Bots in PartyPoker's 6-max Limit games?

[Jake (The Snake)]

Mr. Rick,

Thanks for the response. Hopefully some more people with CS experience can add some more ideas.

[ QUOTE ]

Ideas to combat bots:
1) Identify potential bot players and their corollary statistics and publish as you have already done. This should start a collaborative effort to get a complete list on all sites based on the statistical and timing signature of the potential bots.


[/ QUOTE ]

Possible idea. The problem I see with this is that bot users could just check the list and change their screen name when they see that they are on it.

[ QUOTE ]

2) Think video/computer games. Understand their algorithms, and find their weaknesses. This may require private collaboration (i.e., get trusted bot haters and send private e-mails, because public posts would be easy to spot by bot owners and would eliminate financial punishment). Though I think it would be much easier to post like you have been doing. Collectively I think there is tremendous wisdom here.


[/ QUOTE ]

Firstly, I think it will be hard to beat the algorithms of the better bots. This may be an ok idea, but winning money from the bots shouldn't really be our primary goal. Making a bot go broke in a few sessions will be almost impossible if the bot is any good at all due to the randomness of the cards.

[ QUOTE ]

4) If HU or 3-way is the best way to beat them - then alert other innocent human players via on-line chat that a bot is playing at the table (and name the bot) and that should incent the humans to leave. Then destroy the bots.


[/ QUOTE ]

HU or 3-way might be easier, but it will be hard to figure that out if the bots don't play HU or 3-way.

[ QUOTE ]

5) When implementing counter offensive strategies, we must be vigilant not to play 2 or more of us at the same table - even if we are not consciously colluding. Because we will know the proper "bot" counter strategy and we may be able to infer the other 2+2ers cards by their betting. Then we would be no better than the bot owners.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yep. This is a big problem.

[ QUOTE ]

6) if a counter strategy cannot be formulated or cannot bring the bots to their knees (i.e., force their removal by their owners), then ask support of all 2+2ers to "out" them on-line via chat - at every possible opportunity. Most other human players will leave the tables immediately and the 2+2er can just sit out. The sites themselves will be devestated by the loss of games. They may try to stop our chats - but if they did that, I would assume that the internet forums would explode with posts and backlash at that site would be crippling. Eventually sites would see that in the current 2006/2007 timeframe, they will lose all of their business if they don't start acting proactively. Part of this strategy may be to alert the sites of the bot player names as well - so that they will stop the bot players ASAP. Within a very few incidents, I predict that sites will start acting very very proactively.


[/ QUOTE ]

The poker sites are probably going to have to be the ones to do something eventually, but I don't see how table chat could get us there. All human players aren't going to leave the table and even if they do, they will just go to another table. Poker is an addicting game. The sites will not feel a pinch if they lose a table or two.


[ QUOTE ]

8) Also create a bot freindly poker site - possibly for profit - that welcomes and encourages bot playing. It would be interesting to see the debate on whether hole card sharing should be disallowed... Since it is hard to effectively police, maybe it is more efficient to allow it. Perhaps, with a legal and ethical alternative many bot owners wouldn't even try to invade non-bot sites (or at least the 2+2 non-bot site).


[/ QUOTE ]

Some chess sites do something similar to this. The problem here is that we play for money, and there is no guarantee that bot owners will be willing to label themselves as bot users.

[ QUOTE ]

******* Other observation *******

Ray Bornert is providing us with extraordinary insight into the bot world. I for one am grateful for his perserverence on this thread. Why are we not treating him like we would a fish (no offense meant Ray)? I would never insult a fish, lest he go away. We should be thanking Ray for playing with us, whatever we may think of him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but he is getting information from us here too. A number of other people who have posted in this thread are also clearly bot-users who lurk 2+2 for info and strategies.

[Newtown]

Can we please get this thread split in two. The intention was to discuss the bot situation on Party whereas the topic now seems to have changed to the merits of cheating/botting in general.

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
depends on the gaming jurisdiction and whether or not they
will certify games that have "good faith" security requirements.

[/ QUOTE ]

my point is that casino blackjack shufflers have "good faith" security requirements. The customer has good faith that the casino has not rigged the machine or that they use decks with the right ratio of ranks, eg, they havent shorted the face cards or whatever.

