Bot stuff from Spear's thread

[Mousey]

If a 'bot' changes the outcome of the game... i.e., makes a game positive EV, then that's cheating... There are already terms in all casinos that I've seen making it illegal to manipulate the software, change the game, etc. That is not a bot, that is a cheat.

If a bot is merely a tool... basically 'autoplay' -- then what's the big deal? Casinos often fear what they don't understand. And many do not seem to understand, that a bot, playing perfect strategy, will not change game's EV to favor the player, in the long term. We all already know the payout percentages are already built into the game. I see the 'no bot' rule as the "we don't like the way you play" FU rule with a twist.

If patterns are there to be detected, then there is a problem with the software. Fix the software. We (players) are told, over and over again, that what we perceive as patterns in casino software (the way a slot hits, the way cards are dealt, etc.) is allllll in our minds. Our brains want to see patterns, so we find them, whether they are there or not.

We've seen AP and UB poker software manipulated on the back end to reveal hole cards to the crooks/theives who knew how to take advantage of a flaw (whether built in or bad programming, was that ever clarified?) in the software.

Theives who have access to the software on the casino side (IMHO) pose more of threat to players, than a bot programmed for autoplay in casino games is a threat to the casino.

Unfortunately, I think casinos are going to be up in arms and will not remove the 'no bot play rule', thinking it leaves them unprotected from cheating bot play. I contend that their T&C covers the cheating bot situation in the 'you agree not to manipulate the software' etc., etc., rule. And if the software has been manipulated, the outcome of the game changed, would this not be evident on the casino end?

And I'm referring to bots used in casino play, not online poker rooms.

My apologies for being so long winded...

 

[Rusty]

Max
Surely you were around when we had Two very high profile threads about Casinos accusing players of bot play?

Of course that is the fear of players that a Casino can use the bot play term to justify non payment of winnings.
In fact it is more than just a concern as those threads proved.
It is bad for the industry not just the players.

I am still waiting for just One reasonable argument as to why bots should not only be banned but why that should result in confiscation of winnings.
Bot play is not cheating it is optimization.

I am still waiting for a Casino to give an example of bot play that has been proved.

I am waiting for the next "Ignorance Casino stole my winnings and accused me of bot play" thread.

Personally, if bot play could be proved with 100% accuracy then I would accept them banning bot play.

I would just see it as part of the shitty way the industry operates in order to squeeze every last Cent out of their punters. (That is what this is all about after all)
You know like how they want you to play when you're tired or drunk or emotionally unbalanced.
That is all fair game but a bot that reduces a players losses?
seize winnings! Steal deposit! lock account! Ban! Exterminate!

I'm done.
Oh by the way bots in player V player poker are rightly banned.
I accept all the arguments on that.

PS
I have never used a bot nor ever will. Now I'm done.

 

[WagerWitch]

You guys have missed my point.

Why are you gambling?

Isn't it to get the thrill of possibly winning - of personally beating out the game - or thinking smarter than the average joe?

Isn't it about GAMBLING?

To me a bot represents you NOT gambling.

It means you aren't playing.

I don't have a problem with AUTOCLICKERs - I don't use them.

Autoclickers just click for you. (my concept of them)

I wouldn't call an auto clicker a "BOT"... I mean - it really defeats the purpose of the concept of YOU gambling. But it's not an invasive to beat all software piece that would give you any different outcome than anyone else clicking at the same possible speed.

BOTs to me - are something that raise your advantage - as in POKER PLAYING.

I will never play poker at an online casino again - once I saw a bot in action.

I'm not comfortable with bots on BJ - but... with the caveat that I do not play BJ on a regular basis. I'm sure that the proponents or users of software that is NOT in the casino software will say it doesn't change anything --- BUT -- I think it does.

I think if it does NOT come with the software - you shouldn't be using it.

If it isn't part of THEIR package - then you shouldn't be using it.

I think using it goes against their terms - and I think it's not playing in the spirit of gambling.

Regardless if it could be figured out in your head or by looking at a card - the bot takes out human error - and it also is NOT in their software - so it really shouldn't be used... It's called Integrity.

If you built a software - and you expected people to be honest - and you found they were implementing a secondary software to do the action for them - you would actually be upset - TRUST ME.

