OT: Excerpted by Citanul: Proving I'm not a bot

[unreal_nh]

Update:

So they have come to the conclusion given the "evidence" they have that juicy is a bot. they are permanently locking the account and confiscating the funds (about 15k). /images/graemlins/frown.gif so anyway, further action will definitely be taken. suggestions are welcome /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[bones]

Damn man, that sucks.

On a side note, what are you doing keeping 15k in an account that just plays 22s-33s?

[Mr_J]

Good point. So they didn't even tell you what their so-called 'evidence' was??

[Degen]

[ QUOTE ]
suggestions are welcome

[/ QUOTE ]

A. Make a better bot

or

B. Don't make troll posts like this

[bawcerelli]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
suggestions are welcome

[/ QUOTE ]

A. Make a better bot

or

B. Don't make troll posts like this

[/ QUOTE ]

harsh. you believe he is a bot?

[Deuce2High]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
suggestions are welcome

[/ QUOTE ]

A. Make a better bot

or

B. Don't make troll posts like this

[/ QUOTE ]

harsh. you believe he is a bot?

[/ QUOTE ]

I do.


Edit: I would go so far as to even say it is downright foolish to even believe one thing Unreal_NH has to say about this situation at all.

Who would possibly dedicate so much time to poker as to play 3000 22 sngs at the same level without ever moving up? And have $15k in ones account without trying bigger buy-in SnGs? (data thanks to PokerProphecy, someone hypocritical but nowhere near as shady as this ordeal)

Who plays over 3000 SnGs without even verifying their [censored] account first?

That sucks that you lose 15k and I would highly advise against trying to get legal with party. If you try to scare them by sharing your 'bad experiences' with others in an attempt to get your money back you might get sued yourself. Watch out.

[chisness]

this logic is awful: i'm pretty sure he's been playing at least $33s also and it's not like he's been doing the $6s, $22s can make him good, easy money with minimal downswings.

having $15k in account is definitely not that smart, but i see nothing wrong with that.

i'm not saying he's legit, but i think your evidence is very bad. it does seem like something's missing -- party has never done this before so they definitely don't throw this very serious accusation around.

[PartySNGer]

My God, this dude is like 1st or 2nd in the leaderboard so I just assumed he played 215s. If he has played enough 22s to be in the top 3 of the leaderboard he has to be a bot or an idiot.

[se2schul]

[ QUOTE ]
...and confiscating the funds (about 15k).

[/ QUOTE ]

You can write a bot that can win you 15K, but you can't code it to click the little pop-ups or to cash out.

Oh well... time to start working on Juicy v2.0, eh??

[Mr_J]

"If he has played enough 22s to be in the top 3 of the leaderboard he has to be an idiot. "

Well that'd make him a well paid idiot, and you just an idiot.

[KennyBanya]

I have no idea if unreal/juicy is a bot, but I would be curious to know why he did not answer the popups.

It seems like it would have made his life much simpler.

Peace,

KennyBanya

[Degen]

i kinda wanna sue unreal for making fish afraid to put their money in partypoker for fear of being accused of being bots

[PartySNGer]

[ QUOTE ]
I have no idea if unreal/juicy is a bot, but I would be curious to know why he did not answer the popups.

It seems like it would have made his life much simpler.

Peace,

KennyBanya

[/ QUOTE ]

Party isn't stupid, they wouldn't just close the account of a big money player and member of 2+2 boards if there wasn't something fishy going on with his account. The guy plays $22s and he's higher on the leaderboard than ppl who are playing $215s and $109s 40+ hours a week. That is virtually impossible unless someone is playing shifts on his account (prob also illegal) or he is a bot. Also, why wouldn't he just move up instead of playing this many $22s? It's probably possible for a bot to do well with a basic push/fold strategy in the $22s, but this prob wouldn't work at higher levels. That is likely the reason he's stayed at $22s. No sane person would play that many $22s without moving up or going broke.

[Degen]

[ QUOTE ]
No sane person would play that many $22s without moving up or going broke.


[/ QUOTE ]

This whole thing smells fishy, but this statement is very very untrue. I think a REALLY sane person would play the 22's if they were just after the money and felt their hourly was better 10 tabling them continous than say 4 tabling the 109's in sets. I sometimes wish I had control of my ego enough to play at a lower level than my bankroll will allow to have a more stable stream of income.

Many top posters here have tried to do this, some are trying to do it right now.

[PartySNGer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No sane person would play that many $22s without moving up or going broke.


[/ QUOTE ]

This whole thing smells fishy, but this statement is very very untrue. I think a REALLY sane person would play the 22's if they were just after the money and felt their hourly was better 10 tabling them continous than say 4 tabling the 109's in sets. I sometimes wish I had control of my ego enough to play at a lower level than my bankroll will allow to have a more stable stream of income.

