NL Bots on Full Tilt

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If FT is in fact unwilling to re-open the investigation, or at the very least to provide a FAR greater explanation for their rationale in clearing those accounts, then this will be an unmitigated public relations and customer service DISASTER for them.

[/ QUOTE ]

while i agree that it would be a disservice to their players if they fail to re-open this investigation, i doubt it will change much in regards to public relations, and i'm sure they won't lose more than 10-20 players.

personally, while i would be unhappy w/FTP, i would still play on their site. in todays online poker environment, there simply aren't enough choices.

[/ QUOTE ]


They and the sites are counting on that, and that accounts for their arrogant refusal to do better. Surely all here could boycott a site for at least a month without taking too big a hit. It's not like any one site is super-duper these days for US players.

[Fat Nicky]

[ QUOTE ]
They and the sites are counting on that, and that accounts for their arrogant refusal to do better.

[/ QUOTE ]

you're right and we have no choice but to accept and live with this fact, especially those of us that play for a living. fact of the matter is, i am willing to forgive ftp for a lot given the fact that they are sticking around for us US players.

[VanVeen]

guys, hate to point out the obvious but..

there is no reason why four individuals using the same basic rule set cannot have identical preflop and post-flop stats over significant samples. bots automate the execution of simple rules developed (for the time being) by humans. if they're potentially bots they're potentially four (robotic and dull-witted) humans. if they don't make strategic adjustments based on board texture or their opponents then their post-flop stats will be much smoother and less variable.

i'd just like to point out that this is why it is essentially impossible to detect bots programmed by anyone competent. they wouldn't do anything that a human couldn't conceivably do and they'd be supervised at all times. how could they ever be detected without invasive software scanning?