[matrix]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


1) i'm not sure you understand the muck issue
in a live casino the information
is guaranteed to be forgotten (the exception being the
camera tables now in existance); but in the current online
servers the information is preserved/remembered; this means
that it's possible for a site operator to make the info
available to some (after the hand is over) and not others;
(and that would be cheating)


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

so your saying that in real B&M holdem camera tables allow the muck to be remembered - but those are allowed????

It IS possible to prove a positive (do we agree on ths much?) therefore why is it IMPOSSIBLE for poker sites to prove that they HAVE done something? that something being to destroy the muck.

and your solution to stop some people possibly maybe cheating is for everyone to cheat all the time - even people that weren't sat at the table who might be my future opponents?

[ QUOTE ]

(*note that this is not an issue for the live b&m game
because the deck is never known by any one person)

[/ QUOTE ]

except for camera tables - which means it IS an issue at minor tournaments like say the WSOP - zomg how did they get certification?????

Ray get on the phone quick and get the ngc to invalidate the 2006 WSOP results - it seems obvious that the dealers were colluding with that James Gold person - I mean we can't prove that they didn't.
It was those unsecure camera tables that did it !!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!!!1!!!!111111111oneoneoneoneoneel even

It was obviously nothing to do with him outplaying and getting luckier than the rest of them.... o wait.

[ QUOTE ]

3) cant see players

[webcams and anal probes] this is not a workable solution

[/ QUOTE ]

it is workable - it's just very inconvenient - it is not *impossible* and is therefore a solution to hole 3.

[ QUOTE ]

4) cant prove the server isn't colluding with a player

(matrix the issue is not if encryption works the issue
is that it does work)

dude. if the connection is encrypted then it's not possible
to sniff the information traveling to the player and that
means that it's possible for the server to cheat with one
of the players by sending them a privileged piece of info
(like the entire deck that's being used this hand)

[/ QUOTE ]

in my example teh only encrypted info sent was the rank and suit of each dealt card 6 times (or however many times there are players at the table) - once that info is encrypted we can tell if we know what algorithm is used to encrypt it how long the string of data will be - if the amount of encrypted data alters we can make a guess that the server is sending exra info (colluding) and then void the game.

it's not difficult to use some public/private key system to make this work and have the resultng encrypted datalook like jumbled plain text - if the entire rest of the communication between client and server is plain text then it IS sniffable and you could even decrypt the hole card data after the fact (say some independant testing body randomly samples hands and is provided with a means to decrypt the data) which could prove that no collusion was going on.

[ QUOTE ]

the purpose of an encrypted channel is to gain a private
conversation between 2 parties and if the conversation
between the server and client is totally secure then the
server can tell the client anything it wants including the
next 100 decks to be dealt. you can defeat this if an
non-encrypted channel is used but that puts player card info at risk in the context
of the internet in that somebody might be able to sniff
the traffic and learn our cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ray you have a talent for stating the [censored] obvious like it's some new secret truth that only you have figured out.

My solution to 4) doesn't involve an encrypted channel it involves encrypted packets (of a predetermined length) sent on a clear channel.

Again if there is some way of encrypting the hole card info and ONLY the hole card info then 4) can be plugged. (similar to a dealer at a live game turning the card face down before dealing it.)

it is not impossible.

[ QUOTE ]

the honest holdem t&c plugs holes 1-3 but not 4
hole 4 is an unsolvable problem on the internet.

[/ QUOTE ]

the honest t&c "plugs" these holes the same way that Pilot "plugged" the Jesus hole by simply washing his hands (so the story goes)

Just because you can't solve 4) it does not mean that 4) is unsolvable.

I agree that the internet is an unsecure place - I do not agree that the answer to this is to cheat as much as you possibly can yourself and to encourage as many people as you possibly can to also cheat as well just to protect yourself form the tiny % of people who might possibly be cheating against you.

[Mr Rick]

Thanks for your point by point response. I give up on my idea about trying to beat the bots first. Though I still think that there is a lot of value in understanding their strengths and weaknesses (I sure learned a lot that I think I can apply to my game...).

[ QUOTE ]
All human players aren't going to leave the table and even if they do, they will just go to another table. Poker is an addicting game. The sites will not feel a pinch if they lose a table or two.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just assumed most people would leave the table because I would - and also maybe hesitate about using the site for a while... I also was thinking in terms of many bots (of the same type) occupying many tables. My vision was the emptying of a significant number of tables within a short period of time. I think it would be worth trying.

