
02-26-2005, 01:48 PM
I just feel kinda bad for the people who lose to it and DON'T know it's a bot. Like that AA vs QQ

Obviously, it's an easy call everytime, but just knowing it is bot winning their chips.... /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

1C5
02-26-2005, 01:49 PM
At what point does Party realize it is a bot and do something?

I mean if it is actually a bot and Party doesn't stop it and word gets out, the fish could stop coming in droves and Party could really be screwed.

gasgod
02-26-2005, 01:49 PM
TBird obviously is not in on the joke of the day. (Called saabpo with QQ)

GG

1C5
02-26-2005, 01:51 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Im playing next to it apd123 right now table 13827

[/ QUOTE ]

Just opened the table, what is the strategy? Can't min raise him as you are on the wrong side to do that...

SuitedSixes
02-26-2005, 01:51 PM
I would call saabpo with QQ.

SuitedSixes
02-26-2005, 01:52 PM
No, but he can see the all-in coming.

1C5
02-26-2005, 01:53 PM
How does it have 1500+ chips in level 2???

gasgod
02-26-2005, 01:55 PM
I haven't seen it push with less than QQ at level 2

GG

apd138
02-26-2005, 01:55 PM
im thinking late hell fold his blind to me only seat i could get

SuitedSixes
02-26-2005, 01:56 PM
Ok, my A9s was at Level 3.

villafan
02-26-2005, 01:57 PM
Smart to start chatting about "reading that 2+2 thread right now" in the game.

I know it was not you who actually said that, but see no point in chatting anything at all.

apd138
02-26-2005, 01:57 PM
levels 1-3 group one hands not even akos only jj-aa aks after that it loosens. never plas post flop check folds or all in.

apd138
02-26-2005, 01:58 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Smart to start chatting about "reading that 2+2 thread right now" in the game.

I know it was not you who actually said that, but see no point in chatting anything at all.

[/ QUOTE ] Yeah i never once mentioned 2+2 but i really dont think anyone cares.

gr8vertical
02-26-2005, 02:02 PM
The real question is do you call it with KK in the first level after the bot goes all in /images/graemlins/grin.gif

edit: obviously he has 1 hand that beats you and 2 that dont

id call everytime /images/graemlins/blush.gif

apd138
02-26-2005, 02:03 PM
[ QUOTE ]
The real question is do you call it with KK in the first level after the bot goes all in /images/graemlins/grin.gif

edit: obviously he has 1 hand that beats you and 2 that dont

id call everytime /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[/ QUOTE ] Course not you might bust and not be able to have fun with the bot later. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

EdgePort
02-26-2005, 02:04 PM
Do you think the person is trying to make it less obvious by only playing one game at a time?

And I think I want to be on its left to see the all-in coming..

SuitedSixes
02-26-2005, 02:06 PM
If I had my choice, I would sit to its right to get it to fold to a min raise.

shayneon
02-26-2005, 02:07 PM
This morning I watched him/it go from 6 Players left $1100 in level 4 - to taking First Place by doing nothing more that fold or go all-in preflop.

It reminded me so much of my own game I don't know whether to laugh, cry, or puke...

1C5
02-26-2005, 02:10 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Smart to start chatting about "reading that 2+2 thread right now" in the game.

I know it was not you who actually said that, but see no point in chatting anything at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Someone actually playing in the game said that.

I don't see any harm by what me and Suited did by simply saying our names.

apd138
02-26-2005, 02:13 PM
[ QUOTE ]
If I had my choice, I would sit to its right to get it to fold to a min raise.

[/ QUOTE ] Yeah this was the only seat left. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

ilya
02-26-2005, 02:15 PM
At first this really unsettled me, but now that I think about it...how is this so different from playing a human? It's not like low-buyin Party players are wily and unpredictable. Just like with them, it's a matter of reading the bot and figuring out its patterns, then adjusting one's play accordingly. Matter of fact, I'd rather play the bot -- for now, at least, it can't even try to adjust back to me in real time. Of course, that'll change.

gumpzilla
02-26-2005, 02:17 PM
Yes, but I think what people are concerned about is not playing the bot, but how the fish that they like to play will react to playing the bot. I've no idea how that would go over - people say that if the fish started getting crushed by the bot they'd stop showing up. But those players are already presumably getting crushed by humans, so this isn't quite as compelling an argument as it could be.