Many top posters here have tried to do this, some are trying to do it right now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming all you care about is cash I refuse to believe it isn't more profitable moving up the SNG ladder. If you have played a few thousand $22s and you are doing reasonably well and are a solid player it is crazy not to attempt to move up. Your ROI doesn't have to be near as good in the 55s to make more than the 22s, and there is no way the competition is twice as good. I have a double digit ROI at the 55s and as soon as my BR is sufficient I'm definitely moving up to 109s. There is no way the 109s are twice as tough as the 55s so it would make no sense for me to stay at the 55s longer than I had to. The only players who SHOULD stay at the 22s after 5000 or so SNGs are ones who have a ROI of under 10%. They probably wouldn't fare very well in the 55s. Even then I would recommend playing the 33s. Keep in mind if you have a 10% ROI at the 22s and have played 5000 you will have over $10,000 in profit (not including RB). You're saying that this person should stay at 22s instead of moving up to 33s? That is crazy advice.

[SonnyJay]

[ QUOTE ]
That sucks that you lose 15k and I would highly advise against trying to get legal with party. If you try to scare them by sharing your 'bad experiences' with others in an attempt to get your money back you might get sued yourself. Watch out.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the least of your concerns. A company that operates in an industry that the U.S. government views as illegal is not going to come to the U.S. to file a defamation suit against someone posting in an online forum. Because of the same reason, you can't go seek an injunction in U.S. courts because 1)they're based in Gibraltar and aren't in U.S. jurisdiction and 2)internet gambling is illegal.

We all take on risk playing on these sites because we have no recourse against any decision they make (see Dutch Boyd (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=&Number=319817&page=0&vie w=&sb=5&o=14&fpart=) ). While that situation is different from this one, it illustrates the risks of such activities.

Unreal, if you are legit I'd keep fighting. Offer to do whatever they ask, be willing to offer any evidence, and do it frequently so that they don't forget about you. Forget about lawyers, unless you want to catch a flight and sue in the Gibraltar Magistrates Court. They won't respond to a U.S. lawsuit and more than likely it would be thrown out anyway since it's an illegal activity.

-SonnyJay

[citanul]

I wanted to break out this part of this thread because I think that there's a lot of total freaking BS contained herein. Have fun ripping people to shreds who say stupid things in this part of this thread.

c

[TT_fold]

For a moment, let's toss our emotions aside and take a good look at this situation.

If Party's allegations are true, then juicyv_gina has to be the most successful bot to date. The fact that it (a) won the weekly leaderboard several times and (b) showed tremendous monetary gain says a lot about the potential for bots to generate tremendous profits at low limit SNGs.

Has anyone logged a significant number of games with juicyv_gina? I'd be curious to see how the bot played in levels 1 and 2 of $22 SNGs. I know I played at least a dozen times with juicy... I'll have to pore over some hand histories myself.

[runner4life7]

if I remember right my roommate remembered seeing some potential donkish moves out of juicy early levels in the beginning of the month, which I would say is probably not what a bot would be programmed to do.

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]
if I remember right my roommate remembered seeing some potential donkish moves out of juicy early levels in the beginning of the month, which I would say is probably not what a bot would be programmed to do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Any basic bot should enable the creator to take over, so an odd play or a single comment in the chat window doesn't eliminate it being a bot.

Anyway, that is not what is used to identify if someone is using a bot. Unrealistic hours, unrealistic responsetimes, not replying to popups etc are stronger indicators.

[ QUOTE ]

Party isn't stupid

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you a bot /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[citanul]

i'm not emotionally tied to the thread or the situation at all. i merely wanted to chop out this crap from the orignal thread, so that people who would not otherwise see the total lunacy contained herein might see it more easilly.

1) you have no idea if, if this is a bot, it is the most successful bot ever.
2) you should be able to start by looking over your own hand histories, shouldn't you?
3) to the person who says that there were some donkish moves, a) "donkish" really isn't strong enough to say anything at all, and b) how do you know what a bot would be programmed to do? perhaps it would be programmed to not just play push fold poker?

c

[TT_fold]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm not emotionally tied to the thread or the situation at all. i merely wanted to chop out this crap from the orignal thread, so that people who would not otherwise see the total lunacy contained herein might see it more easilly.

1) you have no idea if, if this is a bot, it is the most successful bot ever.
2) you should be able to start by looking over your own hand histories, shouldn't you?
3) to the person who says that there were some donkish moves, a) "donkish" really isn't strong enough to say anything at all, and b) how do you know what a bot would be programmed to do? perhaps it would be programmed to not just play push fold poker?

c

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll try to address these 3 points:

- You're right that we have no idea if juicyv_gina is the best bot around... however, he's certainly the best out of all two of the bots this forum has witnessed (saabpo and juicyv_gina). That's beside the point... I want to get to the bottom of how a likely bot won 15K.

