Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
The problem is you do not understand statistical significance. The more hands you play, the smaller of a difference statistical tests can detect between your stats. That means with a large sample as presented in this thread, the numbers given would have to be increasingly close together to conclude that they are using bots. And that is exactly what we found

[/ QUOTE ]

I do understand, and I think we both agree to some extent: the statistics tell that these numbers, to a significant degree, come from the same source. Right?

What I don't get is how you concur that this source is produced by a bot, and not by humans playing the exact same strategy?

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

hiya adde!! long time.

i think you know i respect your opinion TREMENDOUSLY. that being said, quick question for you;

you said

[ QUOTE ]
I do think they got themselves lost somewhere in trying to explain, making it more suspicious than it is.


[/ QUOTE ]


how do you square this in your mind? i.e. if they are being 100% truthful, how would they get 'lost'?

fwiw, i do not think it is bots per se, but i do think there is something artificial driving their decisions.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]

hiya adde!! long time.

i think you know i respect your opinion TREMENDOUSLY. that being said, quick question for you;

you said

[ QUOTE ]
I do think they got themselves lost somewhere in trying to explain, making it more suspicious than it is.


[/ QUOTE ]


how do you square this in your mind? i.e. if they are being 100% truthful, how would they get 'lost'?

fwiw, i do not think it is bots per se, but i do think there is something artificial driving their decisions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Heya, old lady, good to see you again. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

I'd say an innocent lie, not really important in the grand scheme, may have caused another innocent lie, and so forth and the web is spinning. Happens to everybody in life. I guess Nation saying that nlnut couldn't configure his own anti-virus stuff could be such an innocent lie. He tries his best to defend his buddy, and happens to stretch the truth. This tech inability then rhymes bad in peoples ears when they hear that he used AHK scripts.

Adde

(BTW, how you doing money wise on AI this year? For several years I have planned to get your back on that betting, but I always end up forgetting about it.)

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

BOTS will be on the increase on FTP because they obviously don't have the kohonas to do anything about it.

I didn't know MicroBob was poker manager at FullTilt

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A person is just not going to play the exact same way as another person over that many hands, as a system does not account for all factors, especially in NL due to the practically infinite bet sizings.

[/ QUOTE ]
With Teddy's theory, which someone else actually came up with as well several hundred posts ago, all that would be required would be for each player to play consistently themselves...oh, and for each account to be divided up fairly evenly between the three of them. Far-fetched, perhaps, but possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't think so, they could split up but I don't see why that would even matter. They are still going to have different stats, because even if you play a certain system, that system will not account for every possible situation in the game. It is those situations where they will deviate.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's trivially easy to design a (simple or complex) system that will account to every possible situation on the game.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's trivially impossible to design a (simple or complex) system that will produce the stats these players had.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The problem is you do not understand statistical significance. The more hands you play, the smaller of a difference statistical tests can detect between your stats. That means with a large sample as presented in this thread, the numbers given would have to be increasingly close together to conclude that they are using bots. And that is exactly what we found

[/ QUOTE ]

I do understand, and I think we both agree to some extent: the statistics tell that these numbers, to a significant degree, come from the same source. Right?

What I don't get is how you concur that this source is produced by a bot, and not by humans playing the exact same strategy?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hahaha exactly dude. This is what I have been saying. The mob's answer is that humans can't possibly do that (strictly follow a set of rules). Why not? Nobody knows. They just know for a fact that humans can't do that.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
They just know for a fact that humans can't do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Humans have two weakness. Hungry and sleepy.

gogogogo

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They just know for a fact that humans can't do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Humans have two weakness. Hungry and sleepy.

gogogogo

[/ QUOTE ]

If playing the same system, in the long run they all would get hungry and sleepy and make mistakes at an even rate, making their numbers look similar.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They just know for a fact that humans can't do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Humans have two weakness. Hungry and sleepy.

gogogogo

[/ QUOTE ]

If playing the same system, in the long run they all would get hungry and sleepy and make mistakes at an even rate, making their numbers look similar.

[/ QUOTE ]
Only if they were written by the same programmer.

gogogogo

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

OK, I trust the regular posters here on statistics (my previous posts all recognize that these are EXTRAORDINARY numbers).