SuitedSixes
02-26-2005, 02:17 PM
I was going to say that. I am waiting to be accused of being a bot.

spentrent
02-26-2005, 02:20 PM
This is fascinating. Does it exploit the protocol or identify the cards I wonder?

SuitedSixes
02-26-2005, 02:20 PM
[ QUOTE ]
At first this really unsettled me, but now that I think about it...how is this so different from playing a human? It's not like low-buyin Party players are wily and unpredictable. Just like with them, it's a matter of reading the bot and figuring out its patterns, then adjusting one's play accordingly. Matter of fact, I'd rather play the bot -- for now, at least, it can't even try to adjust back to me in real time. Of course, that'll change.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's just like every few weeks that someone asks on here if Sklansky-s All-In system will work for SNGs.

spentrent
02-26-2005, 02:21 PM
[ QUOTE ]
At first this really unsettled me, but now that I think about it...how is this so different from playing a human? It's not like low-buyin Party players are wily and unpredictable. Just like with them, it's a matter of reading the bot and figuring out its patterns, then adjusting one's play accordingly. Matter of fact, I'd rather play the bot -- for now, at least, it can't even try to adjust back to me in real time. Of course, that'll change.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be hard for a human to always take 17 ticks in situation x and 23 ticks in situation y.

--
"Tell-A-Friend" is -EV (http://www.valismedia.com)

Voltron87
02-26-2005, 02:26 PM
I think as long as this is a pretty unsophisticated program it's not much of a threat. The danger is when the bot can crunch numbers on the button as a human can. It would be pretty hard to have an advantage over a bot that does that well.

OPJayhawk
02-26-2005, 02:29 PM
The BoT just made the money finished in third, but it made a very interesting play with 4 to go.

The Bot had 500ish chips and pushed utg with 36o. There was another player that had 250 or so chips with the blinds at 100 200.

At the time the large stack at the table 4000ish chips was in the bb

The bot got lucky and made trip 3's and finished ahead of the player with the small stack who went out a few hands later.

This at least to me looks like a horrible play. With a human player close to going out - it pushed into the big stack at the table with close to the worse possible hand.

Just a little more info with 1500ish chips and like 6 left it pushed with a10o from mid position.

lorinda
02-26-2005, 02:30 PM
If you didn't know the other player's stack sizes, would it have been okay?

Lori

SuitedSixes
02-26-2005, 02:32 PM
Let me be the first to say, I welcome our new Push or Fold Overlords.

After watching it play I am not scared to be at the same table of this thing nor do I think that it will make more money than anyone who pays attention to the stuff said here. It will make money, I doubt that it will make over 20% ROI, but it doesn't have to.

My irritation is that it can make money while it's operator does other stuff. I would love to have something 16-table $22s for me, making the same decisons that I do so that I can spend time watching my kid (turned 3 yesterday) do fun stuff with my ill-gotten gains.

EdgePort
02-26-2005, 02:32 PM
[ QUOTE ]
This is fascinating. Does it exploit the protocol or identify the cards I wonder?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would gues to identity the cards it just parses the saved text file.. How is it doing the raising??

villafan
02-26-2005, 02:32 PM
The danger is not the level of the bot play. The danger is the media coverage that will come when a bot can make money on 20 dollar SNGs.

davehwm
02-26-2005, 02:34 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is fascinating. Does it exploit the protocol or identify the cards I wonder?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would gues to identity the cards it just parses the saved text file.. How is it doing the raising??

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure it just reads the amount of it's own stack when it has a hand that qualifies for going all-in and inputs that amount into the raise box.

stupidsucker
02-26-2005, 02:56 PM
Your all really not helping with threads like this. You are adding to the hysteria, and drawing attention to the bot maker so that he has a chance to adjust, and even change his account/name.