- I only had 5 hand histories with juicyv_gina, so I'm just looking to get more feedback. His play in the early levels is certainly interesting... he's shown an ability to limp, raise, fold, and even cold call preflop, unlike saabpo's method of pushing QQ+ in level 1 and getting progessively looser each level. See below:

***** Hand History for Game 3051270985 *****
30/60 Tourney Texas Hold'em Game Table (NL) (Tournament 17496995) - Thu Nov 17 18:42:31 EST 2005
Table Table 67923 (Real Money) -- Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 9
Seat 2: spilly1000 (1030)
Seat 3: BILLFILLMAF1 (745)
Seat 4: juicyv_gina (775)
Seat 5: alexanderj1 (1020)
Seat 6: scottyboy727 (745)
Seat 7: drews51 (865)
Seat 8: chukcz (1480)
Seat 9: velimirovic (485)
Seat 10: F_Lindeman (855)
BILLFILLMAF1 posts small blind (15)
juicyv_gina posts big blind (30)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to BILLFILLMAF1 [ 8h, 4d ]
alexanderj1 calls (30)
scottyboy727 calls (30)
drews51 folds.
chukcz folds.
velimirovic folds.
F_Lindeman folds.
spilly1000 raises (100) to 100
BILLFILLMAF1 folds.
juicyv_gina calls (70)
alexanderj1 folds.
scottyboy727 calls (70)
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 5s, 7s, Ks ]
juicyv_gina checks.
scottyboy727 checks.
spilly1000 bets (130)
juicyv_gina raises (675) to 675
juicyv_gina is all-In.
scottyboy727 folds.
spilly1000 folds.
Creating Main Pot with $1150 with juicyv_gina
** Summary **
Main Pot: 1150
Board: [ 5s 7s Ks ]
spilly1000 balance 800, lost 230 (folded)
BILLFILLMAF1 balance 730, lost 15 (folded)
juicyv_gina balance 1150, bet 775, collected 1150, net +375
alexanderj1 balance 990, lost 30 (folded)
scottyboy727 balance 645, lost 100 (folded)
drews51 balance 865, didn't bet (folded)
chukcz balance 1480, didn't bet (folded)
velimirovic balance 485, didn't bet (folded)
F_Lindeman balance 855, didn't bet (folded)

- I can't really comment on any "donkish" moves, but I'd definitely like to see more hands involving juicyv_gina.

[citanul]

i see nothing interesting about this hand at all except that it would be very hard to program a bot to play a hand like that.

[Seth Money]

[ QUOTE ]
For a moment, let's toss our emotions aside and take a good look at this situation.

If Party's allegations are true, then juicyv_gina has to be the most successful bot to date. The fact that it (a) won the weekly leaderboard several times and (b) showed tremendous monetary gain says a lot about the potential for bots to generate tremendous profits at low limit SNGs.

Has anyone logged a significant number of games with juicyv_gina? I'd be curious to see how the bot played in levels 1 and 2 of $22 SNGs. I know I played at least a dozen times with juicy... I'll have to pore over some hand histories myself.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well just to clear up some things. I've gone through my hand histories and I would say that I prolly have played more tourniees with juicy then anyone else during the month of October and some into November.

For the longest time when I was playing versus him I couldn't understand why he was leading the leaderboard I had never seen him win a tourney let alone go heads up against him.

So if someone had told me he was a bot then I would have said that he was pisspoor one at best but then through posting on here and through pm's I became friends with juicy and I can attest that he isn't a bot.

But to clear up some things, he only won the leaderboard once and that was in October where he was playing the 20's. In November I did not play with him at all because for the most part he was playing the 30's.

I don't think it is right what Party is doing. I mean not to go out there on a tangent but if you were arrested for murder and you didn't have a say in it but they told you they had evidence that you killed someone but never showed it to you wouldn't you be pissed off?

I guess thats just my two cents. I know the person, I talk to him quite frequently and am on his said for little or whatever that is worth, I don't know.

Seth


P.S. I find it funny that you guys assume he is a bot because he played 3k tournies in a month or that he plays hella hours. I mean I remember a post from Gigabet where he said that he played way more then that and at one time played 50+ hours straight.

[runner4life7]

i dont even recall what the donkish moves were and if they were that bad. I guess i was more going for the bot is either advanced in the sense that it plays more early level which I would think a bot would not or it was just two players playing a ton which is what I think is the case, but I have no proof, just my 2 cents.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
i dont even recall what the donkish moves were and if they were that bad. I guess i was more going for the bot is either advanced in the sense that it plays more early level which I would think a bot would not or it was just two players playing a ton which is what I think is the case, but I have no proof, just my 2 cents.

[/ QUOTE ]

why can't it be a real person?

that was after all the whole point of me making this excerpt.

i understand that since it was quoted out people don't feel like they want to read the top of the thread again, but bah.

the people from the original thread assumed this player was a bot from a variety of very bad reasons. i wanted them mocked.

c

[runner4life7]

didnt he even say a while back that his friend played 2000 games and he played 1000?