But now listen to an informed perspective on the "criminal" mind: suppose I develop a supertight system that, as long as its undetected, can acheive a marginal win rate at low stakes NLHE (hardy that difficult). I program a script with that system (again easy). I set up a group of computers AND PLAYERS to sit and execute this script over set periods of time. I am present at these times to oversee compliance and occasionally play. The players really make no decisions, they just make the clicks instead of the script. I do this, even though a real bot would be easier and cheaper, precisely because I see it as a loophole in the rules.

The above scenario is what I believe happened. It technically is not a bot nor a violation of the TOC. But it sucks none the less.

Can you statistics guys assure me that the above scenario is not consistent with the stats?

Skallagrim

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


If playing the same system, in the long run they all would get hungry and sleepy and make mistakes at an even rate, making their numbers look similar.

[/ QUOTE ]
Only if they were written by the same programmer.

gogogogo

[/ QUOTE ]

I take it you ran out of arguments and played the joke card.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
If playing the same system, in the long run they all would get hungry and sleepy and make mistakes at an even rate, making their numbers look similar.


[/ QUOTE ]
Random humans executing a complex task which required taking many notes and having in-depth discussions on actions under a limted time frame will exhibit the same error rate?

Sorry, I thought you were the one that was joking.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
OK, I trust the regular posters here on statistics (my previous posts all recognize that these are EXTRAORDINARY numbers).

But now listen to an informed perspective on the "criminal" mind: suppose I develop a supertight system that, as long as its undetected, can acheive a marginal win rate at low stakes NLHE (hardy that difficult). I program a script with that system (again easy). I set up a group of computers AND PLAYERS to sit and execute this script over set periods of time. I am present at these times to oversee compliance and occasionally play. The players really make no decisions, they just make the clicks instead of the script. I do this, even though a real bot would be easier and cheaper, precisely because I see it as a loophole in the rules.

The above scenario is what I believe happened. It technically is not a bot nor a violation of the TOC. But it sucks none the less.

Can you statistics guys assure me that the above scenario is not consistent with the stats?

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course they can't...

But you forgot 2 things in your "hypothetical scenario"...

1. After the script read card info, it would cover them on sceen, so a human couldn't think about the situation, just execute the proper scripted click on command.

2. A central command "station" that would evaluate PT tracking data on the fly, to assure that everything was within standard variance, and specifically that any particular opponent wasn't exploiting the system.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If playing the same system, in the long run they all would get hungry and sleepy and make mistakes at an even rate, making their numbers look similar.


[/ QUOTE ]
Random humans executing a complex task which required taking many notes and having in-depth discussions on actions under a limted time frame will exhibit the same error rate?

Sorry, I thought you were the one that was joking.

[/ QUOTE ]

They aren't random. The task isn't that complex.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If playing the same system, in the long run they all would get hungry and sleepy and make mistakes at an even rate, making their numbers look similar.


[/ QUOTE ]
Random humans executing a complex task which required taking many notes and having in-depth discussions on actions under a limted time frame will exhibit the same error rate?

Sorry, I thought you were the one that was joking.

[/ QUOTE ]

They aren't random. The task isn't that complex.

[/ QUOTE ]
They aren't random?
At last we agree. They were written by the same programmer.

gogogogo

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

Three friends using the same system can't hardly be called random.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
Three friends using the same system can't hardly be called random.

[/ QUOTE ]
"Friends" is a poor criteria to use to determine error rate of performing a task. So yes, they are random. Unless some testing criteria was given, like a timed test putting pegs in holes or something, before they became a "friend".

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

Hey Sniper, I consider myself an expert in certain fields, but computer assisted poker is not one of them.

I appreciate your reply, but quite honestly I, and I suspect many other non-experts, want to know if the "hypothetical scenario" with your improvements is reasonable? Or possible? Or even most or least likely?

It seems some still insist it must have been bots ... So I want someone to address my guess as to the truth specifcally. It is, essentially, my "reasonable doubt" in this situation.

Skallagrim

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hey Sniper, I consider myself an expert in certain fields, but computer assisted poker is not one of them.

I appreciate your reply, but quite honestly I, and I suspect many other non-experts, want to know if the "hypothetical scenario" with your improvements is reasonable? Or possible? Or even most or least likely?