Great that you have publicly given the maker insight as how to not be so suspicious. Perhaps if we dive into it more in depth you can help him and others design an undetectable bot.

davehwm
02-26-2005, 03:03 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Your all really not helping with threads like this. You are adding to the hysteria, and drawing attention to the bot maker so that he has a chance to adjust, and even change his account/name.

Great that you have publicly given the maker insight as how to not be so suspicious. Perhaps if we dive into it more in depth you can help him and others design an undetectable bot.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have unrealistic expectations.

gumpzilla
02-26-2005, 03:05 PM
What would the danger in an undetectable bot be? If it were good, since bots aren't allowed, the designer would want to keep it secret. He wouldn't be very likely to give it away for free, but selling it would be a difficult proposition, because if it became widely known you would see likely countermeasures from Party. The countermeasures probably wouldn't stop anybody with sufficient determination and skill from getting around them, but again this would be a few people, most likely, not an entire customer base.

So I don't really see a proficient bot spreading around the wild. And, given that, what's the harm in one player writing a bot that does slightly worse than what the best human players can do? How is it really different, from your perspective?

gasgod
02-26-2005, 03:10 PM
If Party doesn't shut it down (how?), we can expect to see V 2.0 shortly. If it can do this well with such a rudimentary game, imagine how well it will do a year from now.

It seems to me that the way to stop it (or at least slow it down) is in the tournament registration process.


GG

FishBurger
02-26-2005, 03:12 PM
[ QUOTE ]

Great that you have publicly given the maker insight as how to not be so suspicious. Perhaps if we dive into it more in depth you can help him and others design an undetectable bot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhhh ... how do you know that an undetectable bot isn't already out there?

gumpzilla
02-26-2005, 03:14 PM
[ QUOTE ]
If Party doesn't shut it down (how?), we can expect to see V 2.0 shortly. If it can do this well with such a rudimentary game, imagine how well it will do a year from now.


[/ QUOTE ]

Barriers in the registration process would be one possibility. I think I've seen the possibility mentioned of using a technique that you see pretty frequently on sites that host lots of downloads that are trying to keep you from robotically downloading everything they have. You put up a picture with a word in it, and ask the user to copy the word. Pretty easy task for a person, pretty rough for a computer. You could do this in the reg. process, or you could randomly do it every 10-15 minutes during the game. During the game would be problematic, I think, because what do you do if somebody fails in the middle of a tournament? DQ them on the spot? Seems very difficult to do fairly.

So I like your idea about the registration being the barrier.

adanthar
02-26-2005, 03:32 PM
[ QUOTE ]
You could do this in the reg. process, or you could randomly do it every 10-15 minutes during the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody will ever do it every 10-15 minutes, if only because once fish are clued in that bots *exist* they'll leave in droves. Doing it once is pointless since you need a human to deposit money in the first place.

Really, it's not that the bots are any good; it's that they exist at all that's the problem. While I trust myself to beat a thousand bots I'd rather develop my skills for when the fish are missing.

The fact that few of us know how to play 25/50 or 50/100 very well is a big part of this - Party just doesn't develop postflop play and it shows.

gasgod
02-26-2005, 03:36 PM
Interesting. SB tried a minraise around level 4, and saabpo came over the top all-in from the BB.

GG

wiggs73
02-26-2005, 03:44 PM
Yeah, I hadn't seen this before, I suggested just calling when it's in the blind and if it checks, just bet the flop since it goes into check-fold mode post flop.

gumpzilla
02-26-2005, 03:54 PM
I realize it was unclear, but following gasgod, I meant the SNG registration process, not the original signup for the account, which would be obviously useless. It doesn't really address the issue of people being scared off by bots though, which would still be involved if every SNG you had to play required one of these processes.

Is the argument that fish will be scared off by bots based on perceived anti-computer hysteria? Do these people not realize they're losing and think that the bots are better than strong human opposition? Are the people who are playing purely for recreational value and aren't afraid of losing some money going to rebel against playing bots because it seems less fun? What gets me about this is that it's not at all clear to me that the fish are really worse off with a few bots out there - and as long as there are only a few, they really aren't - but everybody thinks that they'll be horrified by the prospect. I can certainly see some basis for this but it's very hard for me to predict how people would react.

