PR: Poker Bots Consistently Win Online Poker Games by Cheating

[nafanny29]

Wow!! that is frightening winbig!!!

Even if its in the T&Cs I cant believe its legal. What about privacy invasion

I would feel very uneasy knowing that my entire pc could be scanned by someone. It would be like leaving it on and letting a stranger on it for an hour. Scary stuff

 

[baldidiot]

Yowser, I don't like that at all! Do any other sites have similar terms?

 

[PokingStars]

Something needs to be done about this IMO. I really don't know what but this collusion and botting problem is getting really really annoying.

 

[nisosbar]

While computer science is still being developed, better and better bots will appear, it has happened with chess , and is just a question of time when bots almost impossible to beat will appear, so poker online rooms in fact have to do something about it.

We've sort of been at that point for years now, and the poker rooms don't care - bots generate rake, and most of the fish are no more the wiser.

Personally, I stopped playing online poker years ago when it became clear to me that nearly every single table I was at was populated by bots.

 

[jetset]

It's an interesting topic - did you guys read the reports of the Laak and Esfandiari contest against Polaris, a bot developed by a Canadian university in Alberta?

There were a couple of contests if I recall correctly, with the bot AI getting progressively better.

I'm guessing that AI developments are watched closely by the anti-bot departments of major online poker sites.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Rather than fight the tide, maybe an operator should open a room specifically for bots to try their skills against other bots, or even human players who think they have got what it takes to beat a bot.

Given the rake model, the operator is not going to lose money to the bots directly, and players signing up will know exactly what they are letting themselves in for.

The contest to be VISIBLY the best poker bot may lure bot users away from other sites, and analysis of how the bots play on THIS site would help develop means to detect them elsewhere where they are not wanted.

 

[petro]

With the advancement of the computer "bots" or programs have ruined many games. Not only poker but chess as well. It is virtually impossible to detect if a player is using or not.

 

[jstrike]

Why fight the tide?? It doesn't make any sense. All things in their place: Give it a place to be, and regulate it.

I'm actually doing this with my new site. When I open up, there will be house bots, which are on special tables and tournaments only (always marked and obvious that they're bots), where players will be invited to use their own bots or to test their own skills against our machines. Any collusive bots will be excluded under the same anti-collusion rules that apply to all players (and yes, they can be spotted).

My house bots are based on an artificial intelligence I wrote, which uses real players' personalities as basis for their decisions. I've got two house bots so far that are based on the two best players in our beta test.

One of my more outside-the-box ideas for the site is that once we're open, we'll have a contest for the best live poker player each week, and base a bot on his or her personality, rewarding them with a % of that bot's winnings ongoing =)

 

[rockycatt]

for any one that doubts that there out there

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

and if any mod wants to erase the link please do its just for info purpose's

 

[3mptyseat]

Why fight the tide?? It doesn't make any sense. All things in their place: Give it a place to be, and regulate it.

I'm actually doing this with my new site. When I open up, there will be house bots, which are on special tables and tournaments only (always marked and obvious that they're bots), where players will be invited to use their own bots or to test their own skills against our machines. Any collusive bots will be excluded under the same anti-collusion rules that apply to all players (and yes, they can be spotted).

My house bots are based on an artificial intelligence I wrote, which uses real players' personalities as basis for their decisions. I've got two house bots so far that are based on the two best players in our beta test.

One of my more outside-the-box ideas for the site is that once we're open, we'll have a contest for the best live poker player each week, and base a bot on his or her personality, rewarding them with a % of that bot's winnings ongoing =)

When you said, 'my new site' does that imply an old site? If so which site was it?

 

[maxd]

... if any mod wants to erase the link please do its just for info purpose's

I don't see a problem with it, fwiw.

 

[vinylweatherman]

for any one that doubts that there out there

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

and if any mod wants to erase the link please do its just for info purpose's

Works on AP and UB - probably the most deserving poker rooms for this to happen to

I bet they spot it quickly though, since they have extensive experience with cheating at poker


Chess bots have been around for YEARS, and the best can beat the grand masters. Worse, chess is a much slower game, and a player could run the bot on one PC, and manually make the moves on another using the online chess client. This WOULD be impossible to detect, since there is no way to tell a bot & grand master apart. Only if the user gets greedy, and tries to run duplicate avatars from the same PC/IP/email etc will he expose evidence that he is cheating.

Poker bots might be spreading because players feel "if you can't beat them, join them", so are getting hold of bots rather than play when they feel they are against other bots, and the poker rooms don't appear to be taking the issue seriously (they ARE for the most part, but they are being outwitted all the time by new developments in bot software).

An operator using their own house bots IS at risk of losing out to better ones, since they will consistently beat the house bots in the long term.
Collusion is also a risk, because all the time those doing it are working on better ways to make it less detectable.