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]

So if someone had told me he was a bot then I would have said that he was pisspoor one at best but then through posting on here and through pm's I became friends with juicy and I can attest that he isn't a bot.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can you attest to that? Have you physically observed him play poker at his computer?

[bones]

This kind of brings up an ethics question, at least for me. Is it unethical to team an account? Say 2 players playing off the same BR, either splitting variance or tracking results separately from the same party account. Is it against Party's TOC? I looked and it only mentioned them not being liable for losses if someone else plays on the acct.

Any thoughts?

[Seth Money]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

So if someone had told me he was a bot then I would have said that he was pisspoor one at best but then through posting on here and through pm's I became friends with juicy and I can attest that he isn't a bot.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can you attest to that? Have you physically observed him play poker at his computer?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not here to start a war but you guys are assuming he is the wrong.

Have I physically observed him playing on his computer? No. Have I talked to him throughout my 12-16 hour sessions via messneger? Yes, multiple times, having conversassions for hours on end about meaningless stuff like chicks, food, vegas, and the weather.

Last time I checked people who create bots won't sit at their computer for the entire 12-18 hour session and chat, hahaa. I mean a bot is meant to be made so you don't have to be at the computer at all and it will just play. I'm sorry but based on my experience and evidence with him I've come to the conclusion that he isn't a bot. Have you ever played with him, spoken to him, ect ect?

I like how people just state what they think even though they don't squat about the topic.

"George Bush doesn't like black people"

Kanye

[Freudian]

So bascially you can attest to him chatting on AIM and not attest to him not using a bot?

If you simply meant you didn't believe he used a bot, you should have said so.

[ QUOTE ]
Is it unethical to team an account?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would it be? Party doesn't care where they get their rake. It would screw up your notes or database numbers if 2/more people played the same screen name with different styles. I don't feel any moral obligation to maintain the validity of someone else's notes or DB.

One instance that I would consider unethical would be if I had a personal bet with someone about results, leader board position, etc., and had an unknown partner helping me get in a large number of games.

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is it unethical to team an account?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would it be? Party doesn't care where they get their rake. It would screw up your notes or database numbers if 2/more people played the same screen name with different styles. I don't feel any moral obligation to maintain the validity of someone else's notes or DB.

One instance that I would consider unethical would be if I had a personal bet with someone about results, leader board position, etc., and had an unknown partner helping me get in a large number of games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why it would be? The winner of the leaderboard get $5k and teaming up might rob someone of money they earned.

[bluef0x]

[ QUOTE ]
Last time I checked people who create bots won't sit at their computer for the entire 12-18 hour session and chat, hahaa. I mean a bot is meant to be made so you don't have to be at the computer at all and it will just play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't remember the last time playing 8 SnG's was "fun"
I think there's a reason so many of us have 2+2, AIM, irc, etc open during our sets... and I think that reason is because we rather be doing something else but love money /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
One instance that I would consider unethical would be if I had a personal bet with someone about results, leader board position, etc., and had an unknown partner helping me get in a large number of games.

[/ QUOTE ]

well, for exactly that reason, it would be unETHICAL, maybe. would it be cheating? well, that depends on the T&C of party. i haven't and am not going to read them for this purpose, i simply don't care enough to wade through it. someone else can have fun with that.

when there's a monetary prize for doing a lot of something that it's expected that you do alone, it's poor gamesmanship to play as more than one person. however, if party has no rules against it, they have no rules against it.

if there's a personal bet about it, it's clearly hideously unethical, if it's stated in the terms of the bet.

c

[se2schul]

Just my 2 cents.

Most of what I read doesn't prove that Juicy is a bot.
Juicy plays a lot of tables for many hours... so what.
Juicy doesn't click the popups.... So what... I've missed popups multitabling.

The only truly damning bit of info is that Party has recorded Juicy clicking buttons in simultaneous games within miliseconds of eachother. The buttons were clicked so fast that it was humanly impossible to do the clicking (according to Party). That would suggest that either Party's methods of obtaining this information is flawed, or that Juicy is a bot.

Now, if I were unreal_nh, I'd ask Party how they're collecting this information. If they are waiting until the clicks arrive on their server, then the method is flawed. Their programmers would have to be retarded to do it like that, but there are lots of programmers who seem retarded enough to do such a thing.

If Party were recording the time on the client's end when the button were clicked and then compared that information, then either Juicy clicks at super human speeds, or Juicy is a bot.

In my opinion, the clicking is the really the only damning evidence. So, unreal_nh, try to find out how party collects the info about button clicks. Maybe they can send you logs of the clicks which will reveal their methods.

[Nicholasp27]

if he's using autohotkey or the like, he can type 2 keys really quickly to make 2 'mouse clicks' on diff tables...faster than clicking on one and then moving cursor over to click on the other...

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]
Just my 2 cents.

Most of what I read doesn't prove that Juicy is a bot.
Juicy plays a lot of tables for many hours... so what.
Juicy doesn't click the popups.... So what... I've missed popups multitabling.

