PokerStars: Allow Datamining - Page 12

mrick · #**111** 10-22-2007, 05:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Go sit in a casino and do your datamining. Oh thats right you cant do that so why online. Get a life you dont need someone to hold your hand while you play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Psst, you really oughta get with this hot new thing called the internet!

Amazon - you can buy books online. No need to go sit in the bookstore.
E-bay - you can auction off stuff or bid in auctions online. No need to go sit in Sotheby's.
Google - you can summon texts, articles, references online. No need to go sit in the library.
Pornsites - etc. You get the drift.

B&M is a different planet from online poker. Don't visit if you can't breath the air.

mrick · #**112** 10-22-2007, 05:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
you left out the part where none of the data came from datamining. It all came from people who had actually played with the suspects.

[/ QUOTE ] I would venture that the suspicions will always come from people who actually play with the suspects but that the suspicions will be confirmed by comparing the cheaters' stats with "normal" players' stats.

That's the way to catch most cheaters is what I mean. The specific Absolute Poker cheaters were too obvious. Their cheating was too blatant. Don't bother to compare their stats, etc. But data analysis is the only correct way to catch the clever cheats, the majority of cheats!

Thinking otherwise, and taking the Absolute Poker case as precedent-setting, would be results-oriented thinking.

Besides, the cheats and the bot programmers read the papers too...

freecard4all · #**113** 10-25-2007, 04:35 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Folks, we can have it both ways.
It is this: One year after a hand is played, everything about that hand becomes public knowledge, including the players' hole cards ... it will only tell you how someone was playing a year ago -- not how they play today.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except that hole cards it's kinda good idea and it would certainly protect the fish (cause the fish are usually the people with the less hands in my database).

There's only one very very little problem: 95% of these "FAIR GAME!" kids don't want fair games.
They want to data mine to get an advantage.

As you said, old year data is almost no advantage. Means: put it in test and a week after you will read thead "Pokerstars: we want actual hand histories because duh duh duh and so it doesn't protect the fairness of the game blah blah blah".

freecard4all · #**114** 10-25-2007, 04:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Now, you can't get too much of an advantage from this, because it will only tell you how someone was playing a year ago -- not how they play today.

[/ QUOTE ]
And this is what makes it worthless.
Hands from a year ago aren't worth squat for profiling opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]
HA HA HA HA HA HA HAHA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HAHA HA HA HA HA HA HAHA HA HA HA HA

What did I say? I didn't even need to proceed to the next comentary to know what will follow!

[ QUOTE ]
Waiting a year to catch bots and cheaters is stupid...

[/ QUOTE ]
poker rooms has records. They can trace out every penny you withdraw if they wanted to.

blackize · #**115** 10-25-2007, 04:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Waiting a year to catch bots and cheaters is stupid...
[ QUOTE ]

poker rooms has records. They can trace out every penny you withdraw if they wanted to.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay... and just how do the cheated players get those pennies back? Oh right, they can't if the cheaters are cashing out.

What about the cheaters who change names regularly?

Face it, datamining does not provide a significant advantage, but has recently been used to help identify cheaters.

freecard4all · #**116** 10-25-2007, 04:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
How does datamining make the games unfair?

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not the one who repeats "fair fair fair".
Hunting whales if fair (indeed) - everyone can do it freely.
Well everyone could do it freely.
Why?
Because everyone could do it freely.

[ QUOTE ]
2) The edge gained from this sort of analysis is very small. Knowing which regulars are 3betting a little more than they should

[/ QUOTE ]
why did you ask for this stat specifically then?

And if anyone thinks datamining can prove cheating: you are free to test FTP or any other site that allows it.
There's no need to ruin fishy PS games because you "want to test PS".

freecard4all · #**117** 10-25-2007, 05:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
how do the cheated players get those pennies back? Oh right, they can't if the cheaters are cashing out.

[/ QUOTE ]
rubbish.
Every casino (PS does) has a fund for this case. That's the fund that is sponsored by seized funds (examples in other BVV threads).

[ QUOTE ]
What about the cheaters who change names regularly?

[/ QUOTE ]
I thought that to allow name-changes is a bad idea.
You have to decide: it either is possible or it isn't possible for cheater to change names.
Same applies for the data mining posibillities. If you say don't change names becase dm is worthless you have to say dm is worthless against this kind of cheaters

If you allow name-changing (maybe half a year) then I agree data mining won't hurt that much (as fish play once or twice a week).

freecard4all · #**118** 10-25-2007, 05:07 PM

And if anyone thinks datamining can prove cheating: you are free to test FTP or any other site that allows it.
There's no need to ruin fishy PS games because you "want to test PS".

MyTurn2Raise · #**119** 10-25-2007, 05:55 PM

pokerstars games are fishier than full tilt? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

anyway,
There is also the alternative of Stars hiring a real forensic audit team and not the purchased seals of approval that are on their website

blackize · #**120** 10-25-2007, 06:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]

rubbish.
Every casino (PS does) has a fund for this case. That's the fund that is sponsored by seized funds (examples in other BVV threads).

[/ QUOTE ]

...Are you serious? They catch cheaters, they hand out the seized funds to parties that were affected by the cheating. *poof* that money is gone. If they take months or years to catch cheaters then they either don't pay all aggrieved parties or have to pay them out of pocket.

If datamining allows cheaters to be caught sooner it cuts down on costs for Stars and leads to fairer games for its players.

[ QUOTE ]

I thought that to allow name-changes is a bad idea.
You have to decide: it either is possible or it isn't possible for cheater to change names.
Same applies for the data mining posibillities. If you say don't change names becase dm is worthless you have to say dm is worthless against this kind of cheaters

[/ QUOTE ]

It IS possible for a cheater to change names. They aren't doing it legitimately, they are signing up with friends, family, or stolen identities. Datamining is not worthless against these guys because they simply don't have enough identities available to them to be changing accounts often enough.

[ QUOTE ]

If you allow name-changing (maybe half a year) then I agree data mining won't hurt that much (as fish play once or twice a week).

[/ QUOTE ]

You're worried about datamining killing off the fish? The fish don't play many hands and go broke before a significant sample can be obtained. Datamining provides its biggest edge against other regulars and even that is not significant.