It seems some still insist it must have been bots ... So I want someone to address my guess as to the truth specifcally. It is, essentially, my "reasonable doubt" in this situation.

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe your scenario is very likely given the facts:

-Long time to make trivial actions - a bot would most likely take less time to act unless specifically programmed to "think" for a while.

-The players never improved their strategy over time - nlnut admitted that they didn't want to change their system as it was making them enough money as is. Sounds like BS since if they are making some money with this system with known flaws, then more money by improving it would be better. That is unless they have a simple system programmed into a script and modifying it to increase the win rate would cause too much complexity or they do not have the technical knowhow to program more than just a basic system.

-The win rate is fairly low - some people have argued that NL is too complex to program because of the almost infinite possiblities of situations. This is true if they wanted to win big, but if they are willing to live with a low win rate, programming a tight playing system that generalizes many similar post flop situations will do exactly that. It will clobber the fish and get exploited by the sharks that figure it out, providing a small +EV.

-Low variance in pre AND post flop stats - some have argued that this is a case of bots preflop with human interaction post flop, again because NL is too complex to program. If this were the case, then the postflop play would have much more variance than the preflop play.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

Guys, we should all realize by now that a poker site's self-interest in the bot area is different from that of the players. The poker sites want the rake, and there's no better kind than automatic bot rake. On the other hand, Joe Average doesn't want to play against bots (or multi-tabling semi-bots, but that's another matter).

So what's the end result, given the context of a less-than-ethical company? It's easy: Announce a policy of no bots, claim aggressive enforcement - and don't look very hard. Except, of course, when it's time for a bot to cash out big; just as for humans, there are definitely times when enforcement can be a nice profit center.

I think that's exactly what we see at FT, and nobody that's been around here for any length of time should really expect anything different.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

about 4 months ago a dude posted in the micro limit forum stat thread(you can search for it i wont bother) 2 samples of himself of about 60k hands and his stats were less than a tenth away from each other, BOT ldo.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

I like the fact that they all get up at the same time and take washroom breaks together. They probably shake it for it each other too then huh? GO TEAM

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

Although my first reaction was to do the same, seeing as I feel this situation is being mishandled by FT....why is it our punishment to have to leave FT??

Why not up and leave the table or choose to not sit at a table with these players/"bots"? Spread the word--this is a huge community. If these players have no one to play with, how does FT make money??--they don't!!

Although I thought it was ridiculous that players were directing players to this forum, earlier--now I am wondering if in doing so, you will cut back the amount of profit these "bots" are bringing in.

Boycotting??? just doesn't seem like it will happen(given the increase in numbers this weekend), when someone enjoys a site--it is hard to leave and like I said....why punish yourselves??

So, take a moment and inform the players at the tables with these people. Make an educated statement so you are taken seriously--pin them to the wall so they have nowhere to go.....
~A

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

Even if you take the numbers out of this equation....b/c OJ was not found guilty, doesn't mean he is innocent.

If you are truly an innocent person, do you come on a public forum and try to justify yourself to a community of people you really don't care about?

After all, your business is to make money. After FT gave back their privledges, why not just put it behind you??--instead, they found themselves tangled in a web they weaved.

"We started with a notebook" "The strategy is all in our training" "We keep notes on players" "We never deviate from our formula", etc, etc. Trip, Trip, Trip

These people are slick enough to put together a formula with almost identical numbers when it comes to making money but cannot put together a strategy when addressing this forum---OK!!!!

Face it, the crap hit the fan and they went in to panic mode--plain and simple.

~A

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
if they are being 100% truthful, how would they get 'lost'?

[/ QUOTE ]
You don't think you have anything to explain. Suddenly 100 people are standing around you shouting questions and demanding explanations. You get a little muddled.

Not that it's necessarily the cast here, but it wouldn't be the first time someone tried to quell an internet [censored] and only wound up making things worse.

("Secwet pwan to fight infwation?!")

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm afraid this whole situation is very unsatisfactory. As a c50k a month hand player with accounts at multiple sites, I will certainly look to migrate business elsewhere.

