Mr. Gatorade’s Lies cost me over 70k at Full Tilt

[teddyFBI]

Sean, I am not weighing in on how I feel about the principal players in this drama, but I'm going to give you a quick historical anecdote about being "absolutely certain" about bots, which comes from your biggest rivals, PokerStars. You might not have been around to witness this drama but in short, it involved PokerStars closing my mother's account under the ERRONEOUS belief that she was running a bot. They later recanted and apologized profusely both privately to her and publicly on this forum.

But the point I'm trying to make is one about humility and 'certainty' -- I went through my email client and dug up the emails that Stars sent to my mom that discuss how *certain* they were that she was using a bot. Here's a selection.
<font color="blue">
From the Stars security manager Jeff:

" There are several other factors in your logs and regarding your account that are also suspicious -- it isn't just your level and frequency of play. Unfortunately, I cannot detail for you exactly what it is we look for to make this determination. We have no desire to educate bot authors and operators in what needs to be done to avoid detection. Suffice to say that our judgement that you're operating a bot comes from multiple vectors. The decision was reviewed by two experienced "bot hunters" and the judgement was unanimous in deciding this.

Another one from Jeff

I really hate to say this point blank, but your claim that you're not terribly technically savvy does not hold much water, given what we see in your account history. As I said, I'm not going to go into detail as to what we look at to make such a determination, but the things you're doing
are rather out of the ordinary, and highly indicative of non-human play. I'm afraid this decision is final. I would be happy to escalate it to someone like Lee Jones for review, but please believe me when I tell you these two things: It's just going to fall back on me, with such people trusting my judgement... and that the evidence I'd present to them is very damning.


And one from the big Kahuna, Lee Jones himself:

"Hello -
As you requested, Jeff escalated your case to me. In his email to you, Jeff said, in essence, "You're wasting your time because (1) my superiors will put the responsibility back on me, and (2) I will show them damning evidence." In almost three years at PokerStars, one thing that I have learned is that Jeff's judgment is as reliable as the tides. I could lay long odds that if Jeff says it's a bot, then it's a bot. But we didn't stop there. Jeff showed me the evidence, and it is, indeed, damning. You are using a bot, at least part of the time. I am persuaded of that beyond a reasonable doubt.
It is time to take your poker business elsewhere. I *strongly* encourage you to drop the bot and play manually all the time.
Best regards,
Lee Jones
PokerStars Poker Room Manager
</font>

So why do I bring these up? Well, because fast-forward 2 wks after I helped draw attention to it all in these forums and both Lee and Jeff investigated further, realized an error had been made and were writing mea-culpa apology notes, both privately and publicly.
<font color="blue">
e.g. a snippet from Jeff:

"A second apology is owed for my finding. Upon further review of your records, you are clearly not using a bot. Even I am convinced beyond any doubt of that now. I mis-read certain aspects of the evidence, notably regarding the 43 hour session of play -- I was looking for "sleep" breaks of 6 hours or more, rather than for non-stop play. I was also latching onto similarities between your playing behaviour and that of a particularly clear bot case of past (one in which the bot "plead guilty"). I failed to take into account some other, mitigating evidence as well. I made a less-than-thorough job of it. I expect a great deal better from myself, as does PokerStars. I apologize for the mishandling of the case."


And a snippet from Lee's email:

"I owe you an apology. After a thorough review, we are quite sure of what you've been sure of all along: that you're a human, not a bot. After Dan and you contacted me asking me to review Jeff's findings, I should have done a thorough investigation on my own, but I didn't. I could give you all kinds of excuses why I didn't do that, but they'd be just that - excuses. So I won't bother - I will just say "I'm sorry; I blew it." I do feel awful about this whole thing."
</font>

What's the point of this all? It's only to remind you that *certainty* is a funny thing. In my mother's case, we had both Jeff, a highly-trained bothunting supervisor and Lee Jones swearing *beyond a reasonable doubt* that they were absolutely certain that my mom was using a bot. And guess what -- they were wrong.

