No Limit Bots ? Kwickfish says yes.

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
The glaring issue with bots is that, ultimately, the programming is left to a human - a human must decide how to interpret statistical databases and how to handle anomalous behavior from its opponents

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not correct.
There are programming techniques which allows to write a program which play a game which programmer dont know anything about. Some of those techniques were used to write backgammon programs (which are bette than best humans).

[fukkeneh]

Just with Pokertracker and Pokerstove. A bot could be programmed to make decisions based on hand ranges and pot equity.

Hell I might be able to program a winner using those two programs.

What makes you think no one has already done this??

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
What makes you think no one has already done this??

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont think anybody did that but its just my guess.
I dont have trouble believing that its possible or even that someone already programmed it.

[metamath]

for the sake of discussion, i know firsthand of bots killing 5/10 limit games...

imo it's only a matter of time til we see bots crushing nl

[Heir_Aparent]

[ QUOTE ]
for the sake of discussion, i know firsthand of bots killing 5/10 limit games...

imo it's only a matter of time til we see bots crushing nl

[/ QUOTE ]

5/10 limit is a total joke. u could have a bot that understands agression and that is very detailed with respect to value betting that can beat that game. FWIW, i doubt this bot 'destroys' the game. That would imply the bot would be a winner at 10/20 or 15/30, games that are typicall drastically different online than 5/10. Admitedly, this is without considering a program like PTrack implemented into the bot, which im sure is possible. anyways i have a friend who has some experience with this, and I think its possible up to a certain extent(limit), but after that it would become v. difficult. I dont knwo enough abouit the intricaticies, but unless we're talkin about a super poker bot building team (in which case I can see this being done), this doesn't seem like it could be easily accomplished.

I think things change A LOT when u consider no limit. Also, the 100/200 and above LHE games would [censored] kill a bot, no questions asked. The programming, testing and time necessary to make a bot on par w the avg player in these games would be sick.

I don't know much of anything with regards to the programming part, so i'm not an expert on this topic. I do think it's possible, but I suppose what im saying is that it would be a very difficult and complicated endevaor-not sure if it will ever be done to the point of actually beating high stakes games.

[traxamillion]

So Bots aren't even illegal?

[metamath]

interesting hypothetical question... what about the possibility of a bot mimicking the style of aba/durrr?

[KurtSF]

[ QUOTE ]
That would imply the bot would be a winner at 10/20 or 15/30, games that are typicall drastically different online than 5/10.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's right.

There has been documented proof of bots beating 30/60 online, including beating 2+2ers.

Check it.

[JayTee]

The argument that bots can't beat high stakes because poker is a "game of incomplete information" seems pretty week. All players lack the information. I think you have to consider that what may seem intuitive to you can ultimately be logically deduced. Every decision that a player makes can be expressed mathematically. Just because humans don't solve equations in their head while playing means nothing. The question is: How complicated does the programming have to be to make these difficult decisions? Thinking that it is impossible seems flat out wrong.

[Victor]

[ QUOTE ]
dmitedly, this is without considering a program like PTrack implemented into the bot, which im sure is possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

wtf, why would you not consider this? i would always consider this as crucial if making a bot.