Poker Bot piece

[subzero]

[ QUOTE ]
I think one good way to thwart a bot would be to randomize the placement of the Fold Call Bet etc buttons on every turn.

[/ QUOTE ]
The problem with this is that somebody's going to complain that they "mis-clicked" because of the random placement, costing them a huge pot. I think you're on the right track, though. How about a text box that prompted you to type in a displayed word (skewed, like with e-mail sign-up protection) every 100 hands or so? Programs seem to have problems reading words that are distorted.

[lozen]

The University of Alberta's bot has played scott Fishman and lost to him. It is the most advaced bot out there right now

[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.

[subzero]

[ QUOTE ]
Using the time bank to signify if they had a pocket pair and the first digit of the bet to signify the suit and the second digit to signify their first hole card. Add that with the time bank and everyone knew what each other had.

[/ QUOTE ]
You're kidding, right? Wouldn't it be easier to communicate with AOL IM (chat mode)? I'm hoping the top poker sites monitor their games and can identify collusion (cheating) when it occurs.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Using the time bank to signify if they had a pocket pair and the first digit of the bet to signify the suit and the second digit to signify their first hole card. Add that with the time bank and everyone knew what each other had.

[/ QUOTE ]
You're kidding, right? Wouldn't it be easier to communicate with AOL IM (chat mode)? I'm hoping the top poker sites monitor their games and can identify collusion (cheating) when it occurs.

[/ QUOTE ]

No joke, they are an interesting group... IM etc takes longer than simply posting a bet and letting the time bank show.

It was an interesting find honestly, they are really not that good at pot odds, implied odds, EV, etc. So I usually lighten then rolls for them a little. They hit about 4-10 new people each hour so... Usually that will round-out the noobs but, I have seen some TAP's come in there and take them ALL! Then the TAP will leave almost like a hit and run but, who knows they may be doing the same thing I am. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

For me bots, and software based calculators are in the same category, after all, they are making recommendations right? Therefore fall prey to the same fundamental issues of a bot. Software/Bots are following established patterns right? That is what software does after all, follow various code pieces step by step. If someone discovers this then you know why they bet exactly 75% + $1, 50%, or 300% of a pot.

As far as IBM's "Deep Blue" post made previously by someone, Deep Blue only won because the player was not basing decisions on human based experience but "theory" based experience. The games won by the human player were simply based on experiences of "machine based" decisions.

This is a fun topic, really, I personally believe if more people delved into the "Psychology of Poker" type books instead of pure mathematically based odds calculations, these bots/programs/applications, would not have nearly the market share that they currently have.

After all how many people would rather play chess against a human opponent than a computer because "they know how to win against the computer?" Except poker is more fun because I have never played chess for money! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Personally I LOVE ALL the little software goodies that people buy, download, and try. It only deepens my understanding of the game and people, and hopefully generates a little extra cash on the side. I have personally picked apart a TON of those applications simply to learn their weaknesses, just like how people buy MS Chess blah blah to learn how to beat and feel good about themselves. Even that is psychological.... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

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.

[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.

[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.

[magiluke]

Once the algorithms the bot follows are figured out, all we have to do is induce them to fold. All you have to do is realize who the bots are.

I'm not sure exactly how they work, but if they are programmed to play only +EV, you just have to give them -EV, and you take the pot!

Now we just need to put together a bot database. It seems as though the best way is to use the bot itself, since it identifies who is using it at the table (to my understanding).