What are the chances this player is a bot?

[Bytestream]

Ok, I know that 150 hands is a small small sample.

The player in question has a VPIP of 16% and a PFR of 0%. I double checked that, and the player has never raised preflop in 151 hands. Two known starting hands AA and QQ.

So Im sure this is just a really timid player. But then I remembered reading in one of the Winholdem threads here, how someoone was making fun of the users on the winholdem forums because one of the popular strategy suggested never raising preflop. I noticed this after the player seemed to be having a hard time getting into the seat and into the game. It was weird, like a glitch in the Matrix or something. So I pulled up my stats on him and they look peculiar.

Just something to think about, and something we all need to be on amber alert for.

[VinnyTheFish]

I do not if it is a bot or not, but if you are playing at Party (or even Empire), this maybe someone working off a bounus.

[bdk3clash]

Dude--rule 1 for 99% of bots would be to raise with AA preflop.

[PennDisc]

If it is a bot, then never raising preflop isn't going to win it money the same way that never raising won't win money for a human player. Should we really be on "amber alert" for a bot that plays this poorly? I'd be happy to take its money the same way I would a poor human player. In my opinion most of the bot talk right now is overhyped.

[Bytestream]

No, you should not be worried about a bot beating you (right now). You should definately be worried about the bots feasting on all your fish though. You know, the bots that don't need to work, eat, sleep or get up to take a piss. Because a halfass winnning bot is taking more money from you then they are "taking from you". You get what Im saying?

[Bytestream]

Dude --- did you not read the whole post???

[ QUOTE ]
But then I remembered reading in one of the Winholdem threads here, how someoone was making fun of the users on the winholdem forums because one of the popular strategy suggested never raising preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

[lorinda]

I'd be happy to take its money the same way I would a poor human player.

In that case you'd be happy to be on amber alert, surely?
Especially considering that bots will usually have clones.

Lori

[lorinda]

You should definately be worried about the bots feasting on all your fish though.

I think only Saabpo is currently in this category, although there might be some NL ring bots that just went out of business /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Lori

[bdk3clash]

I read the post. There are lots of player who don't raise preflop. Ever. Most of them are not bots. So when presented with a player who never raises preflop, it's likely it is not a bot.

Even if 100% of all bots playing online never raised preflop, this player is still not likely to be a bot. But maybe it is. Who knows.

[B00T]

Some fish wont raise AA preflop because they are obsessed with setting traps like they see on WPT. They do not realize people will call the raise anyway and instead they will slowplay them and then get sucked out on when 1 of 5 other people in crack them because they dont want to lose anyone in the pot.

This even goes for limit.

[Bytestream]

Of course I would need to see more hands, but to not raise one single time preflop in 151 hands, I dont even know why you would play poker. I can understand the "trap" mentatlity, but you would then almost certaintly expect this player to try to steal the blinds or raise with crap every once in a while too.

[Bytestream]

And by the way, this isnt a thread about whether bots exist. It is a FACT that winholdem bots exist and play on Party Poker. They are there, and I bet we have all played against at least one. Just wondering if this was one of those...

[CORed]

If it's a bot it's a very badly programmed one. Not raising preflop and playing only big pocket pairs might make a little money in loose games, but it's a long way from optimum. If the winholdem users think this is a good strategy, we have little to fear from them.

[AngryCola]

I'm not going to disagree with any of your post here, but why are you so incredibly obsessed with bots?

Honestly, there's nothing you can do about it.
We're all aware of the risks and dangers.

It seems like you've made it your personal mission, and I don't understand why.

[Mr. Graff]

0% PFR = Bot. Simply ridiculous.

[lorinda]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not going to disagree with any of your post here, but why are you so incredibly obsessed with bots?

Honestly, there's nothing you can do about it.
We're all aware of the risks and dangers.

It seems like you've made it your personal mission, and I don't understand why.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you find a badly programmed bot, it's an ATM.

If you find a well programmed bot, it's a fish destroyer.

Finding bots is good and important. Looking for them keeps you awake /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Lori

[AngryCola]

I couldn't agree more, but that wasn't my point.

He has always tried to educate all of us on the horrors of bots. I'm just asking why he does so, because most of us are aware of the dangers. Yet he seems he thinks we never 'get it'.

I have zero problem with hunting down bots, but I'm confused as to his reasons for thinking most of us don't 'care', or aren't aware of the problems.

[Rudbaeck]

All the bots I find turn out to be 2+2'ers on closer inspection.

I fear the TAG bot who sits in Party 3/6 for 16 hours a day, 7 days a week. But they got rudimentary ChatBot implemented, they all answer to brown trout. (And presumably to sup bro? these days.)

[JPNet]

Just as an FYI, I came across what must have been a bot on Golden Palace about 2 weeks ago. It was playing in a vary low limit sng. It and I got heads up. It had about $6000 in chips. Within a few hands, I realized that if I raised pre-flop, even the minimum, it would immediately fold. It folded so fast that there was no way anyone could look at their cards and make a decision. So I ignored my cards and clicked raise every time. It folded every hand from $6000 down to $0, $300 at a time, didn't call a single hand. I notified Golden Palace support, but never heard back from them.