 

[jstrike]

When you said, 'my new site' does that imply an old site? If so which site was it?

No... the site / software I'm launching in a couple months is my first venture. So this is all kind of a big experiment. I'm starting it real small so I don't think anyone's gonna take the time to write a bot for it early on, anyway. Botters would have to do some serious tweaking to make it work, and it probably wouldn't be worth their time.

Anyway, I'm gonna discourage their use on tables not marked for bots and/or make people label them as bots (at the risk of getting kicked out). If it's me, I don't mind playing a bot if I know I'm playing a bot. Some of 'em are pretty good, but I've found if you tighten up and don't get too clever, I mean don't underestimate what they're capable of, you can fool them just like anybody else.

 

[vinylweatherman]

No... the site / software I'm launching in a couple months is my first venture. So this is all kind of a big experiment. I'm starting it real small so I don't think anyone's gonna take the time to write a bot for it early on, anyway. Botters would have to do some serious tweaking to make it work, and it probably wouldn't be worth their time.

Anyway, I'm gonna discourage their use on tables not marked for bots and/or make people label them as bots (at the risk of getting kicked out). If it's me, I don't mind playing a bot if I know I'm playing a bot. Some of 'em are pretty good, but I've found if you tighten up and don't get too clever, I mean don't underestimate what they're capable of, you can fool them just like anybody else.

Don't bet on it.

Bot writers look to the future, and like to "crack" as many softwares as possible, so that their bot looks better than the rest, and thus attracts a higher price.

The "casino robot" on offer comes in at least 3 versions, and higher prices are charged for more softwares and games supported.

The "free" trial version seems to only work on Cassava.

If you start allowing bots on parts of your site, they will be written, but then could be used where they are NOT wanted.

You should consider how you will detect these "allowed" bots, even tell the programmers HOW to hook them into your software. If they follow these hooking instructions, you can then use this to detect when one of these bots is being hooked up, and make sure it is where it is allowed.

 

[jstrike]

For any who are interested, there's also a very intense discussion about bots

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

, along with talk of new legislation that would make it a criminal offense to use them if UIGEA ends up being repealed.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Interesting.

It seems the proposed law is about establishing a fair game for all. The harsh penalties would be because it is the other players that are being "ripped off" by playing against a bot. This is in line with most consumer protection laws, which do NOT expect the average consumer to have the knowledge to make their own evaluations on such advanced matters.

Companies sneaking unfair terms into consumer contracts with a view to cheat their customers can ALSO suffer significant penalties. There are certain things that CANNOT be in the terms of a consumer contract, no matter HOW clear.

Companies also need legal protection against fraud, so penalties apply whoever is doing the defrauding.

As a CRIMINAL law, it would be "proof beyond reasonable doubt", which would NOT catch the vast majority of clever bot users, where poker sites have nothing more than statistical analysis of play, and ASSUME this means a bot was far more likely to be playing than a human.

It would be possible to develop a bot that cannot be PROVEN as being in use to the standards of criminal law, evenn though a CIVIL case might rule that a bot was in use, and damages payable.

It would be better for US regulated sites to use CIVIL law first, and only the criminal law when they have a SERIOUS case of very clever bot use and/or collusion.

In terms of detection, what is to stop the use of a real time advisor program on a DIFFERENT PC to that running the poker client. It would not show up in a running processes scan, and the human player would always have to make the plays suggested by the software on the other machine.

This could be further disguised were the player to have TWO broadband providers, on one they run the client, and on the other the cheat software. Even with cooperation from the tool developer, the IP addresses would not match, and it would be impossible to identify the player as the user of the prohibited tool (except by statistical analysis of play, which is not CRIMINAL level proof).

 

[jstrike]

It would be better for US regulated sites to use CIVIL law first, and only the criminal law when they have a SERIOUS case of very clever bot use and/or collusion.

In terms of detection, what is to stop the use of a real time advisor program on a DIFFERENT PC to that running the poker client. It would not show up in a running processes scan, and the human player would always have to make the plays suggested by the software on the other machine.

Exactly. That's why I think it's a ridiculous law.

My dad, whose knowledge of Chinese culture was pretty much limited to Chow Mein noodles and Moo Shoo Pork, used to like to say there was a Chinese saying about a paper tiger. That when you find out it's made of paper, you don't have to worry about it. So don't make threats your ass can't cash, basically, because if you do, no one's gonna take you seriously about anything else. As sad and dumb as it was for America to try and stamp out online poker, it looks like the gov't might be coming to its senses finally. And then they have to load up the bill with this kinda crap? Can't they just repeal a bad law, without making something else stupid and harmless into a felony at the same time?