Bots in PartyPoker's 6-max Limit games?

[Theodore Donald Kiravatsos]

[ QUOTE ]

I wonder if Party isn't reactive rather than proactive in a lot of these situations. They'll take action someone points something out to them, but otherwise they really don't care.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, I just spent 20 minutes using the search function, and wasn't resourceful enough to find the thread I wanted. I gave up trying to find it.

However, the post that came to mind about Party being reactive as opposed to proactive happened when a guy hooked up a bunch of bots to occupy every seat in a ring game and just fold every hand...

no rake was being collected because...
(almost) no flops were seen, HOWEVER

The bots were all colluding with each other and communicating information about their hole cards, and they would take a flop only when the distribution of hole cards was such that the odds on the flop sidebet were favorable for the players. Because they were all bots, they were playing 600 hands an hour, folding nearly every flop.

Remember the side bet in the ring games? It seems that, rather than get rid of the bots, Party took the sidebet option away from the players so as not to get burned on this prop.

To me, Party's move was a very telling (re)action, and this was a step taken to protect themselves rather than to protect the players. It seems it was easier to kill the sidebet rather than hunt down the bots. As far as I know, the sidebet option is still available in tournaments and SNGs, where you can't stack the table with a bunch of your dumb buddies or your colluding robot army.

"Your excuses are your own" -- Richard Roma