The only truly damning bit of info is that Party has recorded Juicy clicking buttons in simultaneous games within miliseconds of eachother. The buttons were clicked so fast that it was humanly impossible to do the clicking (according to Party). That would suggest that either Party's methods of obtaining this information is flawed, or that Juicy is a bot.

Now, if I were unreal_nh, I'd ask Party how they're collecting this information. If they are waiting until the clicks arrive on their server, then the method is flawed. Their programmers would have to be retarded to do it like that, but there are lots of programmers who seem retarded enough to do such a thing.

If Party were recording the time on the client's end when the button were clicked and then compared that information, then either Juicy clicks at super human speeds, or Juicy is a bot.

In my opinion, the clicking is the really the only damning evidence. So, unreal_nh, try to find out how party collects the info about button clicks. Maybe they can send you logs of the clicks which will reveal their methods.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can bet that Party places much more significance on him failing to responding to 20-30 popups than you do. As do I.

I can tell you if I was playing and accidentally missed one popup I would be worried (simply because I know why Party uses them) and would make sure I didn't play so much that I would miss another. I certainly wouldn't happily play on missing dozens of them. In my mind it is pretty damning.

[citanul]

auto hotkey is going to work off of the repeat speed of your keys at fastest. no one sets their keyboard to repeat that fast, otherwise tttttthhhhhhhhhheeeeeeeiiiiiiiiirrrrrrr typing would look like that.

editted to add: i actually started writing a post about hotkeys and deleted it before i came to the above conclusion.

c

[Nicholasp27]

i'm just saying that u can type 2 letters faster than u can move a mouse to a small button across 2 monitors

[vinyard]

[ QUOTE ]
if he's using autohotkey or the like, he can type 2 keys really quickly to make 2 'mouse clicks' on diff tables...faster than clicking on one and then moving cursor over to click on the other...

[/ QUOTE ] Sure. But as someone who has mucked around in this kind of work before I would suspect that they would have to, at a minimum:

1. Be using local machine system time
2. That they wouldn't consider anything less than a very high number of clicks (4-6 at a minimm) in an exceptionally small amount of time.

FTR, I still don'tthink he's a bot but AutoHotKey didn't screw him here.

[citanul]

but i'm assuming you can't type them fast enough to have this be realistic. for argument's sake, i think that's a safe assumption, that either the click was unreasonably fast, or that htere was an error, but not that the hotkey could possibly miss that fast.

So is party acknowledging that such programs exist? Are they acknowledging such programs can be profitable? Hmmmm..

[vinyard]

The increased speed of hotkeys would likely not raise their flags - their threshold for flagging suspicious behavior is likely a whole order of magnitude smaller than what you are thinking.

[citanul]

party is acknowledging that someone could program something that would click buttons, and that they are trying hard to eliminate them. nothing more.

[Nicholasp27]

yeah, either they are using his local system time and authotkey wouldn't do it fast enough for them to think bot or they are using server time and then it's a packet issue which is bogus


i do know one thing; if he gets this cleared up (or creates a new account), he'll never miss filling in one of the popups!

[citanul]

yo, you big bald biatch, send me some hand histories so i can look them over tonight. you got the email.

[microbet]

I know criminals and cheaters can be amazingly stupid, but how stupid would you have to be to leave $15k in the account of a bot?

[Seth Money]

[ QUOTE ]
yo, you big bald biatch, send me some hand histories so i can look them over tonight. you got the email.

[/ QUOTE ]

You talking about me? If so, I prefer bald big biatch, thank you very much. Being PC would be nice.

Seth

LOL..Something that clicks buttons?? So party believes that there are programs that randomly click buttons? Well as a live player I find it to our benefit to allow users to program something to push buttons? This will also increase $$$ for party as well? So I don't think they are concerned with programs that click buttons.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
LOL..Something that clicks buttons?? So party believes that there are programs that randomly click buttons? Well as a live player I find it to our benefit to allow users to program something to push buttons? This will also increase $$$ for party as well? So I don't think they are concerned with programs that click buttons.

[/ QUOTE ]

did i say it clicked them randomly? no.

it is in party's best interest to shut down automated programs, winners or not.

c

[adanthar]

Hey guys, a request: can we have less talk about how Party detects bots (I sure don't care, I'm not writing one) and whether playing multiple accounts is bad (wrong thread) and more on whether this is a bot that's beating the game for that much?

I've never played vs. him, obviously, but if someone wrote a bot that was good enough to be up at least 15K+ and won a TLB, I wanna know about it.

[citanul]

you just want to claim some of the $ because of your patented robot strategy. freaking lawyers.

the guy's not a bot. he plays mad hours and splits the acct with a friend.

c'est tout.

if there's a bot out there that beats the game for a big amount it's not him.

[adanthar]

Then how'd he manage to miss a few dozen popups?

[AllinDan]

I never even get these popups when I'm playing sngs, only at ring games. that true for anyone else?

