Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

FTPSean, now that you are done with the bot issue, could you please see that my doom switch get's turned off?

TY

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Hypothetically, if you had concrete proof that players were using a computerized decision making system with humans inputting the actions, was this allowed previously?


[/ QUOTE ]

SukitTrebek,

not saying anything particuarly about FTP (I can't find a FAQ page to confirm/deny) but according to Stars this is explicitly allowed, and according to Party this is not explicitly disallowed. I Imagine FTP is similar.

If there is a human involved in executing the decision, not only a bot, no problem. Banned software "BOTS" only occurs when a human cannot override the advice of advisory softwares.

I posted links to policy pages in the massive thread, can post them here if need be.


dave.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct!

Decision Support software, which tell a player exactly what to do in any given situation is specifically allowed at Stars, as long as the player is actually taking the action.

It would be most helpful, if FTP specifically addressed the question of what software is and is not allowed to be used on their site.

Here is a link to Stars Software FAQ , as an example of the information requested from FTP.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

This begs the question...is it really possible to ever prove a player is 100% a bot? Seems impossible to me unless if they come out and admit it OR if they are using some confirmed bot software which i'm sure might be used by only a small percentage of botters.

Personally I think the proof (statistical evidence) of a bot is as great in this case as you'll ever see. Fine cant prove it 100%, let them keep their money but at least change the T&C and ban them from your site.

I guess what I am asking is what proof is needed to determine a bot?

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
This begs the question...is it really possible to ever prove a player is 100% a bot? Seems impossible to me unless if they come out and admit it OR if they are using some confirmed bot software which i'm sure might be used by only a small percentage of botters.

Personally I think the proof (statistical evidence) of a bot is as great in this case as you'll ever see. Fine cant prove it 100%, let them keep their money but at least change the T&C and ban them from your site.

I guess what I am asking is what proof is needed to determine a bot?

[/ QUOTE ]

I the bot owner stops playing at the site because of all the publicity at 2+2 and other poker forums and takes his bussiness elsewhere (and all the $$$$ he pays in rake), then I am certain that would be the perfect moment to proclame that the bot has been banned. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

Not to get this thread too far off of the topic of Full Tilt's worthlessness, but I just read the Stars FAQ and Dave, I disagree that robotic assistance/human inputting is allowed. IMO it is simply not addressed specifically in either the prohibited programs or allowed programs, with it strongly implied that it wouldn't be allowed.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
Not to get this thread too far off of the topic of Full Tilt's worthlessness, but I just read the Stars FAQ and Dave, I disagree that robotic assistance/human inputting is allowed. IMO it is simply not addressed specifically in either the prohibited programs or allowed programs, with it strongly implied that it wouldn't be allowed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please view from the list of "Acceptable Programs", #4 Texas Calculatem

Observe the Flash Demo. (EDIT: I have not tried the progem, I presume the demo is accurate)


I only saw this tonight after re-checking the link before posting in the main thread.

The thing has a big slider bar, indicating the recommended action "Fold / Check / Call small bet / Raise / You have the NUTS!" depending on action / hand strength.

http://www.calculatem.com/

EDIT: link added

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ 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 ]

QFT

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

#17: PokerBility http://www.pokerbility.com/

Also seems similar, at a quick glance. Offering intra-hand advice - "PokerBility - Will give you the next move!" is their catch phrase.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

You're right, #4 is a type of program that I assumed would be banned (even if it is for novice players).

It's still too illogical to think that a place that outlaws datamining would allow humanbotting, and that it was an oversight when they made the rules. I would imagine we'll see an update to Stars rules soon.

Re: Official Full Tilt Poker Response to Bot Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
This begs the question...is it really possible to ever prove a player is 100% a bot? Seems impossible to me unless if they come out and admit it OR if they are using some confirmed bot software which i'm sure might be used by only a small percentage of botters.

Personally I think the proof (statistical evidence) of a bot is as great in this case as you'll ever see. Fine cant prove it 100%, let them keep their money but at least change the T&C and ban them from your site.

I guess what I am asking is what proof is needed to determine a bot?

[/ QUOTE ]

If this case doesn't qualify, I don't see any possible way that FTP could find a bot without the players specifically coming out and saying I'm A BOT!. The numbers here are unheard of and we will likely never see something this clearcut again. It will be very easy for these guys to vary the numbers between accounts now. It doesn't have to be drastic, but the most minute variations will now be undetectable b/c of the precedent set here.