Texas Pete
02-26-2005, 04:23 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but I think what people are concerned about is not playing the bot, but how the fish that they like to play will react to playing the bot. I've no idea how that would go over - people say that if the fish started getting crushed by the bot they'd stop showing up. But those players are already presumably getting crushed by humans, so this isn't quite as compelling an argument as it could be.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree! Taking the stock and futures trading arenas as examples, people have no problem participating and losing lots of money, with full knowledge that much of the volume is from program trading. There are also lots of program traders who lose lots of money. Finally, even though program trading is well known to all professionals and programs are sold to the public, i'll guess that lots of participants still don't have a clue about it.

The Yugoslavian
02-26-2005, 04:32 PM
Meh.

Yugoslav

EdgePort
02-26-2005, 04:58 PM
I bet we have upped its winning percentage because no one is calling the all-ins.. If we didn't all go there and knew what it was doing, other people would call some of them.. and it would lose..

Texas Pete
02-26-2005, 04:58 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Meh.

Yugoslav

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly what I was thinking!
Also on the subject of "the fish" and their reaction to bots. No one thinks they are a fish. I'm sure if you could take a poll, 90% of people would consider themselves above-average poker players (or traders, or drivers, or golf players, or whatever else they did regularly). I think many would be pleased to play a bot, because they would get the idea that they could figure out how it could play and take advantage of it, or routinely "bluff it out".

Dead
02-26-2005, 06:00 PM
I do not understand the problem people on here have with robots. First of all, let me say at the outset that I have nothing to do with this robot and I have no idea who it is or how it works.

That said, I don't understand how it's cheating. It's not colluding, as far as you can tell, and it's not privy to any information that the other players on PartyPoker are.

I think it's rather ingenious, actually. While the guy is asleep, his bot is making money for him.

-Dead

Phil Van Sexton
02-26-2005, 06:13 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I do not understand the problem people on here have with robots.

[/ QUOTE ]

It violates Party's rules that you have to agree to when you sign up. It doesn't matter what we think.

Party busted a bunch of WinHoldEm users a while back by extending the poker client to take screenshots of your desktop (yes they can see everything on *your* desktop. Try to keep the porn to a minimum).

They will catch this guy if he is cheating since he is being so blatant about it. They might not take him down right away, but instead gather evidence before taking his bankroll. If they can't prove it right now, they'll find a way eventually.

hate
02-26-2005, 06:20 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If Party doesn't shut it down (how?), we can expect to see V 2.0 shortly. If it can do this well with such a rudimentary game, imagine how well it will do a year from now.


[/ QUOTE ]

Barriers in the registration process would be one possibility. I think I've seen the possibility mentioned of using a technique that you see pretty frequently on sites that host lots of downloads that are trying to keep you from robotically downloading everything they have. You put up a picture with a word in it, and ask the user to copy the word. Pretty easy task for a person, pretty rough for a computer. You could do this in the reg. process, or you could randomly do it every 10-15 minutes during the game. During the game would be problematic, I think, because what do you do if somebody fails in the middle of a tournament? DQ them on the spot? Seems very difficult to do fairly.

So I like your idea about the registration being the barrier.

[/ QUOTE ]

That technique about image recognition has proven to be faulty, even the more advanced ones have proven to allow image recognition software systems to recognize somewhere between 20 and 80% of the time. I'm not saying it's not a good barrier, it's just not foolproof. Even the toughest ones I was reading awhile ago are still recognized 4% of the time or so.

Dead
02-26-2005, 06:26 PM
Isn't WinHoldEm the software that allows and encourages collusion? That's quite different.

Anyway, can you tell me a little more about Party spying on me?

They can actually see everything that I am doing on my computer while I am playing on there?