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]
I never even get these popups when I'm playing sngs, only at ring games. that true for anyone else?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is extrememly rare for people to get them playing SnGs, and if you do get them you can be sure you are under investigation and it would be pretty smart to actually respond to them.

[tjh]

I do not think Juicy is a bot.

I am infuriated that we do not get some hand histories here to help show not-bot behavior. The check-raise all-in that was posted. That is advanced Bot behavior, if it is a bot.

I do think that Juicy messed up by teaming the account. Probably had multiple log in attempts or frequent geographic jumps that did not add up. Teaming an account and mistakes made implementing that plan probably got his account investigated.

He messed up. Maybe not by using AI but he messed up. He should confess to the teaming on the accounts and see how things go from there.

I do not think that the bots have made a jump to such high profit margins. Last I heard the bots were making pennies at ring games. Maybe SNG's are a bit easier than ring games but I still doubt that this sort of profitability is possible by a bot.

I see no proof of BOTness.

Many games, two players can do that.

The timing of mouseclicks. HearSay, I want to know how many mouseclicks, how many milliseconds and by what clock.

Staying at the 20's and not moving up.. A human can do that.
Geeze it takes a bazillion games to show Irie that you are not losing in the loooong run. So what is wrong with playing many hands at a level?


If he wants to prove that he is not a bot and he has PokerTracker he merely has to show a wide variety of play given similar situations. I know , I know a bot can be programmed to be somewhat random but once a bot hits profitability I imagine that the programmers would not bother getting too fancy. I mean if adding the stop and go made you .0001 % more money ..big deal.

So find some check raises, some flexible blind defense that shows some creative thinking and email that to party and see what they say.

It is possible that the investigators are technically backwards and do not understand poker, computers, or much of anything. So convincing them could be dificult.

--
tjh

[Mr_J]

Which should partly dismiss him from using a bot. If you were cheating, you're at reasonable risk so would minimise your exposure and keep the account balance quite low. I haven't heard anything that suggests he uses a bot.

One question... who gets the money? it should go back to the people who lost it (impossible surely). If the site gets to keep it thats just pure wrong. it would mean it would be advantageous for them to have bots on there site. Anyone know?

[jeffraider]

[ QUOTE ]
Who would possibly dedicate so much time to poker as to play 3000 22 sngs at the same level without ever moving up?

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/blush.gif /images/graemlins/blush.gif /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I never even get these popups when I'm playing sngs, only at ring games. that true for anyone else?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is extrememly rare for people to get them playing SnGs, and if you do get them you can be sure you are under investigation and it would be pretty smart to actually respond to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

What? I get these popups every session now. /images/graemlins/ooo.gif

[tigerite]

I've still NEVER had a pop-up.

[citanul]

is it possible that they are using a different method for these popups than their standard popups, and that these popups are like, capable of being killed by popup stopping programs? and that they are getting stopped for people who aren't seeing them?

c

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Geeze it takes a bazillion games to show Irie that you are not losing in the loooong run.

[/ QUOTE ]

Off topic: But I doubt this statement. I'm sure he could tell from just one HH, perhaps two.

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I never even get these popups when I'm playing sngs, only at ring games. that true for anyone else?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is extrememly rare for people to get them playing SnGs, and if you do get them you can be sure you are under investigation and it would be pretty smart to actually respond to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

What? I get these popups every session now. /images/graemlins/ooo.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I play ~50 SnGs a day and have yet to have one.

[Scuba Chuck]

I can't believe I'm sucked into this drama.

Here's what's most interesting to me at this point. It's been near 36 hours since OP made this post. Why don't we have a single response from him yet?

Also, I think some of the difficulty we're going to have solving here, that maybe Party Poker can solve is the following. Maybe OP plays 40-50 hours a week. He loves poker. He likes SNGs. But maybe, he also has a bot who plays when he's not. Maybe that's his "buddy."

Regardless, the one clue that I still can't resolve in my mind is, who plays the $22s and $33s with the type of returns this guy must be earning, and still leaves $15,000 in the account? My hunch is that it's someone who isn't worried about the status of his account, and/or a really foolish individual.

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]
is it possible that they are using a different method for these popups than their standard popups, and that these popups are like, capable of being killed by popup stopping programs? and that they are getting stopped for people who aren't seeing them?

c

[/ QUOTE ]

Since I've never had one I don't know but I still get popups when logging in and for their useless tourneys. I think there is a very low probability that popup killers would remove Party popups. And if they did, we would see many more players on 2+2 getting in trouble. Unreal_nh is the only high volume here that has gotten into trouble with Party that I know of.

[Slim Pickens]

[ QUOTE ]
is it possible that they are using a different method for these popups than their standard popups, and that these popups are like, capable of being killed by popup stopping programs? and that they are getting stopped for people who aren't seeing them?

c

[/ QUOTE ]

I got one per table on the very first session on my Party account. This was at the 1/2 beginner ring tables, the first four I opened up. I botched the first one somehow but got the rest and haven't been bothered since. I've got all but the most tenacious popups blocked so it's not that.

