Bot complaint

[adamstewart]

[ QUOTE ]
Didn't Homer's post just show that at 480,000 hands you still could only be 95% certain that your winrate was w/n .5BB of your true number? And even at 96,000 hands, it was still +/- 2BB.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good, so we're in agreement

Thanks,

Adam

[Bytestream]

There is actually a fairly simple explanation for this and it was a mistake on my part. While I was working on the recent PokerStars bonus last week, I was only getting the last 60 or so hands sent to me by my hand history, when i requested it for the last 10 hours. This was the first time I used Pokerstars data in my PT, up unitll then I had just used Empire and Party. I don't play much due to other other commitments, about 3-4k hands a month depending on what the bonus scene looks like.

Anyway, I emailed support and asked them to send me the rest of my hands and for the past month or two if they could (longshot, but what the heck, figured if they could send it for the last week, why not longer) and lo and behold they sent me a link to download a zip file with exactly that. I was about 4k hands, and there are actually close to 17k hands in Pokertracker now. In memory, I updated my winrate but not my hands. Simple honest mistake. This didn't start as a thread about my winrate and I didn't intend for it to become one, I was just my rant on the existence and ability of bots in online poker.

Either that or I am just a cluess, disposable, fraudulent lying troll. Thats for you to decide.

Either way, I stand by my assertion that a winrate greater then 3bb/100 is acheiveable at 2/4 party.

[Bytestream]

Bravo! Everything I've been trying to say, yet written so much better.

[adamstewart]

[ QUOTE ]
Either way, I stand by my assertion that a winrate greater then 3bb/100 is acheiveable at 2/4 party.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoa, whoa, whoa.... hold on a sec. This was not, nor has it ever been until now, your assertion.

Adam

[Rick H]

Winholdem site is still up, I just checked it out. Last thread is about some guy complaining about a phone call from Pacific and how can he avoid getting caught, again.

[OldLearner]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, the # of decisions you can make when the action is on you is small. You're ignoring the large # of analyses that go into choosing one of those options, though. To do that analysis requires a lot more than "You only have 4 choices". You need to consider action on previous streets, what your opponents are likely to do in response to your various options, and so on. Not to mention that you need to store all the info you observe while playing and constantly re-evaluate your profiles of the other players.


[/ QUOTE ]

This analysis actualy sounds very "mechanical":

[ QUOTE ]
consider action on previous streets

[/ QUOTE ]

A bot can do this without "forgetting sometimes" and having to check the chat.

[ QUOTE ]
what your opponents are likely to do in response to your various options

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are using PokerTracker stats, a bot can do this. A bot can also store and retrieve exact instances of the same player in the same situation flawlessly. A bot could even determine more accurately whether an opponent is "mixing it up". Most people's memories aren't that good.
A bot can also be programmed to apply game theory (mix it up) better than you.


[ QUOTE ]
Not to mention that you need to store all the info you observe while playing and constantly re-evaluate your profiles of the other players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pokertracker already does this to a limited degree in that it summarizes the specific information. A bot can go a step further and re-evaluate its player profiles much more accurately, as it can store and examine the "specific" information rather than "summarized" statistics.

A bot can do these things and do them SO MUCH better than you.

- do it faster (when you have limited time to make a decision this determines how deep you can take your analysis)
- do it more accurately (store and observe, Pokertracker already does this to a limited degree in summarizes the specific information)
- do it unadulterated (by fatigue, "tilt", any form of distraction including multi-tabling, ...)

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, the # of decisions you can make when the action is on you is small. You're ignoring the large # of analyses that go into choosing one of those options

[/ QUOTE ]

This is one of the most important considerations.

How large of an analysis can you do in 30 seconds?
Do you have any idea how much analysis a bot can do in 30 seconds?

Can WinHoldem bot do these things. NO. Although by considering a limited number of factors, it can still win.

Can POKI (UofA bot) do these things. YES. Can it win? Well, it can compete with one of the best Shorthanded online limit Holdem players in the world (The Count) and that while it was still in its infancy.

The number of people capable of creating a POKI type bot are limited. As stated in an earlier post, prior to the online poker boom, there was little motivation. A BSC in Computer Science and knowledge of AI is also a requirement so not "anybody" can do this.

We know there are Winholdem bots online now. (or were).

Are there POKI type bots in online poker now?

Is there other intelligent life in the universe?

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
In Poker I DO KNOW YOUR TWO HOLE CARDS. It is 1 of 168 possiblities (I hold one of the 169 possiblities). After the flop I narrow it further, the turn even further, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with your points, but, being the anal retentive nitpcicker that I am, I have to point out the error in the quoted statement. There are 1326 unique hole card combinations. The 169 number comes up if you, for example, consider all AKo as equivalent (which they are in terms of preflop EV). So, there are still 169 possibilities for your opponent, but the probability that he holds the same one you do is reduced (significantly of you hold a pocket pair).

[Bytestream]

[ QUOTE ]
Whoa, whoa, whoa.... hold on a sec. This was not, nor has it ever been until now, your assertion

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it has, a few posts above I stated that exactly:

[ QUOTE ]
I am certaintly aware of possible errors in this rationale as well. However, I am making the conjecture that my winrate will continue to exceed 3bb/hr over the next 38K hands as well. We are not talking about Vegas 20/40, this is Party 2/4, the majority of players are absolutely horrendous

[/ QUOTE ]

[CORed]

I'm going to way in on a few points:

1. Party's reponse on this sucks. I think it is much more likely that your emails were answered by a bot than that the opponent in question is a bot.

2. Given that he checked in last position with the nuts, I think it is highly unlikely that your opponent was a bot.

3. I think the posters who believe that writing a winning bot is impossible are fooling themselves. I am a winning player and a programmer. I believe I could write a bot to beat low limit games pretty easily, and I don't think writing a bot to beat good players, at either limit or no limit is impossible. No I haven't done so, and have no plans to do so. That doesn't mean somebody else hasn't.

[MS Sunshine]

Welcome Bytestream. Sorry you're getting Bar-B-Qed, but it's your own fault you actually put out numbers(oh yeah, and that higher schooling stuff) to show that you might know what you are talking about. My wife is just like these guys. If one of her girlfriends asks how I'm in bed she says, "I really don't want to say yet, because I don't have a big enough sample size" [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

Last month's PT DB has 166K hands with 37% winners. DbBaker, from here, has claimed to be the player in question. I believe him.

I don't go around with my hands in the air yelling that Party is filled with bots and that's why I'm not winning. I had my reasons to think that it was possible that this player might be a bot. That is why I wrote to support. Who I didn't think did squat.

I have 6348 players in PT for last month. This player was #12 for most money and #9 for for most hands. Players like this I like to look at more carefully. When the hand in question happened that was enough for me to see if the site would take a look at him. I don't think I've ever made this request before. I can see where Party might just lump this with all the other emails claiming bots. The problem is I think Party doesn't do anything when someone claims bot, but try to appease the player that complained. I think they have some way to spot winholdem bots only and do a sweep of most accounts on a regular basis for the winholdem bot. I also think that there are much better bots out there that don't have a web page and spam the poker forums. As long as they don't Party doesn't have a problem, can't find the problem, or will happily deny that there is a problem.

I don't think that a NL bot is so hard to program to win at Party. It doesn't have to play perfect, but like me, just good enough to win. I think that for the low limits even a basic game selection program using PT data would have real value.

MS Sunshine

Winning player
Sample size: over one million hands online
NO JOB