Bots in PartyPoker's 6-max Limit games?

[MicroBob]

Back to the issue of the alleged bots identified in this thread (as opposed to the more general discussion of bot-ethics and implications).


Are these players/bots still playing on Party?

[KurtSF]

[ QUOTE ]
Back to the issue of the alleged bots identified in this thread (as opposed to the more general discussion of bot-ethics and implications).


Are these players/bots still playing on Party?

[/ QUOTE ]

Good [cencorded]. [censored] finally!

[Saien]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe now, but when the bots starting to exploit stats more effective nobody will cry for hh anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]

This makes no sense.

Bots, assuming they exist and are real, can scrape the screen/scan memory/whatever to get hand activity - real time. What makes you think they can't store this somewhere and generate stats?

Hand histories are simply to provide the same data to those of us who are not bots.

[mute]

[ QUOTE ]
Back to the issue of the alleged bots identified in this thread (as opposed to the more general discussion of bot-ethics and implications).


Are these players/bots still playing on Party?

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't seen any of them for the past 2 days.

[BiPolar_Nut]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Back to the issue of the alleged bots identified in this thread (as opposed to the more general discussion of bot-ethics and implications).


Are these players/bots still playing on Party?

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't seen any of them for the past 2 days.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since this thread, I've been lurking the cheaters' forums to get a better idea of how advanced those bots may be getting. There have been several supports requests to fix the screen scraping profile for party since the 11-14 update. Apparently, it's fairly easy for botters to fix it themselves with the universal scraper that is apparently semi-new, so these support requests seem to go unanswered more often than not.

Since the bots listed seem to be written by a better player than coder (due to the easily fixable timing tells and relatively similar naming convention), it'd be reasonable to assume that botter is one of the posters crying "Help! Party is broken after the update!".

In fact, if you're ambitious and a lil lucky, you may even be able to figure out which poster runs these particular bots by monitoring their forums and seeing when they return.

[Flintoff]

The bots have gone.

btw - I truly hate that Ray guy. He is so full of [censored]!

There were often 2 bots sats together. Identical stats. Now tell me they weren't sharing hole cards.

There is a specific example in this thread where I did an experiment against them both.

One of them capped the flop (subjecting me to call 2 cold twice). He then folded the turn for one bet.

These two have now been banned. They even started talking as the programmer started to panic. They had never said a word in months yet both start speaking at exactly the same time. It was laughable.

Wishing you die is a bit much Ray, but your product is taking money off me by cheating so understand why I am a little pissed.

[MicroBob]

Cold-calling at all is probably not such a hot idea UNLESS you have a monster hand and WANT them to think they are extracting value out of you and bullying you.

But if you're just trying to stay in the hand you may want to consider a 3-bet or fold philosophy??

[aflaba]

Will the poker sites ever be able to somehow deal with the bot problem, or will bots always be one step ahead of security even of poker sites tried the hardest they could?

[Flintoff]

[ QUOTE ]
Cold-calling at all is probably not such a hot idea UNLESS you have a monster hand and WANT them to think they are extracting value out of you and bullying you.

But if you're just trying to stay in the hand you may want to consider a 3-bet or fold philosophy??

[/ QUOTE ]

It wasnt how I would normally play Bob. Though thanks for the advice <ahem>

As I said, I was trying a little experiment.

[Mr Rick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I want to stop bots.

I am trying to think of ways that regular players can help to do this because it seems unlikely to me that the poker sites will be proactive in doing it, mostly because of the reasons you just said.


[/ QUOTE ]

Initiate table chat with anyone with 2+2-like stats. If they consistently do not respond with intelligent conversation, they are most likely a bot.

This would require 2+2 custom to be to respond to table chat on occasion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with the above posts and I have found this entire thread scintillating. I am fairly new to on-line poker (year and a half) and was in the process of trying to make this my means of support when the internet ban hit. My poker mentor suggested that I log on to the 2+2 forum and I recently have (hence my Post total is low). I was about to try to go to FullTilt to continue my play at the $5/$10 level... I am now in somewhat of a quandry because of what I now believe is the proliferation of bots and I have a reluctance to go there. I should also say that I was in the computer industry for 20 years up until 2005 as a programmer, consultant, and then software project manager - with a degree in computer science.

Until today I was convinced that on-line sites had a vested interest in keeping bots out - because of the potential loss of non-bot players. However, in addition to the very persuasive rake profit argument, it may well be that a complete loss of non-bot players might not actually matter to the sites if it were to happen at a time when there were many different bots playing freely. Some bot programmers and configuration experts might find it wothwhile to continue playing against other "loser" bots. Note that now, human losers outnumber human winners by a wide margin so maybe we would have more loser bots than winner bots but, the loser bot owners may keep trying to improve their "entries".

OK to the conversation. The reality of this situation is that bots will always be a threat. Because there are hackers who will do anything regardless of right and wrong - and because there is a huge monetary incentive.

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.
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.
3) When you have a winning algorithm, make sure there are enough of you (us) to punish them hard. The play should begin at roughly the same time so the punishment will be extreme.
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.
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.
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.
7) I like "2)" through "5)" above because it could disincent bot owners financially. However, it may be immoral, in that while a strategy is being formulated we are knowingly allowing a cheater to prosper at the expense of fellow poker players. And of course, in the time it takes to come up with a strategy, the bots could earn more than we could take from them when our counter strategy is implemented. So it may make sense to jump to "6)" as soon as we have fairly conclusive evidence of bot playing.

*** alternate and not mutually exclusive solution ***

7) Create a not for profit Poker Site with virtually no rake – run or at least designed by 2+2’ers whose sole purpose is to provide a botless game. Note that the “Rake” incentive that Ray keeps insisting on won’t be there for the site. And it would be a fun challenge to keep ahead of the bots. The site could publish its anti-bot commitment and a tally of bot types and users that had been banished. Freerolls could include all confiscated bot moneys.
7+) It might be something famous poker players would sponsor.
7++)Perhaps some of the rake would be used to counter the US on-line anti-poker legislation. Or even provide a legal way for US players to continue playing [I realize this is off the original track...]
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).

******* 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.