And do other sites do this as well? Or is it just Party and their skins?

rohjoh
02-26-2005, 06:42 PM
[ QUOTE ]
13 of 52 27%

[/ QUOTE ]

Here are updated numbers...
Player saabpo
Games played 67
Wins 22 (32.84%)
Losses 45 (67.16%)
Average value wagered $20
Players with better winning percentage 69198
Players with worse winning percentage 145246
$20 Table: 22 wins / 45 losses

Hirez
02-26-2005, 07:06 PM
it flopped quads on me /images/graemlins/mad.gif

ilya
02-26-2005, 07:17 PM
[ QUOTE ]
it flopped quads on me /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

that's nothing, it straight-flushed me /images/graemlins/mad.gif /images/graemlins/mad.gif

spentrent
02-26-2005, 07:20 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it flopped quads on me /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

that's nothing, it straight-flushed me /images/graemlins/mad.gif /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I called Fugitive's all-in with TT cuz I thought she was a bot.

--
"Tell-A-Friend" is -EV (http://www.valismedia.com)

obeythekitten
02-26-2005, 07:20 PM
you guys are all rookies, saabpo knocked up my girlfriend.

Khern
02-26-2005, 07:21 PM
My roomate once got his chat banned, and, one day, while it was banned, the whole table started a conspiracy theory about how he was a bot.

-John

TT_fold
02-26-2005, 07:24 PM
So far playing Saabpo has been a blast... my ROI is at 218% after 2 games /images/graemlins/smile.gif

You can come watch me play right now, I'm sitting to his right on table 13802.

SuitedSixes
02-26-2005, 07:26 PM
The troubling thing is that Party hasn't done anything about it. They must know about it by now. I would think that pissing off one customer (even if he was legitimate) would be worth it. This would be a +PR move.

theredwave
02-26-2005, 07:30 PM
[ QUOTE ]
So far playing Saabpo has been a blast... my ROI is at 218% after 2 games

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too, somehow I think my success has been based mostly on luck and small sample size /images/graemlins/grin.gif.

bones
02-26-2005, 07:31 PM
Nice 8/2 call. You took one for the team.

Phil Van Sexton
02-26-2005, 07:54 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Isn't WinHoldEm the software that allows and encourages collusion? That's quite different.

[/ QUOTE ]

WinHoldEm has a Team Edition, but I don't think the team feautre is that popular. These guys have enough trouble programming their bots without factoring in other teams members.

If people just use it to see the hole cards of other team members, that's not a big issue since you could do the same thing by sending instant messages to each other.

Human collusion isn't quite as bad as bots because it takes effort (ie you have to be sitting at the table and paying attention), so it would likely be doable on a couple table for a few hours a day. With a bot, you can 4 table 24/7, and more if you have more computers.

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, can you tell me a little more about Party spying on me?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you want to know? Are you the BOT!?

Seriously, you are running a .exe on your computer, so they can do anything they want. Take a screenshot, erase your hard drive, whatever. Just like any program that you run.

You probably have spyware running right now that you don't even know about, so I wouldn't worry about party too much.

RiverTheNuts
02-26-2005, 07:59 PM
what table is it on now??
I wanna see it in action and it looks like its hidden from search

lfx
02-26-2005, 08:00 PM
14922

RiverTheNuts
02-26-2005, 08:24 PM
Just pushed A7o in EP on LV 4 and lost

Where'd he go now?

Strollen
02-26-2005, 08:30 PM
Well it busted out on A7o after stealing?? a couple of blinds.

bones
02-26-2005, 08:36 PM
Is he on break now?

ilya
02-26-2005, 08:40 PM
Yeah, he's getting lubed up.

psyduck
02-26-2005, 08:41 PM
It might be prudent not to post so many messages on the tables he's playing on. Seriously, some 2+2ers and goons are creating a ruckus.

bones
02-26-2005, 08:42 PM
Is it wrong that I'm eagerly awaiting his next game?

TT_fold
02-26-2005, 08:42 PM
In all seriousness...

I wonder what happened to saabpo? I had been stalking him for his last 4 tournaments, but he's vanished since he busted with A7o.