[playtitleist]

I'm not a 3000 SNGer, but I have played enough to theoretically get SOME pop-ups. WTF are you all talking about? Anybody have a screen shot of one, cuz I've never seen a single one?

Pop-ups from Party probably can't be blocked, or they wouldn't being using it as grounds to lock out unreal_nh. But it is a possibility, and the fact that I have seen none makes me more skeptical.

[Bill Poker]

[ QUOTE ]

Regardless, the one clue that I still can't resolve in my mind is, who plays the $22s and $33s with the type of returns this guy must be earning, and still leaves $15,000 in the account? My hunch is that it's someone who isn't worried about the status of his account, and/or a really foolish individual.

[/ QUOTE ]

In Oct, he and his buddy played ~3000 20+2s, and with 20% ROI (OP and his buddy "bmx" are both solid), they made $15K, and got caught when they tried to cashed out early Nov.

Not sure about Party's policy on two persons sharing one account (Stars is ok with it, right?), and I think if Party does not have solid bot evidence, they probably should let them keep the money, and, depending on Party's policy, they may or may not get the $5k for the 1st in the leader board.

bmx is a regular on stars turbos, and I doubt they have a bot capable to have 20% ROI (if so, why does he keep grinding on $25+2:p /images/graemlins/tongue.gif)

[ZeroPointMachine]

[ QUOTE ]
is it possible that they are using a different method for these popups than their standard popups, and that these popups are like, capable of being killed by popup stopping programs? and that they are getting stopped for people who aren't seeing them?

c

[/ QUOTE ]

This concerns me as well. I really don't want an account locked because my spyware/popup utility is blocking something from Party. Can't they take a screen shot to verify the popup?

[ QUOTE ]

***** Hand History for Game 3051270985 *****
30/60 Tourney Texas Hold'em Game Table (NL) (Tournament 17496995) - Thu Nov 17 18:42:31 EST 2005
Table Table 67923 (Real Money) -- Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 9
Seat 2: spilly1000 (1030)
Seat 3: BILLFILLMAF1 (745)
Seat 4: juicyv_gina (775)
Seat 5: alexanderj1 (1020)
Seat 6: scottyboy727 (745)
Seat 7: drews51 (865)
Seat 8: chukcz (1480)
Seat 9: velimirovic (485)
Seat 10: F_Lindeman (855)
BILLFILLMAF1 posts small blind (15)
juicyv_gina posts big blind (30)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to BILLFILLMAF1 [ 8h, 4d ]
alexanderj1 calls (30)
scottyboy727 calls (30)
drews51 folds.
chukcz folds.
velimirovic folds.
F_Lindeman folds.
spilly1000 raises (100) to 100
BILLFILLMAF1 folds.
juicyv_gina calls (70)
alexanderj1 folds.
scottyboy727 calls (70)
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 5s, 7s, Ks ]
juicyv_gina checks.
scottyboy727 checks.
spilly1000 bets (130)
juicyv_gina raises (675) to 675
juicyv_gina is all-In.
scottyboy727 folds.
spilly1000 folds.
Creating Main Pot with $1150 with juicyv_gina
** Summary **
Main Pot: 1150
Board: [ 5s 7s Ks ]
spilly1000 balance 800, lost 230 (folded)
BILLFILLMAF1 balance 730, lost 15 (folded)
juicyv_gina balance 1150, bet 775, collected 1150, net +375
alexanderj1 balance 990, lost 30 (folded)
scottyboy727 balance 645, lost 100 (folded)
drews51 balance 865, didn't bet (folded)
chukcz balance 1480, didn't bet (folded)
velimirovic balance 485, didn't bet (folded)
F_Lindeman balance 855, didn't bet (folded)


[/ QUOTE ]

This is not an odd play at all with either AK or JJ if you were positive that villain is a LAG, disagree anyone?

Thing is, a bot could be programmed, without _THAT_ much effort, to detect LAGs using very availible information in PT and try for a check raise when this kind of situation arises. A check-raise with JJ or AK would be a pretty damn good choice of play here against a LAG, disagree anyone?

Only reason this may seem odd is because it isn't your standard play. Why isn't it your standard play? Probably because you play 4+ tables and you just can't remember who are LAGs and who are not while facing 30+ opponents. A bot would have no problem with this.

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]

In Oct, he and his buddy played ~3000 20+2s, and with 20% ROI (OP and his buddy "bmx" are both solid), they made $15K, and got caught when they tried to cashed out early Nov.

Not sure about Party's policy on two persons sharing one account (Stars is ok with it, right?), and I think if Party does not have solid bot evidence, they probably should let them keep the money, and, depending on Party's policy, they may or may not get the $5k for the 1st in the leader board.

bmx is a regular on stars turbos, and I doubt they have a bot capable to have 20% ROI (if so, why does he keep grinding on $25+2:p /images/graemlins/tongue.gif)

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that they teamed up is perhaps the strongest evidence that he didn't use a bot. Why share the $5k if he has a bot that enables him to play absurd hours?

