Internet Poker... doomed from Day 1

[PlayaHata]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I don't know if most 2p2ers agree. I don't base my opinons on what the group thinks, I base them MY DEFINITION of logic.

[/ QUOTE ]

and this where the problem lays. certain players will continue to find the 'next big program' to give them the edge, even if its the slightest edge. and thus, players will continue to use different programs that are altering the game of poker and since no one has the same definition of ethics or the same logic, what i may consider to be unethical and unfair you fine completely fair and ethical. so when that new program comes out that can make judgements on what a player holds based on statistical evidence of player profiling that IS allowed by party, many people in this thread would get the program ASAP. because, as you said, it is not a matter of ethics, as definitions are subjective, but what is allowed by the site and what is beneficial to oneself. THIS is the future of online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

See your using a slippery slope arguement. For one, you could not create a program that can find through stats exactly what an opponent holds. Do to Random distribution, stats not based on extensive data mining are not that reliable. A players VPIP over 40 hands is not solid eough to conclude his true VPIP, let alone the hand he holds in a particular situation. See: mike Caros Concept of Loose Wiring, which states that the same player, in the same exact situtation (same position, cards, opponents, chip stack, stakes, mood, everything) can and will make different actions in some situations. That is undetectable from HUD stats. You are not playing a robot (and if your playing WinHoldem, then good for you, the average player is +EV against it).

As for the program you are describing, it can not exist, unless your playing against a bot. People will not play a set system postflop and those that follow hand charts for preflop play rarely play exactly as the chart is.

There are many people on this forum that believe HUDs are usless, as it doesn't give you that helpful of stats. While I disagree, it is not that big of a boost.

So what if more software comes out. It's coevoultion, competetion, free market capilatism, take your pick. If I believe a program that PP deems legal and I don't agree with it (such as say they allowed hacking a computer to see your cards) I would leave the site. however comparing that to HUDs with very incomplete general info over a short span of time is not a computer telling you exactly what the correct move is.

[/ QUOTE ]

my example was just that, an example. you are arguing against a program that doesnt exist. what i am saying is that as new programs come out that are more sophisticated but are crossing the line in ethical and fair and with the fact that humans are by nature self interested, we will be faced with the inevitable degradation of internet poker.

players, due to their subjective definitions of ethics, morals, and fairness, will continue to use whatever means necessary to gain an edge over their competition. this has been shown throughout the history of internet poker, through the planetpoker card mapping, multi accounts on MTTs, and bots. (although bots now are mediocre at best, over time they will become more sophisticated) this is my problem with programs such as PT and PA HUD, although they may be fair in some eyes and are allowed by certain cites, these program developers and the users of such programs will continue the push for better 'tools' and getting that edge. so that the future of internet poker will have less and less human involvement and more and more computer involvement. do you see what i am saying?

im glad we are having a more civilized conversation today.

[3N1GM4]

[ QUOTE ]
to people who advocate PT. please explain the difference, in your opinion, why using PT is ethical compared to using a BOT, which i would hope is unethical.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I'm still reading this thread, so I dunno if anyone else has already said this, apologies if they have.

The difference between PT and a bot is that PT just takes information which the sites provide to EVERY PLAYER, and presents that information in sich a way that is easier to understand. You say it is unethical because it makes calculations that humans could not, which is completely false. There is absolutely nothing to stop people just getting the HHs from their site and then working out their opponent's VP$IP etc at the end of each week manually and then having that information to hand when playing the following week. Is that unethical? And then supppose someone makes a spreadsheet to get the calculations done? And then someone just writes a DB app to arrange it for you?

PT does not make decisions for players, it simply shows information which they (and everyone else) already had in an aesthetically pleasing and useful way.

[Our House]

[ QUOTE ]
For one, you could not create a program that can find through stats exactly what an opponent holds.

[/ QUOTE ]
Exact hands? No.

What if I were to tell you that there are programs that can sift through 10s of thousands of mined hands on a player and spit out his range of hands on any given street? Also, just like a HUD, the sites have no clause directly prohibiting this program. Do you have a problem with it now?

What if I were to tell you that there are programs that can take the range that was spit out by the program above and display proper counter strategies to that range (like displaying "call 22%, raise 54%, fold24%")? Also, like the range program and HUDs, the sites have no clause directly prohibiting this program. Do you have a problem with it yet?

What if I were to tell you that programs like these DO exist, but we haven't found them yet because the owners/users don't feel like telling us about them -- just like we don't feel like telling the fish about the software we use? Got a problem with it YET?

Try to think outside the box before telling people they are using slippery slopes and straw mans. There's damn good reason to be concerned because the programs I mentioned DO exist. Maybe you don't see the problem yet, but I'm sure you will one day.


[ QUOTE ]
If I believe a program that PP deems legal and I don't agree with it (such as say they allowed hacking a computer to see your cards) I would leave the site.

