For those that think botting isn't too big of a problem

[operaman]

I have a theory for you guys:

1) Say i am a rich american and have found a method of playing that I think is fairly easy to teach to others.

2) I move to bulgaria and find bright starving children
who will work for pennies.

3) After teaching them many of the tricks I have discovered
I let them loose on party. Keeping close supervision of them to make sure they follow my formula to beat the poker game in question.

4) They log in to party on one of my 10 random accounts so each account will have the exact same playing style, but would be difficult to play against as in reality slight differences between the players exist, which can't be fully adjusted to.

Have you shown anything to prove this is not what was happening?

The timing tell might be a better way of proving they are bots, but the tell that was given in the thread seems like a reasonable delay for a person multitableing. I know i have the same delay and i think i am not a bot. It would have been nice to have had a measure of the exact time delay between every action.

[Flintoff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Btw Burn,find the Party/Bots thread.The OP that claimed bots were at work there gathered thousands of hands and the evidence was very compelling.And to Opera,the bots in that thread(and i believe the evidence showed they were),were beating 10/20 Limit at over 1.5bb/100.Theres your beef.And this isnt the only example.

[/ QUOTE ]


I have read the entire mega threat you are talking about, and that is not hard proof.

[/ QUOTE ]

How much proof do you want?

It was me who did a lot of that research. I have 70,000 hands of them winning at 1.5 on 10/20. I have had PM's off others claiming similar. What hand sample size do you need?

The guy who created them even posted on the bot site that he was devastated his very profitable operation had been shut down!!

[/ QUOTE ]

70,000 for all the accounts, or each one? Remember you have to some degree contaminated your results by selecting players after the hands have been played and grouping players as you see fit.

How do you know that you havn't just isolated a naturaly occuring grouping of stats?

I am glad you went to the trouble to post real information on here, but it seems your work is just preliminary.


How do you know the person complaining on the forum is accociated the the accounts that you singled out?

[/ QUOTE ]

There was nothing 'perliminary' or 'contaminated' about it. I have NEVER seen another player play like those bots played. It was blatant.
EVERY SINGLE ONE of the names I gave to Party was banned and has not been back since.

You are just trying to cause a pointless argument and are coming across as pretty lame.

[5thStreetHog]

lol at "bright starving children" [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[stickneymarc]

It's safe to say that bots easily exist in large numbers online. One only has to look at a bot forum to also realize that nobody there posting has a winning bot. There are lots of losing ones and only the losing ones are talking. Winning ones would never post about it. The site is actually quite interesting from a programming aspect. The amount of time and energy put into programming to steal from poker players is huge. I can only imagine the time and brains put in by the people with winning bots that would never ever post about them. All it takes is one winning program and then multi-table it on multiple site and collude with its other programs to take you money. The colluding aspect the bots haven't even begun to tap.

Imagine dropping 3 or 4 semi-winning bots on a table that can share hole cards and cap pots pre-flop then raise out any non-bots through maniac play. You'd be able to pick off some pots against them but over 1000's of hands per day they would win most days.

[operaman]

[ QUOTE ]

There was nothing 'perliminary' or 'contaminated' about it. I have NEVER seen another player play like those bots played. It was blatant.
EVERY SINGLE ONE of the names I gave to Party was banned and has not been back since.

You are just trying to cause a pointless argument and are coming across as pretty lame.

[/ QUOTE ]

The reason i said your results were somewhat contaminated is that finding unusual statistics and then coming up with a hypothisis is bad science, although that didn't stop quantum theory. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I didn't say it was easy to avoid this contamination, but it does raise the threshold of proof considerably.

You said party banned all the accounts. Did they tell you that? There is a small difference between stoping playing and being banned.

Is it not plausable most many pros have left party for greener pastures since the usa gambling ban?


I am not wanting to start an argument. My livelyhood depends on playing poker and I have a keen interest about the existance of bots. I would like to have some definiative answers about this, not the endless conjecture present in most of the posts. Just because I don't think you have proven that those accounts were bots doesn't mean i don't thank you for putting in effort to expose possible bots. Being critical is a good thing.

[spino1i]

Ill play against a bot anytime.. bots cant beat good NL players.

[Flintoff]

All of the bots played AFTER USA was banned from Party. They all stopped playing at exactly the same time. There were 2, and even 3 at some tables there for a while.

[operaman]

[ QUOTE ]
All of the bots played AFTER USA was banned from Party. They all stopped playing at exactly the same time. There were 2, and even 3 at some tables there for a while.

[/ QUOTE ]

well I would expect a pro from outside the us to stop playing shortly after the ban.

Early in the original post you said they hardly ever played together, but at the end they did. Unless the bot programmer added collusion right after the internet ban, it would seem like a no brainer for 3 bots to never ever play at the same table. These were 6 max tables right? 3 bots from the same person would find it almost impossible to win more than a single bot at the same table. Three at one table seems to be an indication they are seperate entities.

When i find i am playing at tables that have many other winnning players i find another site to play at.

When you say the exact same time, what is the range of time that the word "exact" refers to?

[Flintoff]

I give up. I spent way too long on this already to waste time convincing someone who has his head in the sand. I really don't care whether you believe me or not.

Everything you have said is 100% truth. You win.

[5thStreetHog]

Dude,what is your deal?? Every statistical figure pointed to them being bots.They were reported by multiple people to party.On a bot forum it was posted by a user that all of his accounts in his "6max bot empire" were under investigation.A day later every one of the reported players were gone and never returned.Yet you post and make statements stating that what the people who followed and were directly involved in this event are telling you is "endless conjecture" And you make absurb alternatives like it coudve been someone with slaves in a third world country? Its clear that you are not interested in hearing what anyone else has to say,if it is not what you want to hear,even if it is true.