Don't know if Party will be that impressed with that argument though.

[Seth Money]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

In Oct, he and his buddy played ~3000 20+2s, and with 20% ROI (OP and his buddy "bmx" are both solid), they made $15K, and got caught when they tried to cashed out early Nov.

Not sure about Party's policy on two persons sharing one account (Stars is ok with it, right?), and I think if Party does not have solid bot evidence, they probably should let them keep the money, and, depending on Party's policy, they may or may not get the $5k for the 1st in the leader board.

bmx is a regular on stars turbos, and I doubt they have a bot capable to have 20% ROI (if so, why does he keep grinding on $25+2:p /images/graemlins/tongue.gif)

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that they teamed up is perhaps the strongest evidence that he didn't use a bot. Why share the $5k if he has a bot that enables him to play absurd hours?

Don't know if Party will be that impressed with that argument though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to update this post the leaderboard was worth $1500 last month not 5k as stated a few times. November was the first month the leaderboards top ranking was worth 5k.

[Slim Pickens]

I have only seen them in ring games, and I play about 85-90% of my table-hours on SNG's. It was also the very first four tables in the very first session with my new Party account and then never again after that.

[protoverus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who would possibly dedicate so much time to poker as to play 3000 22 sngs at the same level without ever moving up?

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/blush.gif /images/graemlins/blush.gif /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I've done that many at the $11's.... So I'm either a bot or I suck. Makes me wish I was a bot.

[bmxreed36]

Hi guys, I've been out of town for a week now and just read through this thread and thought I should respond to some of it. First of all, unreal_nh and I set up an account named juicyv_gina (you guys still like the name right?) and decided to both play on it and take a shot at the leaderboard which then awarded just $1500 and also the shot at 1000 weekly in the clash of the titans. Whether or not this is unethical, I'm not sure of and I suppose you could debate that, but we have let Party know that we both played on the account and they have not said anything specifically about that being wrong, against their policy, or the reason for our accounts being shut down.

We did play a mad number of SNG's. I played a few more than unreal_nh, 10-tabling continuously, a couple times even playing over 150 in a day. I played over 2000 in October and believe it or not, actually took like 7 days off totally. I played all 22's in October and the reason I didn't move up was because everytime I felt prepared to move up, I would have a bad downswing which hurt my confidence and would then decide to play more 22's until I was again ready. In November, I did finally move up to the 33's and started out pretty hot.

The reason we had 15K sitting in the account is basically because we both had money sitting around from previous months' profits and didnt really need to cash out although I admit it was probably dumb to have that much sitting there.

Now, the important part--neither one of us have ever programmed, bought, owned, used, or been associated with a bot. I really would have no idea how to even do it and have never had any desire to.

As far as the pop-ups, here's the thing--I got like 3 or 4 the first day Party started using them. After that, I NEVER saw one and am fairly certain Party is straight up lying about that. If you could hear the conversations we've had with them, you too would know that they are the ones being shady. They are inconsistent with what they tell us, they are unable to tell us any details of their "investigation" and repeatedly deny us most of the information we ask for and always tell us to call back in 6 or 12 or 24 hours. There have been two people that we have been dealing with and for working for an online poker company, they seem to have minimal knowledge of either poker or computers.

The thing they keep coming back to is that they "know" we have been using a "banned program" which uses AI and plays for us, but they can't tell us what the program is called, any details of how it works, or how they "know". I finally got them to agree to send a list of "banned programs" but of course, havent received it yet after two days. So far, it seems that everytime we cooperate by answering questions, explaining how we play (and how un-bot like it is), taking pictures of the computers and different screenshots, they either ignore our answer or say it isn't a "reasonable" answer.

Sorry for rambling but thought I should get facts out instead of speculation. In conlusion, we are not bots, we worked hard for our money, Party is full of idiots and [censored], I'm pissed, I don't know what we're gonna do next, but we're gonna do something, thank you.

[chisness]

i think your party name is inappropriate

Well...if you are interested in a new, better business venture, you should Buy Socom 3 and play like mad, to aquire the necessary skills...then go to Gibralter and use your new Navy Seal skills to kill those bastards that are hiding their fake evidence about your account and the use of a bot...I know that you aren't a bot, because I am the bot master and I have not given your premission to use such a bot or to program a bot and use it...Party is however, in fault for using the word "Bot" with regard to onlining gaming. I hold all rights to the word and am quite offended that a company would use my property to falsely accuse these players. Party should just come to terms with their insecurities with there own personal programming flaws and just realize they can never defeat me...I WILL REIGN TERROR on the $5 tables until they click the [censored] pop ups and they [censored] send me screenshots and pictures of their [censored] equipment.