NL Bots on Full Tilt

[nlnut]

[ QUOTE ]
Nicho,

Even if your explanation is true, which doesn't seem likely, nlnut and nation have given a different story. There is a lie in those stories somewhere and that's the point.

[/ QUOTE ] link me too the lie.... i missed it.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, remember that I'm not in this group...I'm just good friends with Chuck, good enough to know that he's not botting and that he doesn't pay/hour. I don't know what lie you're referring to Bluffthis but I'd like you to point it out so I can laugh at you some more, because you're just a huge nit now. Even if he WAS paying by hour all it does is hurt his credibility, it doesn't prove he was botting.

[/ QUOTE ]


nation,

When I refer to "some lie" I mean that the story given by nlnut doesn't look or smell 100% right, and that *something* isn't right therefore about the story, especially as the postflop stats issue has nowhere been close to being adequately addressed. Just because we can't at present make a 100% determination of *what* is the untruthful part of the story, doesn't mean the story is 100% true.

Now I will grant I can't prove it isn't. But it doesn't look, walk or smell right. Something is amiss, and a mulit-team parlay including longshots has to come in for nlnut to be exhonnerated.

Posters here have to believe *all* of the following to be true to believe nlnut and your vouching of him:

1) he isn't botting even only part-time;
2) he isn't running a sweatshop and lying about it;
3) the stats are being mis-interpreted by all who think otherwise;
4) 4 players really can play virtually identically post-flop over 100K hands and a system can account for all post-flop situations;
5) 4 players can execute such a system to 99% precision;
6) FT is actually competent in making botting determinations;
7) nlnut isn't deceiving you in any way.


That's a 7-team parlay and it only pays 3-1. Anyone who wants to bet on it is welcome to.

[DWarrior]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
- I argue that the reason all of the data is so similar is that he is playing on all of them. Think about this: Take 400k hands and split them up into four 100k chunks. Won't the data for each of these 100k hands be very similar to each other?

[/ QUOTE ]

But VPIP, which should obviously be identical across the board, is statistically different between the 4 accounts listed.

[/ QUOTE ]

How about this: At some time t0, he decided he wanted to adjust something in the strategy. He has four accounts with x1, x2, x3, anx x4 hands each. But say they're all different # of hands. The stats for each of those will be different based on how many hands he played at his strategy before t0 and the number of hands he plays with the new strategy after t0.

Example:

Set1: 110
Set2: 111100

Both have average of .67.

Change strategy to play all hands. Add 1 to each

Set1: 110 1
Set2: 111100 1

Average for 1: 0.75
Average for 2: 0.71

Same strategy, different averages, hmm. Maybe theres is a lesson here? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

A valid point.

However, two of the accounts have basically the same number of hands (105k hands and 112k hands), so we can assume they were datamined at the same time. How come their VPIPs are so significantly different then? (13.64% and 14.08%) That difference is over 4 SDs

[marlboro8425]

who decides if it is reasonable to play as a team in poker? go to a casino and try it lol

[cwar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what part of it being a "system" don't you undestand. We created it together, and studied it together. And then we try to give each other advice during our sessions...all of this will create identical numbers...and all of this is allowed by FTP T&C

[/ QUOTE ]


DOESN'T EXPLAIN POST-FLOP. ANSWER THE [censored] QUESTION ADDRESSED TO YOU EARLIER ON THIS!

[/ QUOTE ]

I will not discuss post flop strategy for obvious reasons. You are asking me to tell you how we play. That will never happen

[/ QUOTE ]


Another nice dodge. I am only asking how you can account for identical post-flop play when the number of total situations is greater by orders of magnitude than just pre-flop ones. Of course it serves your case better not to give an obvious lie and just refuse to answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would have to discuss the strategy to answer this question. If not please tell me how to answer it otherwise and I will try too.

[/ QUOTE ]

oh come on. this post, and your last one quoted here, are the biggest red flags ever. youve had a 2p2 account for over 2 years yet you refuse to talk a tiny bit a strategy that could get everyone off your back if justifiable .. right...

[/ QUOTE ] well how about this... I would like to play 200nl at FTP again and you can use these strategies to expolit me.....sound reasonable???

[/ QUOTE ]
Most likely this isnt going to happen unless you happen to make new accounts. Even then I think the jig is up for your group.

[MinRaise]

nlnut,

Please confirm or deny that there is a computer program/script that is giving plays to the players on these accounts.

[robinsons]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
people saying - wow, how could the stats be the same over 100k hands as if the more hands you have, the more you would expect the stats to differ? try thinking about 2 100k hand samples and 2 100 hand samples and try to figure out which sets are gonna be more similar...

[/ QUOTE ]

You are confusing two concepts, and actually making the argument for bots not against them.

Only two computers/people that play EXACTLY alike in ALL instances could have stats so close over that big a sample.

The argument those of us that play poker are making is that no one person could even replicate their own stats over two 100K hand samples, and definitely not two individual people with different tilt tendencies, emotional responses, etc etc.

Mark

[/ QUOTE ]

however, if you make the following assumptions:
1) their 'playbook' is very simple, doesn't extend to much thinking beyond the strength of their hand and basic flop texture, then most situations will have a clearcut answer
2) in some rare situations where they're not sure, they have a quick 'groupthink'/choose a random action
3) they are disciplined enough to follow the same system and make very few mistakes/deviations from the system

is it not unreasonable for them to all have very similar stats?

I am not saying this proves they are not bots - only that it doesn't say anything either way, except that an explanation for this could very likely be that all accounts are playing by the same simple system (regardless of whether the actions are carried out by a bot or a human).

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nicho,

Even if your explanation is true, which doesn't seem likely, nlnut and nation have given a different story. There is a lie in those stories somewhere and that's the point.

[/ QUOTE ] link me too the lie.... i missed it.

[/ QUOTE ]


The lie is all of your story not adding up, not accounting for all the stats, and especially for post-flop play. Your explanation simply is unproven and unreasonable for you to be both not botting and not running a sweatshop or playing all those accounts yourself at the same time in some way.

[MyTurn2Raise]

[ QUOTE ]
who decides if it is reasonable to play as a team in poker? go to a casino and try it lol

[/ QUOTE ]

how 'bout the terms and conditions of the online casino that they are giving their play, which the other players are familiar with before playing themselves

[UATrewqaz]

A few thoughts

1. Assuming his story is 100% true, isn't this repeated and flagrant violation of the unofficial "1 player to a hand" rule?

Obviously online such a rule is informal and having a friend at your PC for a hand or two every now and then is standard, but this is willful and repeated violation of it? Uh?

2. No NL system can be so precise to account for all scenarios, to the point where 35 people can all memorize and utilize it. NL is way too dynamic.

There are too many factors. The only thing that would make sense is either 1 person watches all hands and makes all key decisiosn OR there is outside software aid.

AKA a bot which just tells the human player what to do

3. The whole story just stinks to high heaven.

We're supposed to believe that a player will sit down and memorize a system to make X amount per hour, but then only take a cut of that himself? After you memorize the "system" why not just leave and go make the full amount, without giving the house it's cut?