Now I don't know about this BeatMe character, and what evidence you have that he's using a bot...but I only ask that you heed the lessons that readers of this forum have already seen and carefully consider any evidence to the contrary with an open mind. PokerStars Jeff's mistake was that once he latched onto the theory that my mom was a bot, he ignored any and all evidence to the contrary and only focused on the potentially damning stuff. So I urge you to do the same: I'm sure that you and BeatMe have had a colorful email exchange to this point, so if he has provided any evidence to you about why your findings might be wrong, all I ask is that you consider them with an open mind. I hate botters as much as anyone around, and am only too happy to see BeatMe lose $70K if he was indeed using a bot, but I urge you and whoever else is investiagting to be open-minded, and heed the lessons learned by the Stars bot-finding team. That is all.

[magicratx]

Ahh i see we've got to the "if you dont know, im not going to tell you" stage of the arguement now!

[El_Hombre_Grande]

I am glad to see that part of the plan is to compensate the alleged victims. It doesn't prove Botness, of course, but at least it would remove the possibility that a site is doing this for financial gain, and that is important. At least the "judge and jury" isn't pocketing the proceeds of the "trial."

Now on to the second part of the problem. What is the problem with a formalized appeal process that allows the account holder to produce whatever evidence would be satisfactory to FTP of non-botness? I see this as easy to fix as well.

The third part of the problem -- the disclosure of the evidence of botness --is obviously more difficult. I'll leave it to those that understand computers to try that. I don't want the ability of sites to detect bots to be compromised, but the account holder needs to be able to respond to the charge in some meaningful fashion. That means having some basic idea of the evidence. And in light of the TeddyFBI's Mom fiasco, its apparent that this is absolutely crucial.

[KurtSF]

[ QUOTE ]


They did explain their decision in general terms: beatme1 is a bot, we're certain of it, and we took his money for retribution/spite. How much more can they say without going into specifics, which would damage their ability to hunt bots in the future?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, they didn't actually say that.

They said: when they are 100% sure there is a ToS violation they confiscate funds, and in this case they are correct.

It was left to us to infer that they are 100% sure BeatMe1 violated their terms of service. FTP never said she did anything wrong. It was also left to us to infer what that violation was. FTP never said she was a bot. It was also left to us to infer that they are redistributing BeatMe1's money to the victims, as they only talk in general terms about redistribution of confiscated funds, and never actually say they aren't keeping BeatMe1's $70,000.

That's why every hates FTPSean's respose so much. It appears to say a lot, but in actuality it says so little.

[BeatMe1]

[ QUOTE ]
Re: Mr. Gatorade’s Lies cost me over 70k at Full Tilt [Re: MrGatorade]
#10678626 - 06/06/07 03:13 AM Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply



The fact that the chief accuser is completely unfamiliar with the basics of logic or proof is a major part of why this incident causes me disquiet.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You make it like Beatme1 is on trial in the United States Of America and that 2+2 is the jury. This is simply not the case. As much as some of you would like to be the jury in this matter it is simply not plausible in the nature of his crime.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Erm, no. We're asking for some indication that it's more than the word of a guy who's self-admittedly obsessed with bots. The human mind is adept at spotting patterns, even ones that aren't there. You spend all your time looking for bots, therefore, you seem bots everywhere. In some cases, you are right, and this may well be one of those cases.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Divulging ones evidence would also hinder the ability for the poker sites to identify misconduct and simply means that the particular method of detection will become obsolete and no longer able to thwart the bots.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are two fallacies packed within this statement. The first is 'obsolescence'. No one is asking FTP to disclose the methodology used, we're asking for the results, or at least a summary of the results, of those diagnostics.

The second is that it is fundamentally unfair to have the same party both making the decision and deciding the standard needed to make the decision. Any limit on the site's power is illusory in this case. You are a bot if they say you are is different only in scope, rather than in kind from "you are a terrorist/enemy combatant because we say you are."


