Poker Bot piece

[CCovington]

I think if the bot was really capable of making a ton of money, there would be no way he would be offering it for sale to the public.
However, the more people that hear about this the less attractive online poker will become. I hope all the online poker rooms are taking major action to sniff out and get rid of the bots.

[subzero]

"No-limit poker may be the ultimate challenge within the domain, since it seems to emphasize the more nebulous poker skills, such as in-depth knowledge of the opponent and the ability to make fine judgements." article

"The game of poker is logistically simple yet strategically complex, and offers many properties not exhibited by chess, checkers, and most other well-studied games. Most importantly, poker is a non-deterministic game with imperfect (hidden) information. Handling unreliable or incomplete information is a fundamental problem in computer science, and poker provides an excellent domain for investigating problems of decision making under conditions of uncertainty." article

More articles on the Poker AI research being done at the University of Alberta here

[RoundTower]

[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind that when chess programs were first being developed, programs played like programs; that is, you could exploit a chess program because, for instance, they tended to value pieces more than position and tactics more than strategy. They were exploitable. Deep Blue does not have these exploitable tendecies.


[/ QUOTE ]

Deep Blue had all kinds of exploitable tendencies, and probably played a good bit worse than modern computer chess programs.

Similarly, there will be a poker bot made some time that plays well, even very well, but not perfectly. It will have some exploitable tendencies, like any human player. As development on the bot continues, it will be harder and harder to exploit.

I don't see any reason why the development of poker programs will be much different from that of chess engines. The objections raised "the bot wouldn't be able to bluff!" or "the human could ruin its odds for getting its draw!" are ridiculous. Similar short-sighted objections in the world of chess programming were along the lines of "the program can't sacrifice material" or "it can't make a strategic plan" (this one still debatable).

[Pirc Defense]

[ QUOTE ]
Deep Blue had all kinds of exploitable tendencies, and probably played a good bit worse than modern computer chess programs.

Similarly, there will be a poker bot made some time that plays well, even very well, but not perfectly. It will have some exploitable tendencies, like any human player. As development on the bot continues, it will be harder and harder to exploit.

I don't see any reason why the development of poker programs will be much different from that of chess engines. The objections raised "the bot wouldn't be able to bluff!" or "the human could ruin its odds for getting its draw!" are ridiculous. Similar short-sighted objections in the world of chess programming were along the lines of "the program can't sacrifice material" or "it can't make a strategic plan" (this one still debatable).



[/ QUOTE ]

Good post.

[nmt09]

I never said it wouldn't happen but I do feel we are far from creating such a bot.

The other thing you have to remember is that for every dollar these geeks invest, and every hour of sweat the multi million dollar poker companies can invest double or even triple on detection methods...

If this ever becomes a problem it won't be for long!!

The fact that poker sites are offshore (and therefore not governed by US gaming agencies) is a a turnoff for me. Bots? Cheating? Etc? Have fun trying to protect your rights (if any) against cheaters. No government agency to turn to. Can't sue (if you can, you won't win against some offshore entity). But some say that poker sites have an incentive to thwart cheaters. I doubt that incentive means much given that they can make more money by marketing to future fish than by cracking down on some cheaters. And what is punishment for cheaters? Prison? Fines? Nope - US law won't assist you. And if a site goes bankrupt for whatever reason (debt, Enron-ish mistakes, etc)? You won't get your money - US law doesn't govern. Think about US banks - they are insured (FDIC) and so on. But your money sitting at a poker site? Zero protection.

Ok, went off on a tangent.

[johnc]

I don't think anyone can deny that bots can be very effective at the low limit holdem and NL may be a long way off. What I'm really concerned about (and it was touched on in a number of previous posts) is the media getting ahold of this info and start coming out with stories portraying the "average" online pro (or serious amatuer) employing these bots to make their living or how the online scene is rife with cheating and colusion and all sorts of devious plots to extract money from unsuspecting players who play for fun or to get better or whatever. However BS or true this kind of media coverage may be it would be horribly damaging to the online poker industry and if it really got out of hand perhaps permentaly. The media and ESPN esp elavated poker to heights of popularity that would have seen ridiculous 10 years ago which resulted in the online poker boom and all the fish flocked to play like those guys on tv. The media has to potential thru irresponsible reporting and hype to bring poker back down to where it was decades ago at least in the popular image, harkening the days of the streotypical smokey backrooms and shady games.

All this sounds paranoid? Well think of it this way - how would someone who tried to collude, angle shoot, mark cards, and use his laptop to calculate odds at a live table? The house would kick their a$$ out if they were lucky not to be arrested and banned for life. Bottom line zero tolerance. It's the exact same style of approach that should be taken to marginalize those who market and use these bots.

I love your post because I am actually picturing myself tramping on into my typical Saturday haunt with my helmet in one hand and my little laptop in the other reserving a space at table XYZ and saying "By the way, do you have an internet connection for me to use my hand calculator?" WOW! Sounds like a commercial. "Buyin $1000, looks from casino floor manager when asking where the power supply is for a laptop computer based hand odds calculator.... Priceless... And for everything else there's Visa."

Sorry I rambled a little.

[PokerCad]

Most sites if not all will freeze your account if a bot is detected, look at this month's issue of "BLUFF" mag. Good article on this. They had a bot tournament at the WSOP where a bunch of bot programmers went against each other for a chance to go up against the "Unibomber" HU for a seat and it was a close call. The bots can, will, and do beat all but the world class poker players. BEWARE! It is already being picked up by the poker media and does have the potential for putting a big dent in the on-line arenas and is putting dents in some of the profits of the best on-line players. Hopefully the sites can keep up with detection technology or they will pay a price as legitemet player numbers decline. PLAY LIVE, IT IS MUCH MORE FUN

[UATrewqaz]

Does anyone here feel guilty for using Poker Tracker? I mean it's only using available info (publicly available hand histories) however you are using computers to aide your game, something you couldn't do in real life. It would be up to you to store vague ideas of hand histories in your mind for certain types of players.

One could argue that using a computer to help you play blackjack in a casino isn't cheating, due to the fact the only inof you enter into it is of course the publicly available info of what cards have been dealt. The computer is simply "remembering" much better than you ever could, very similar to poker tracker.

I dunno, something to think about.