Bots and the future of online poker - Page 9

MaxCaliber · #81 06-11-2007, 09:04 AM

If you can program such a bot it will not be much better than you and you have wasted a lot of time to program it.
So it is more effective if you play [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Bots would be really advantageous if they can play alone, but then comes my solution that I have mentioned.

flatline · #82 06-11-2007, 09:41 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The only disadvantage bots have that I can think of is that they can't (I don't think) discern when their opponent is on tilt.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bots will be able to tell when people are tilting, why would this be different than anything else? They just have a player model that incorporates both short and long term patterns in another player's game.

Bots will certainly take over; it is only a matter of time. Like someone else said, if sites implement bot-finding technology, people can just run the bot on another computer and input the actions. There is absolutely no way to stop this.

BradleyT · #83 06-11-2007, 10:31 AM

[ QUOTE ]
There is a trivial way to get around bot detection if you drop the automation. Use a second computer, manually input the hand action, then follow the on screen instructions.

[/ QUOTE ]

They already use remote desktop software. Poker clients run on computer A. Bot software runs on computer B which is remotely logged in to computer A. Poker client can only scan software running on A so they have to rely on other "tells" to catch a bot.

ggbman · #84 06-11-2007, 12:06 PM

Yeah it was WPX, they played mostly 10-20 to 30-60 from what i know, there was one player who wasn't definitly a bot but did very well at 100-200. Others were more convinced that he was a bot than myself tho.

vmacosta · #85 06-12-2007, 04:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If you can program such a bot it will not be much better than you and you have wasted a lot of time to program it.
So it is more effective if you play [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Bots would be really advantageous if they can play alone, but then comes my solution that I have mentioned.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're wrong...there's a lot of cheap labor out there.

RIIT · #86 10-01-2007, 06:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The future of tournament poker:

http://www.pokerbotworldchampionship.com

[/ QUOTE ]

2007 PBWC RESULTS

RIIT

Zorlac · #87 10-01-2007, 08:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe i am naive but humans handle situatuations with incomplete information alot better then computers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo. Limit is a game on incomplete information, NL even more so. One is a science, the other is an art.

Computers can only paint by numbers.

.Z

StrongArm · #88 10-01-2007, 08:49 PM

geeks

RIIT · #89 10-02-2007, 10:21 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe i am naive but humans handle situatuations with incomplete information alot better then computers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo. Limit is a game on incomplete information, NL even more so. One is a science, the other is an art.

Computers can only paint by numbers.

.Z

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess it depends on what constitutes "handling" the incomplete info. I don't think any human can calculate exact winning chances against a given opponent hand range as well as a computer can.

RIIT

revots33 · #90 10-02-2007, 12:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Victor there are just so many little rules that you know, but you don't know you know. What's a dry flop and what's a drawy flop, for instance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm no computer expert but I can't see how this wouldn't be ridiculously easy to program.

I have no doubt that bots can and will be programmed to beat most low- mid-stakes NL poker games in the not too distant future. The only question is what steps the online poker sites will take to prevent them.

Perhaps the sites will force all players to type in a displayed word every x minutes in order to continue, to prove it is a human being playing. I'm sure there is a better solution than this, but at any rate it's gonna be up to the sites. Everyone saying "NL poker is too complicated for a bot to beat" is very naive IMO.