I think casinos should find a way to detect Bots - even if that means reading the computer's registry of the player - or the active programs.

People would need to be made aware of that - but the casinos truly should be able to identify it. For your protection and theirs.

I don't see them as being Fair - if they did not come with the casino software.

But --- the only true BOTs that I truly - absolutely disagree with are the Multiplayer Skill game bots (eg. Poker bots). And I think people who use them are CHEATERS, LIARS and Manipulators.

Call it what you want - but the very concept of the game is PLAYING IT.

If you use a bot --- YOU --- are not playing it.

And if you use a Bot outside the software - then you're pretty much breaking the rules.

And if you're breaking THOSE rules - what other rules are you breaking?

 

[spearmaster]

Nobody misses your point.

If you can find it in a land-based casino, why would you not permit it online?

Bots aren't cheating anyone. Is your remote control cheating? How about your VCR when it records a program when you're out of the house? Shouldn't you be watching it when it's televised?

How about your legs? God gave them to you, so you should be using them instead of bicycles, motorcycles, cars etc.?

Things like this are a real part of life. As long as they do not cause any damage, there should be no reason to prohibit them.

 

[WagerWitch]

But Spear... Those things are BUILT into the game.

They are a PART of the game.

Bots --- the kind I'm talking about are not.

They are other programs acting as If they are the human on the other side of the computer - and are NOT part of the program the casino created.

Again the difference of BOT types may be the issue that I am discussing. As I'm reading people are calling Bots as CLICKERS (or autoplay).

I'm cool with Autoplay that is embedded in the Casino Software - it belongs to the software.

I'm wary of autoclickers that are not part of the software but they ONLY CLICK - so they aren't like ALL EVIL...

I don't like BJ counters like CASEY - or BJ players like Casey - a game that chooses for the player - and uses the best mathematical possibility.

BUT - then I don't play BJ - and it can be something that doesn't affect anything... It still removes human error - and I don't particularly like it at all.

However - BOTS that play poker against other players are just WRONG.

And I mean that - they should be labeled cheaters.

I think using a bot - even autoplay takes away from the Gambling and automates it.

It just feels sooooo wrong to me.

I know others have their own opinions - and I don't mind them disagreeing with mine... It's all good.

I am just expressing how BOTS make me feel.

I think most of you need to know that BOTS at online Poker rooms with multiplayers is wrong - I don't know if it's written up... anywhere - but it's just morally wrong.

I believe if it's NOT part of the Software for a casino - and you are playing that casino - then you shouldn't use any program to enhance your play.

That's just a personal choice.

And it's ok if you disagree with me. I really don't mind - just don't get PERSONAL... LOL - cause then I'll cast a hex on ya... (kidding).

 

[WagerWitch]

PS. My tv remote is EVIL - I think it grows legs and moves on it's own. Just in case you wanted to know. You're such a Devil's Advocate. LOL!

 

[spearmaster]

Let me put it another way.

Casinos can NOT tell with any reasonable degree of certainty whether a bot was used or not.

Every case I've seen has used TIMING as a method of determining whether a bot was used or not.

Some players play extremely fast - even when I'm sitting at a slot machine in a land-based casino, I constantly tap the button to try and get spins in as little time as possible. I do the same with video poker if it has auto-hold.

Bots can also be programmed to play at irregular time intervals.

Thus it is reasonable to assume that an online casino will NEVER be able to tell when a bot has been used, unless it is the autoplay which is built in.

On this reasoning alone - I contend that "bot play" - or rather "assumed bot play" should NOT be permitted as a condition for disqualifying a player.

 

[thelawnet]

Let me put it another way.

Casinos can NOT tell with any reasonable degree of certainty whether a bot was used or not.

Every case I've seen has used TIMING as a method of determining whether a bot was used or not.

Some players play extremely fast - even when I'm sitting at a slot machine in a land-based casino, I constantly tap the button to try and get spins in as little time as possible. I do the same with video poker if it has auto-hold.

Bots can also be programmed to play at irregular time intervals.

Thus it is reasonable to assume that an online casino will NEVER be able to tell when a bot has been used, unless it is the autoplay which is built in.

On this reasoning alone - I contend that "bot play" - or rather "assumed bot play" should NOT be permitted as a condition for disqualifying a player.