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This may be an unfavorable answer for some but until online poker is regulated “properly” we have to take the poker sites word and trust that the integrity of their site is more important then anything else and they will keep the cash cow happy and not do unethical things.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I'm not sure how to respond to this other than, uhm, HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA. This is FTP we're talking about. Seriously, this doesn't even pass the basic sniff test.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It’s simply trust, that’s all you can do.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's only all we can do if we by your argument that divulging proof would be some catastrophe.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is all a mute point because Beatme1 used a bot


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



First, it's a moot point, and second, this is simply begging the question. You can't answer the question "how do we know she's a bot" with "because she's a bot" and expect anyone to buy it.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and has caused the reaction from this community that he/she wanted, doubt in the poker sites we play and their ability to handle investigations.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Uhm, no. It's the poker sites at times inept and always opaque investigations which cause our doubt.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

People need to understand that we are at a critical point with online poker right now. Unless we stop these bots now, in a few short years bots will become even more precedent and the games will get tougher as the bots get better.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This is an irrelevant appeal to emotion. No one is saying that bots aren't bad. The question is "is beatme a bot." How bad it would be if she were has no bearing on that question whatsoever, and all this hand waving is simply a distraction from that key point.
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That’s one issue, but another bigger issue is simply once people know that bots exist and are very prominent in the games they play why would a new player or "fish" want to play when they don’t think there getting a fair shake. When you play poker online now you want to think your playing a human... Unless the sites take action now and destroy the bots, it’s a safe assumption that you will no longer be able to think that in a few years.
-Crazy Mike (MrGatorade)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Again, immaterial, and possibly counterproductive. If you go around seeing Bots Under the Bed, people might overestimate the problem, and the very problem you are hoping to avoid will be caused by your hysterics.

Mike, it's laudable that you devote time to identifying bots, but I think your passion has clouded your judgment a bit and caused you to conflate your subject beliefs with objective facts. Let me put it to you this way, if the rolls were reversed, would you feel aggrieved if you were in beatme's shoes? (Any answer that includes "it doesn't matter, she's a bot, she deserves it" is an F answer.)


[/ QUOTE ]

Gatorade I would like to pound on the silliness of your post but I can't do it as well as SethyPooh did it above. So I will just put it to you like this. You don't know 100% that I am a bot. You don't even know 1% that I am a bot. Why don't you pull your head out of your undoubtedly tight ass and admit the truth. You suspect that I used a bot. You have no proof and everyone here can see that you recklessly injured me. If anyone should be barred it should be your data mining friend (gehrig). He actually does get software assistance.

[BeatMe1]

[ QUOTE ]
players like myself and redgar have probably played over a million hands hu, we think fast and act fast simple as that.I will b emailing ftp for you beatme


[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for taking the time to respond to this thread reztes. I know for you time is money.

BeatMe1

[Guthrie]

How is this dumb? A bot presupposes there's a computer not only making decisions but executing them, If she's a bot, she can't play without her computer. If she's playing the same game on FTP's computer, while they watch, then she's not a bot. Case closed.

What's dumb is FTP claiming they're 100% certain she's a bot, stealing her money, then refusing to show even a shred of evidence.

[WillyT]

Guthrie,

Suppose that Beatme1 has a bot. Suppose also that Beatme1 can play exactly like the bot she has.

These things are both possible and therefore it doesn't PROVE anything to have her play in front of FTP representatives.

This was Victor's point.

Best,
Bill

[ALLEN BOND]

I wonder how would Mr. Gatorade react if one day he would come to his bank to withdraw money ($70,000) to purchase a property.

The teller would say: "Sorry Mr. Gatorade, your funds have seized and your account closed due to irregular activity."

When asked what is irregular activity, the answer would be "our decision is final."

I really hope that happens to you Mike. Even though unlikely. You are a tool.

[mjkidd]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


They did explain their decision in general terms: beatme1 is a bot, we're certain of it, and we took his money for retribution/spite. How much more can they say without going into specifics, which would damage their ability to hunt bots in the future?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, they didn't actually say that.

They said: when they are 100% sure there is a ToS violation they confiscate funds, and in this case they are correct.

It was left to us to infer that they are 100% sure BeatMe1 violated their terms of service. FTP never said she did anything wrong. It was also left to us to infer what that violation was. FTP never said she was a bot. It was also left to us to infer that they are redistributing BeatMe1's money to the victims, as they only talk in general terms about redistribution of confiscated funds, and never actually say they aren't keeping BeatMe1's $70,000.

That's why every hates FTPSean's respose so much. It appears to say a lot, but in actuality it says so little.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you read the OP? One of the emails said "we've determined you're using a poker pot" or something to that effect.