[ QUOTE ]

Yes, but he [Ray] is getting information from us here too. A number of other people who have posted in this thread are also clearly bot-users who lurk 2+2 for info and strategies.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well this is very interesting and ironic. By being completely open and honest about our strategies we are in a sense mimicking Ray's HonestHoldem T&C. And we are teaming and sharing our hole cards as it were. My original point was that Ray has been very generous even though he clearly has an agenda (which I assume is to recruit us to play in his world of honest holdem where anything goes). He could just as easily be travelling in our world incognito as your suspected others do.

My guess is that it will be harder and harder over time to identify bots. I believe this because once bot developers discover several winning strategies bots will be programmed to change gears and/or look different based on who they are playing. They will not end up with similar characteristics until many hands are recorded (probably many more than we have in our current sampling). If there is a way to make poker sites our allies sooner rather than later I think we stand a greater chance of preserving the on-line game as we know it. Or at least as I used to know it before the US ban.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
Can we please get this thread split in two. The intention was to discuss the bot situation on Party whereas the topic now seems to have changed to the merits of cheating/botting in general.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Ray Bornert is a nutcase who's using this as a platform to promote his products and insane worldview. He lost his marbles some time ago and now gets high on the thought of his bot network taking over the online world. He's quite a sick individual, and I don't know why he should be allowed here, promoting his site and spreading a very one sided perspective of online poker. He has no interest in discussion, as he's made his mind up about what's ethical, what's possible, and what sites should and will eventually do (openly allow collusion and bots). Even though those beliefs and hopes have no grounding in reality.

His frustration that things aren't the way he wants proves most of his assertions wrong. The solution to the bot problem is vigilance (such as the OP), aggressive detection methods, and not giving fruits like Mr. Bornert any chance to promote their products. I'm sure he's gotten some signups already to his shady site as a result of his postings here.

[5thStreetHog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can we please get this thread split in two. The intention was to discuss the bot situation on Party whereas the topic now seems to have changed to the merits of cheating/botting in general.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Ray Bornert is a nutcase who's using this as a platform to promote his products and insane worldview. He lost his marbles some time ago and now gets high on the thought of his bot network taking over the online world. He's quite a sick individual, and I don't know why he should be allowed here, promoting his site and spreading a very one sided perspective of online poker. He has no interest in discussion, as he's made his mind up about what's ethical, what's possible, and what sites should and will eventually do (openly allow collusion and bots). Even though those beliefs and hopes have no grounding in reality.

His frustration that things aren't the way he wants proves most of his assertions wrong. The solution to the bot problem is vigilance (such as the OP), aggressive detection methods, and not giving fruits like Mr. Bornert any chance to promote their products. I'm sure he's gotten some signups already to his shady site as a result of his postings here.

[/ QUOTE ]Phil is right.This jackass has been on a PR campaign here for a couple days now,hoping to promote his retarded site.Never saying anything truthful,just living in his false reality.And hoping to reel in the few like minded idiots that are here.Congrats Ray,you got one, "Cheating has always been a part of poker.That's part of pokers charm." lol

[Flintoff]

So why isn't he banned.

He flys in the face of everything we genuine players on 2plus2 stand for.

Ban Please.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
prove to me that you're obeying those rules
while you play or if you're willing to admit
that you can't prove this

[/ QUOTE ]
I do play by the rules and naturally I can't prove that.

You are free to believe me or not. I don't care whether you trust me. But not trusting me doesn't excuse your cheating in the slightest. Any more than I can steal from my business partner or murder my neighbor merely because they cannot prove they don't intend to do it to me first.

[ QUOTE ]
then please admit
that you want me to accept on good faith
that you're obeying those rules.

be honest.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm a moderator and it would be inappropriate for me to be honest about what I actually want you to do right now.

Sufficient to say that your mentality seems indistinguishable from a professional criminal and I suspect that you are either already committing other crimes or you will move on to them in time. It's the nature of things.

Of course you could be some 17-yr-old kid who want attention and is 95% talk. In that case you are pretty harmless and the odds are you will grow up before you wreck your life. Anyway I hope so.

[5thStreetHog]

[ QUOTE ]
So why isn't he banned.

He flys in the face of everything we genuine players on 2plus2 stand for.

Ban Please.

[/ QUOTE ]I feel he has a right to express his views here.But i also feel like this has been a calculated assault to promote his site.