I agree on this point. Casinos should only be allowed to void winnings for clear reasons. So 'if we determine that bonus abuse has occurred' is not a reasonable term, however 'players' bet sizes will be limited to $10 while the signup bonus is in the account' probably is.

And since a casino can never prove with certainty that a bot has been used what it amounts to is another 'we reserve the right to seize your winnings' clause. And those are bad. The online gambling industry should concentrate on smooth, trouble-free transactions. Just as it's bad for Vegas if there are too many stories of blackjack players getting back-roomed for winning, it's also bad when there are too many dire warnings and horror stories in relation to getting paid at online casinos.

A quick look at some of the bot cases seen on here will show that - there's the wild blackjack player who won 10k with varying bet sizes who in fact wasn't using a bot, there's a 150k video poker jackpot that I believe is still sitting in the casino's bank account, and plenty of others. None of these cases are ever properly proved, and we just end up with unnecessary disputes.

A player playing minimum wagering and cashing out and a bot doing the same thing both cause the same problem for the casino - essentially losing money on the bonus. If the casino has a problem with this activity, the solution is simple - change the bonus. If the casino's bonus policies are correct, they have nothing to fear from bots. A bot cannot make a bonus profitable for a player.

 

[Pinababy69]

Casinos can NOT tell with any reasonable degree of certainty whether a bot was used or not.

Every case I've seen has used TIMING as a method of determining whether a bot was used or not.

Bots can also be programmed to play at irregular time intervals.

Thus it is reasonable to assume that an online casino will NEVER be able to tell when a bot has been used, unless it is the autoplay which is built in.

On this reasoning alone - I contend that "bot play" - or rather "assumed bot play" should NOT be permitted as a condition for disqualifying a player.

That is exactly what is being discussed, and why confiscation of winnings should not be allowed to happen, using a bot clause. Voiding a person's play with a reason of "he played for 12 hours straight" is NOT reason to assume bot play. Nor is, he only took two breaks of two minutes each, over a session of eight hours or more. If they cannot prove beyond any doubt that a player used a bot, then they cannot just void play and confiscate winnings because they speculate that he did.

WagerWitch, I don't think anyone is missing your point. But you keep bringing up poker, and we're not talking about poker, which is player against player. Presumably, we are for the most part, talking about Blackjack? That seems to be where most of the problems lie. There are many BJ players who can and do play perfect strategy, and a bot does nothing more than that. It seems logical that most players who do employ them, do so to clear WR on a bonus. For example, a player deposits $200 and receives a $200 bonus. If the WR are 15X D plus B, then he must wager $6000, probably on slots or keno, or whatever. Some casinos only allow perhaps 10% of BJ play to count towards WR...so in that case, now the player's WR are up to $60,000. So rather than sit and click each hand, he uses a bot to do it for him, playing in the exact same manner he would play himself. If the RNG is truly random, then the casino still has (and will always have) the upper hand. The bot gives you no strategic advantage...it simply helps in clearing tedious WR.

But again, if they can't prove beyond ANY doubt that the bot is being used, how can they use that as an excuse? So for that reason alone, I wholeheartedly agree with Spear and others, that these bot clauses, as they stand now, should go.

 

[WagerWitch]

Let me put it another way.

Casinos can NOT tell with any reasonable degree of certainty whether a bot was used or not.

Every case I've seen has used TIMING as a method of determining whether a bot was used or not.

Some players play extremely fast - even when I'm sitting at a slot machine in a land-based casino, I constantly tap the button to try and get spins in as little time as possible. I do the same with video poker if it has auto-hold.

Bots can also be programmed to play at irregular time intervals.

Thus it is reasonable to assume that an online casino will NEVER be able to tell when a bot has been used, unless it is the autoplay which is built in.

On this reasoning alone - I contend that "bot play" - or rather "assumed bot play" should NOT be permitted as a condition for disqualifying a player.

I will completely agree with casinos cannot, at this time, determine bot play.

CORRECT.

But - would you allow a casino viewing access to your Registry and your current running programs WHILE playing?

If you would - then they could determine Bot play.

Still - I am against BOT playing.

I agree - the casinos should not make accusations for or against bot playing unless they can validly determine whether a bot has been used or not - AND click timing is not enough to determine such.