I think the key issues are:
1) The concept of allowing multiple users at one location is not ethical in my opinion. This may not be covered by the terms and conditions, and therefore can't be acted on, but this is merely an argument for updating terms and conditions.
2) Almost everyone believes there is a degree of decision automation here which goes beyond basic charts. The statistics are too similar across all 3 streets. There is debate about the degree of this automation. Again your terms & conditions do not appear tight enough - apparently you operate to a binary is a bot/isn't a bot definition.
3) I would agree that to confiscate funds you need evidence beyond reasonable doubt. But there is a lot of circumstantial evidence here, which suggests on the balance of probabilities these guys are botting. In my opinion this is enough to ban accounts and return funds.

The simple question to ask is whether if you convened a meeting of all your customers whether they would approve or disapprove of the outlined operation (even that agreed by DLNUT as fact). The answer would overwhelmingly, in my opinion, be that they would be disgusted by such practices.

I will be extremely angry to face any of these players again (yes, I have lost a stack to Full_Tilting), irrespective of my views of their capabilities.

Full Tilt faces a choice. It can seek to sweep the inevitable continued issue of bots under the carpet, with complicit acceptance from winning players, until their profits are eroded away. This has two issues 1) Customers do have the ability to switch away to other sites, and integrity can be a point of competitive advantage) 2) It gives your business a limited lifespan before profits are competed away on your bot infested tables

Alternatively you can work with your core customer base (yes, here is a good place to start) to tackle the issue head on.

Currently, your stance is clearly that of see no evil hear no evil. Don't underestimate the power of viral marketing in your business. If your business loses momentum it will not recover. I for one would be a part of that negative publicity generation, unless you up your game.

[/ QUOTE ]


The above is indeed a very good response, and Sean needs to answer its points to have any credibility. I would like to emphasize a couple of those points and add to them.

1) Same IP play

You can come up with all the excuses you want for this, from college dorms to small towns to wifi or whatever, but it is a huge issue and one that touches on collusion. Some players might have to be limited in their play options or indeed given no options, in order to insure game integrity for the vast majority of players.

2) Over-enablement of software aides

Now this doesn't just apply to FT. But allowing HUDs and datamining undermines the integrity of the game in the minds of the casual players, and allows a hyper-predatory decimation of losing players when the emphasis should be on the long-term goal of keeping the games going, instead of focusing on short-term gains that risk the long-term viability of the games. Choose the long-term viability of the game for both your business and the players over short-term gains and desire of some players here to over-fish the waters heedless of its consequences.

3) FT needs to see the many alternatives in these situations, and have several alternative responses to match them, instead of just making it only 2 choices.

This means that it's not just botting or not botting, with "inconclusive" always being a win for the investigated account. As pointed out in the main thread, a mix of botting and regular play to cover same has to be considered.

And it means that there is more than one response to an investigated player. It's not just guilty and funds seized, or innocent/inconclusive and keep on as usual. The third option as noted by others is to say it is inconclusive but doesn't smell right, and return their funds and close their accounts.

4)*Pro-active* means need to be taken to root out botting and collusion.

This means not hiding behind the valid but ass-covering response of "we can't divulge our methods" stuff, and making a public committment to datamining the hand history database to find these things yourself instead of it being on the players mostly as a default. If FT (or any other site) isn't willing to expend some computing and investigating time on such pro-active means, then any statements that they do take botting and collusion seriously are bald-faced lies. Taking seriously = using *effective* means.


Finally I would like to commend FT and Doug and Sean for their ongoing communication with 2+2'ers. I realize it's not always easy and you face lots of tough questions. And that you two aren't the owners and have constraints on what you can say. But a substantive response to the points raised here is necessary for FT's future credibility.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm just requoting my earlier post and that of another poster, because I want to note that the points made in them, as well as in several other good posts in this thread, need a FULL discussion by FTPSean. The OP is basically a canned PR response and it will be a week tomorrow since he made it. If Sean doesn't continue the discussion in this thread, then no 2+2'er should give them any credit for for their assertions of taking botting (and collusion) seriously.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

Do you really believe FT is going to post in this thread again?

Unless they find new evidence and they acknowledge that the accounts were bots, they are done with this issue.

