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

[ 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.

[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

[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.

[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?

[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

[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...

[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