I also agree - I'm a fast player as well in slots and vp.

However, I am against bot usage - on principal alone... And will agree that unless a casino can find a way to definitely determine a bot playing it - then you're right... It shouldn't be used as a disqualification.

I'll gladly go with you on that one.

But I think the casinos ought to find a way to determine if there is bot play.

And honest players should not use them.

 

[KasinoKing]

You guys have missed my point.
Why are you gambling?
Isn't it to get the thrill of possibly winning - of personally beating out the game - or thinking smarter than the average joe?
Isn't it about GAMBLING?
To me a bot represents you NOT gambling.

I just wanted to chip in here & say I am also (apparently) in the minority; I totally 100% agree with what WagerWitch is saying.

Would you send an android into a Vegas casino to play for you?

KK

 

[RobWin]

We (players) are told, over and over again, that what we perceive as patterns in casino software (the way a slot hits, the way cards are dealt, etc.) is allllll in our minds. Our brains want to see patterns, so we find them, whether they are there or not.

It's called "Mis-direction" and Harry Houdini was the most famous of all for it.

What the Eyes see and the Ears hear...The Mind believes...

Old Attachment (Invalid)

 

[Rusty]

I just wanted to chip in here & say I am also (apparently) in the minority; I totally 100% agree with what WagerWitch is saying.

Would you send an android into a Vegas casino to play for you?

KK

So you will have never used autoplay then?

As I have said I personally would not use a bot and I very rarely use autoplay but that is just my preference.
The thrust of the argument is that bot play can not be proved with any degree of accuracy so innocent players are always going to be accused of bot play and have winnings confiscated while this bot T&C exists.

"Innocent until proved guilty", you sated in another thread so I would like to think you do not apply that conditionally.

If I could be convinced that bot play was 100% detectable and no Casinos would ever use the term as a way of denying legitimate winnings then I would accept it as a T&C even if I disagree with it on principle.

 

[Jasminebed]

WagerWitch, I don't think anyone disagrees with you that poker bots are cheating, and against the terms at all poker rooms for good reasons.

Blackjack bots do eliminate human error. But studying or using a blackjack strategy card does much to eliminate it too.

But the House Edge is a theoretical house edge, based on the player making correct play always. And in the case of VP, of making MaxBet as well.

To say that players that use blackjack bots are cheating the casino by not making lousy mistakes I don't feel to be true.

For the record, I have never used one, and I don't like online blackjack in general.

Same for video poker, and autoplay is available for that on some platforms.

Heck, if I was developing software, I'd build you an autoplay bot just so you could play faster and gamble while eating in front of your computer. More hands per minute mean bigger profits for the casinos. My main use of autoplay with slots is so that I can eat! I stop it when going to the bathroom usually.

Since bot play cannot be proved by the casinos, to use a suspicion of such play to withhold winnings is insupportable IMO.

 

[spearmaster]

Heck, if I was developing software, I'd build you an autoplay bot just so you could play faster and gamble while eating in front of your computer. More hands per minute mean bigger profits for the casinos. My main use of autoplay with slots is so that I can eat! I stop it when going to the bathroom usually.

You said a mouthful

Everyone's entitled to an opinion - but to call bot usage "cheating" or "dishonest" or "without integrity" is kind of overkill.

Bots do NOT help you increase winnings.

Bots DO help you decrease losses if they make the correct play for the situation - and only over the long run because you could still lose a hand even if you played the correct strategy.

Some bots - including some autoplays - do NOT even play the correct strategy!

My final word - or rather, the Wizard of Odds' final word:

If I ran a casino I would fully allow bot use. If I offered a bonus or game that could be beat by a bot, then that would be my own damn fault for not protecting myself against advantage play.

https://www.casinomeister.com/about-us/philosophy/

I've also said the same thing somewhere in the archived threads... LOL...

 

[WagerWitch]

Those are good points Spear.

Again - like I said - Autoplay isn't the kind of bot I'm talking about - I'm talking about the player using something outside the casino software.

I just don't think it's right.

But truly - the casinos should be able to protect against those.

And I agree - unless they have an EXACT way to determine bot usage - then they should absolutely NOT be able to use that as an excuse to not pay the player.