They said what they meant and that's it.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The problem is you do not understand statistical significance. The more hands you play, the smaller of a difference statistical tests can detect between your stats. That means with a large sample as presented in this thread, the numbers given would have to be increasingly close together to conclude that they are using bots. And that is exactly what we found

[/ QUOTE ]

I do understand, and I think we both agree to some extent: the statistics tell that these numbers, to a significant degree, come from the same source. Right?

What I don't get is how you concur that this source is produced by a bot, and not by humans playing the exact same strategy?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because our measurement error is so small, it would be much more likely to be bots, since even humans playing the same system should end up with different results due to things like exhaustion, tilt, etc. things a bot would not have an issue with.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

bye bye ftp. This was the last straw. [censored] software, [censored] service, and now ignoring legitimate concerns of many well-educated players. FTP obviously doesnt care about there customers. A thread that went over 200 pages got whopping ONE response from FTP. This much concern and they give us ONE [censored] RESPONSE. [censored] FTP. I used to play all my cash games on there, but now i guess i will have to exclusively play on stars. Sorry Sean, but I guarantee im not the only one. You [censored] just lost about 2k per month from me.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do you really believe FT is going to post in this thread again?

Unless they find new evidence and they acknowledge that the accounts were bots, they are done with this issue.

They said what they meant and that's it.

[/ QUOTE ]


William,

I don't believe that they know with certainty that those accounts were botting and are just covering it up. However they can still take the reasonable step of cashing those guys out and closing their accounts. Furthermore, this is a long term issue, and they definitely need to post again and address the issue from that perspective. If they won't take pro-active measures to find bots, disallow same IP play and the use of HUDs and datamining that are half the way to botting, and use other alternatives like cash out and close instead of just seize or allow highly suspect accounts to continue playing just because the evidence isn't 100%, then it means their statements about taking botting seriously, as in serious enough to take *effective* measures, just aren't true. And that posters here should consider taking part or all of their FTP business elsewhere.

Now of course there is no evidence that other sites are doing nearly enough, including stars which doesn't even do all it can to eliminate all datamining, despite their state policy against it. But we have to start somewhere, and since FTP is in the spotlight, we should start with them. Getting one or more sites to truly take effective means will lead to a competitive need for the others to follow. And any poster here who wouldn't consider scaling back or eliminating play at FT until it addresses these issues, including US players with reduced options these days, should just STFU and not complain or post in botting/collusion threads about FT and just eat their [censored] and ignore the full magnitude of the problem like FT wishes them to do.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

It would be better if they were bots, because if they are what they say they are that would be a bigger problem IMO.Bots can be baned,but if a few guys can make a system that wins whats to stop 10,50 or 100 people from doing the same thing since this is within the rules.Now that full tilt has said they don't have a problem with this we should see more teams like this all over the place.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

Bluff, I mostly agree with you. I just don't think FT will be posting here anymore.
Once they have taken a stand, it is allmost impossible they will change their minds, it would be considered "weak".

The site's traffic hasen't been affected in the slightest either. We just have to accept that those are the conditions we have to play in and, as usual, adapt.

Bots, sweatshops or whatever there is out there, I and probably most of us, will be playing where is most profitable, as we allways do.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

Fascinating thread and clearly one with conflicting views. Credit has to be given to Full Tilt for posting a message, however you open Pandora's box if you do, as you are expected to reply to every query that gets raised as a result. I think FT should have said this is their position and they can't comment further or respond to further queries as their resources are employed elsewhere preventing further outbreaks of botdom!

I think it is unrealistic to have expected them to speak until their enquiry was carried out, as they would have been accused of being silent when the barrage of responses came their way.

Nevertheless a company generating the revenues that Full Tilt does should have a dedicated community manager who does a lot more than issue a statement after the horse has bolted. They have clearly lost a lot of goodwill as a result of this issue and perhaps could have generated some had they acted in a more proactive manner on the communication side.

I would think that any poker site that is trying to catch the top 2 will be more lenient towards bots, however most will be reactive rather than proactive as the revenue from these bots must be a positive until somebody uncovers them.

I think they have taken a middle ground view which has satisfied few, so perhaps next time they will either shut up shop and say nothing, or actually engage the poker community a little more. I suspect the former as a result of this type of thread.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
With FTP's HH and resources they can surely determine if they are bots or not.