[/ QUOTE ]
What if neither you, nor the site, know about that program? Is ignorance really bliss?

[JOEL_]

Our House, It is called naive,

Alot of people see where there at,they do not see the big picture,where we are headed.Anyone trying to take away what they have,where they are at, is a nuisance.

[betadecay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I don't know if most 2p2ers agree. I don't base my opinons on what the group thinks, I base them MY DEFINITION of logic.

[/ QUOTE ]

and this where the problem lays. certain players will continue to find the 'next big program' to give them the edge, even if its the slightest edge. and thus, players will continue to use different programs that are altering the game of poker and since no one has the same definition of ethics or the same logic, what i may consider to be unethical and unfair you fine completely fair and ethical. so when that new program comes out that can make judgements on what a player holds based on statistical evidence of player profiling that IS allowed by party, many people in this thread would get the program ASAP. because, as you said, it is not a matter of ethics, as definitions are subjective, but what is allowed by the site and what is beneficial to oneself. THIS is the future of online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]


You are basically restating what he said. If party allows bots it is not cheating to use bots. That is logical. Logic isn't owned by anyone.

You can argue whether it will hurt the landscape of online poker in general and I'm sure their are good arguments for that. But that is irrelevant to what his post and the discussion he was having with canuck. It is not unethical or cheating to be at a table and operate with in that sites TnC's. wether that means you can use a program to look at his hole cards, use a bot, collude, chip dump or whatever.

[betadecay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For one, you could not create a program that can find through stats exactly what an opponent holds.

[/ QUOTE ]
Exact hands? No.

What if I were to tell you that there are programs that can sift through 10s of thousands of mined hands on a player and spit out his range of hands on any given street? Also, just like a HUD, the sites have no clause directly prohibiting this program. Do you have a problem with it now?



[/ QUOTE ]

You keep making incorrect references to TnC's. Party does have TnC's against these programs. It sums them all together and leaves a lot of open statements. Like you say, there are programs that are yet to be made or discovered. If they function with in those broad party statements they are still illegal. Party made those broad statements for this exact reason. Party has also made it clear to people that PA HUD is allowed and does not violate the TnC's regarding software use during play.

[Our House]

[ QUOTE ]
Party has also made it clear to people that, that PA HUD is allowed and does not violate the TnC's regarding software use during play.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is part of where we disagree. Party never makes anything clear. To me, clear would be T&C stating "HUDs are allowed".

But, that's neither here nor there. The important issue is the detriment of in-play software programs. Please let me know what you think of my earlier post that was addressed to you.

[PokerAce]

[ QUOTE ]
This is part of where we disagree. Party never makes anything clear. To me, clear would be T&C stating "HUDs are allowed".

[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't want to argue in this thread about the ethics of using software, but even though Party has not altered their T&C to say "PT is okay" or "PA Hud is okay", their actions say that are allowed. The Party Poker developers have worked directly with Pat from PT at times. Party Poker has directly contacted me about setting up an advertising arrangement to bring more players to their site. This seems like they are making their stance pretty clear to me.

[Our House]

[ QUOTE ]
Party Poker has directly contacted me about setting up an advertising arrangement to bring more players to their site. This seems like they are making their stance pretty clear to me.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry Josh, that's a little vague and I don't want to read into it the wrong way.

Does your statement mean that your affiliate manager contacted you to see if there were ways for you to put more banners up on the PokerAce website or does it mean some higher-up Party executive would like to team up with you in getting PokerAce to Party players who don't have it?

I don't quite follow how "you getting more players for Party" translates into "Party clearly supports HUDs".

EDIT: I'm not trying to be snide. As I've mentioned before, I respect you a ton -- your service, support, character, and track record are impeccable.

[crazy canuck]

players, due to their subjective definitions of ethics, morals, and fairness, will continue to use whatever means necessary to gain an edge over their competition

I couldn't agree with this statement more. There is no point of arguing. Many people are defending softwares becasue it gives them an edge. Morals and ethics are not clearly defined and LOGIC can't be used to evaluate the situation. Some people think gay marriage is a right, and some think the sodomites should burn in hell.

But I'd like to point out using the logic that people are using to defend various software I could argue that using colluding bots is not unethical. While colluding bots are against T&As, they are definitely not illegal and T&As of semi-legal companies can hardly be used as a benchmark for ethics. And as many defenders said people in real life are not ethical and fair anyways.

By the way WinHoldem can be made to be a fairly good bot as it can be seen from the recent bot thread it was making a profit in sit and goes. It's just funny that people piss and moan about bots, but advocate software that is clearly unfair to beginners and people not in the know.

It is apparent people are not basin their arguments on ethics, but on their bottom line instead. Therefore, yes the original poster is right. If we do not adhere to the srictest ethics, online poker will simply turn into a cyborg war. Welcome to destructive capitalism at its best.

PS: As I said before in my opinion HUDs/PT are fine as long as they are not combined with datamining. But in many cases it is.