NL Bots on Full Tilt

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]
nation,

Nice dodge of the critical issue in assessing the stats. You have no non-laughable answer so you and your bud aren't going to reply.


Van Veen,

You are ignoring the far greater number of postflop siutations that have to take into account:

1) hu or mulit-way
2) board texture
3) betting on multiple streets
4) stack sizes.


There are infinite variations.

PLUS if they do in fact have all that figured out, then why aren't they on 10/20 instead of 1/2?

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I think it could be quite simple: just don't take account for the majority of optimal postflop play. Just play ABC (based on your 2 hole cards, sometimes not). Their system isn't that complicated and I doubt they win as well as they could be if they made adjustments on their own. Still, cutting down on overall variance isn't a terrible cause either.

[$crooge]

This is a little off-center, but does anyone else worry that we could alternately title this thread, "How to build a better bot?"

[nation]

bluffthis you're forgetting that this isn't 6 max. full ring is full of standard stuff. why do you think i can autopilot 12 tables...it's all the same shtt. it's so easy to play exactly the same. you're acting as if low limit full ring nl is some tough game with many layers. just play weak tight and you'll pick off the fish. don't tangle with regulars, etc etc etc. it's becoming tougher to do, my wr dropped drastically post-legislation.

[Skallagrim]

I an inclined to believe these guys that they werent using "bots" but "scripts" to augment their live multitable play. Just how extensive these 'scripts" were still seems to be an open question.

At what point is a "script" indistinguishable from a"bot?"

And even if these guys didn't cross the line between the two, is this kind of script and joint play that produces such a formulaic result the kind of thing that SHOULD be allowed by the FTP T&C?

But I have to say as a layman in this kind of mathematical anlaysis, it does sound as though they have an explanation that explains the numbers and that isnt a "bot" at least in the traditional way we understand that term.

But they also seem afraid to confront the other questions.

Skallagrim

[DWarrior]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a little off-center, but does anyone else worry that we could alternately title this thread, "How to build a better bot?"

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually got some good ideas thanks to this thread, yes.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
bluff,

no, i'm not. if they simply ignore those variables their post-flop stats will converge at a much faster rate.

what we know is true:
a) all four players are using the same strategy;
b) that strategy is relatively simple.

we don't know anything else. in fact, we cannot know anything else.

[/ QUOTE ]


VV,

You actually made my point when you apply #2 to the greater number of post-flop situations. Because post-flop it *can't be* that simple for 4 different players in different situations.

Now I realize you are basically making the argument that they might be applying a very weak-tight or semi-weak-tight strategy in stacking off with overpairs/TPTK/sets and folding all else, i.e fit or fold on the flop. *But when they get smoothcalled* on the flop and turn and various draws or board pairs come, IT CAN'T BE THAT SIMPLE ALL THE TIME.

[DWarrior]

[ QUOTE ]
I an inclined to believe these guys that they werent using "bots" but "scripts" to augment their live multitable play. Just how extensive these 'scripts" were still seems to be an open question.

At what point is a "script" indistinguishable from a"bot?"

And even if these guys didn't cross the line between the two, is this kind of script and joint play that produces such a formulaic result the kind of thing that SHOULD be allowed by the FTP T&C?

But I have to say as a layman in this kind of mathematical anlaysis, it does sound as though they have an explanation that explains the numbers and that isnt a "bot" at least in the traditional way we understand that term.

But they also seem afraid to confront the other questions.

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of scripts used by multi-tables are readily available. Stuff like giving you a button to bet pot-size, a button to fold, a mouse slider to adjust your bet size.

[nlnut]

[ 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 ]

you are absolutely retarded if you don't think it's possible for players playing a limit and level the exact same way to accrue the same stats by working together on postflop decisions, especially when they're playing right next to each other.

[/ QUOTE ]


And you are retarded if you think that they:

a) have worked out a book for a 1000 different situations involving different players, flop textures, turn and river cards and stack sizes;

AND

b) could even execute same with 99% precision if they did have that playbook.

[/ QUOTE ]


All,

Notice how nation and nlnut haven't come back *quick* with a response to the post-flop issue questions. If they have to "think about it" a while first the answer will be BS. Of course the quick answer is likely to be BS as well.

[/ QUOTE ] I can't keep up with the avalanche of posts...trying though.

[Triumph36]

could people continue making silly posts? i was enjoying trolling this thread a great deal.

btw, bluffthis's arguments are so asinine in this and other threads that nation could be 12 tabling and replying to them

or is that an indictment of how easy FR is?

[jrbick]

Can the dataminers show evidence that only one or two of the players were playing at once on various occasions.