Drunk Bob
02-26-2005, 08:49 PM
It's saturday night.Even a bot has to have time off for cyper sex. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Khern
02-26-2005, 09:04 PM
But I bet it pushes if it has the nuts on the flop.

gumpzilla
02-26-2005, 09:07 PM
. . . is that I was too slow to grab the name as a gimmick account.

Khern
02-26-2005, 09:14 PM
FWIW(which may not be much), I don't think party's rules are legal(even if the gambling part was/is). The way I understand it, Anti-trust/monopoly law doesn't allow anyone to dictate through that sort of aggreement which progrmas you can run on your computer while there's is running. Otherwise we would live in a straight microsoft world.

Is it right? Maybe that's better left to the philosophers. Poker players mostly think it's wrong, coders seem to think it's ok. It just depends on how you make your money. The way I see it, The world isn't fair to start with. Poker players would rather it be unfair in their favor, and coder would rather it be unfair in theirs..

-John

spentrent
02-26-2005, 09:26 PM
http://www.valismedia.com/saabpo.gif (http://www.valismedia.com/saabpo.html)

BusterStacks
02-26-2005, 09:58 PM
[ QUOTE ]
But I bet it pushes if it has the nuts on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll take this bet.

Bremen
02-27-2005, 01:29 AM
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW(which may not be much), I don't think party's rules are legal(even if the gambling part was/is). The way I understand it, Anti-trust/monopoly law doesn't allow anyone to dictate through that sort of aggreement which progrmas you can run on your computer while there's is running. Otherwise we would live in a straight microsoft world.

Is it right? Maybe that's better left to the philosophers. Poker players mostly think it's wrong, coders seem to think it's ok. It just depends on how you make your money. The way I see it, The world isn't fair to start with. Poker players would rather it be unfair in their favor, and coder would rather it be unfair in theirs..

-John


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually there are economic reasons M$ dosn't do that (not sure if the law would say anything about it, esp since dubya is unlikely to actually stop any abuses anyway). Anyway I'm not sure having a program directly interface with the party software is the same as having a program run at the same time.

I don't know if you've ever played chess, but the ICC (chess server, I play at FICS btw) has many of the same abilities to see what you're doing. I've never heard of any legal cases coming about because of any actions taken when someone was running a chess engine at the same time as their client.

apd138
02-28-2005, 07:25 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW(which may not be much), I don't think party's rules are legal(even if the gambling part was/is). The way I understand it, Anti-trust/monopoly law doesn't allow anyone to dictate through that sort of aggreement which progrmas you can run on your computer while there's is running. Otherwise we would live in a straight microsoft world.

Is it right? Maybe that's better left to the philosophers. Poker players mostly think it's wrong, coders seem to think it's ok. It just depends on how you make your money. The way I see it, The world isn't fair to start with. Poker players would rather it be unfair in their favor, and coder would rather it be unfair in theirs..

-John


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually there are economic reasons M$ dosn't do that (not sure if the law would say anything about it, esp since dubya is unlikely to actually stop any abuses anyway). Anyway I'm not sure having a program directly interface with the party software is the same as having a program run at the same time.

I don't know if you've ever played chess, but the ICC (chess server, I play at FICS btw) has many of the same abilities to see what you're doing. I've never heard of any legal cases coming about because of any actions taken when someone was running a chess engine at the same time as their client.

[/ QUOTE ] There is also not much money involved in chess. Also since when have we thought offshore sites were subject to the same laws Microsoft would be?

Dan Mezick
05-17-2005, 12:12 AM
The nasty $20+$2 players are trained apes, not 'bots'.

They use the Sklanksy 'System'... as described on page 122 of Tournament Poker for Advanced Players.


This link explains the details:

Primate Poker Inc (http://www.pokercoaching.com/primatepoker)

illab
05-17-2005, 12:52 AM
Thats too funny, im buying stock in PPI.

3N1GM4
09-10-2005, 01:04 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is fascinating. Does it exploit the protocol or identify the cards I wonder?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would gues to identity the cards it just parses the saved text file.. How is it doing the raising??

[/ QUOTE ]

hmm, is the text file partially generated as the hand is played though? Or is each hand added to it at the end of the hand?