1) Have they ever timed out?
2) How long have they played without taking breaks?

[/ QUOTE ]

3) Have they ever missclicked and folded the nuts, as we all have done at least once?

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

they will engage the poker community a little more.

This is the one point that FT does not seem to get. They act as they please and NEVER say anything to anybody until the very end and only the absolutly necessary.
They have this very disagreable "STFU, we know better and do as we please" attitude towards players that is one day going to blow in their face. The moment this bussiness gets regulated, they will feel how faithfull gamblers are. Unfortunately by that moment, they will have made so much money that it will probably matter little to them.

No communication at all on the following matters (just to name a few):
- security issues.
- withdrawal issues.
- software issues (horrible lags that they refuse to take responsability of).
- store issues (no shipping outside US/Canada).
- horrible support issues.

Arrogant site.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

I don't have the time to read the whole thing, like I didn't the first one. I have some defense and criticism for FTP though, and I apologize in advance for the bad writing.

<u>Defense</u>-For all you saying FTP should have caught this, I tend to agree, but I can understand why they didn't. These guys are not the only cheaters in on-line poker, and I have a hunch there are a lot of actual colluders from the same IP address that take up a lot of time. Then there are a lot more who use different IP's and IM or telephonic means to collude. Detecting these takes up a significant amount of resources I am sure, and I think the latter category may escape detection until significant numbers of hands are logged. These guys were careful not to play at the same table, and they did that, at least in part, to avoid detection.

I think it's easy to say this should be caught, but think of all the fraternities and dorms sharing IP's. I think that's a huge burden to have to sift through for any pokersite, and that's why the multi-accounters got away with it for as long as they did, and probably still do.

Like it or not, cheating is everybody's business, and we need to communicate with the sites because against all but the simplest of cheaters (who are large in number), it's easier for the people in the game to detect than some programmer/security agent faced with reviewing millions of hands from thousands of players. That's just the ungly fact we have to live with.

<u>Critism</u>-Once these guys were detected, they should have been shut down. Seizing $80,000 and shutting down 4 accounts are not the same thing. Something was going down, and it was fishy. Maybe not enough to grab their money, but enough to say get out of here, and shut down any future attempts to let these guys play, like an IP ban or something. FTP reserves the right to kick any one off for any reason, or even no reason whatsoever. Well here's a big reason, because this looks like a bot, smells like a bot, and tastes like on too. FTP's failure to kick these guys off gives me serious pause.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
These people are slick enough to put together a formula with almost identical numbers when it comes to making money but cannot put together a strategy when addressing this forum---OK!!!!


[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, this argument is silly, why should they have to put forth their entire strategy to the mob that is twoplustwo...this could possibly hurt twoplustwo in the future in terms of programming bots and would hurt themselves. They owe twoplustwo nothing, and in fact have not been treated kindly by two plus two. Proving themselves innocent to twoplustwo doesnt really benefit them in any tangible ways that I can imagine.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
Guys, we should all realize by now that a poker site's self-interest in the bot area is different from that of the players. The poker sites want the rake, and there's no better kind than automatic bot rake. On the other hand, Joe Average doesn't want to play against bots (or multi-tabling semi-bots, but that's another matter).

So what's the end result, given the context of a less-than-ethical company? It's easy: Announce a policy of no bots, claim aggressive enforcement - and don't look very hard. Except, of course, when it's time for a bot to cash out big; just as for humans, there are definitely times when enforcement can be a nice profit center.

I think that's exactly what we see at FT, and nobody that's been around here for any length of time should really expect anything different.

[/ QUOTE ]
QFT.

This is the major problem with us expecting the sites to police themselves. They really do not suffer at all when people collude and cheat against other players. Unfortunately there is no easy way for poker players to punish the sites for ignoring these issues. Organizing a 2+2 boycott is ineffective because it will just take some good players away from the site and make it easier for the remaining good players and bots.

We can try to organize a smear campaign against FTP and any other sites which are obviously ignoring this issue. This will bring negative publicity to online poker and hurt all of our bottom line, but it might force the sites to start taking the issue more seriously.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

That's it?

Are you serious?