Bots....

LARDO wrote: »

The general consensus in germany during the second world war was that the jews should be exterminated!

Wow, just wow. Thats an unexpected twist in this thread.

DEEP THROAT wrote: »

You seem to be watching too much sci-fi..

Advanced bots better than their creators taking over the poker world aaahhhh :rolleyes::rolleyes:

yup, thats exactly what I said in my post, sigh
reading comprehension FTW

Imposter wrote: »

I also personnally think most of the regs (we're talking 8+ tables every day types) are as near to bots as you'll get.

Datamining, huds and PT allow people who play nearly robotic poker, to play 8+ tables thereby filling all tables with 1+ of such people. Now to someone who plays casually without datamining, even if PT and a HUD is used, they have a major disadvantage. Of course the multitabler may tilt occasionally but he/she/it is still nearer to a bot than what could be considered a normal poker player.

Take Lee Jones suggestion from about 2 years back. Allow a user to change their screenname daily - then these multitablers will have to play less tables and concentrate a bit more and perhaps try and play poker. The simple fact that they would have to change what they do means that datamining and the huge databases that come from that are an unfair tool against the casual player.

Lol, you clearly have never player 8+ tables with a hud if you think that's as close to playing robotically as possible.

I love to be able claim I do it but seeing as every time I play I screw up all the time unfortunately I and most everyone else fails miserly otherwise we wouldn't be playing the rather low levels that we do

cooker3 wrote: »

Lol, you clearly have never player 8+ tables with a hud if you think that's as close to playing robotically as possible.

I love to be able claim I do it but seeing as every time I play I screw up all the time unfortunately I and most everyone else fails miserly otherwise we wouldn't be playing the rather low levels that we do

If you you are making mistakes yet you continue to play too many tables then that's your own problem.

A lot of the regs take ages to move up the levels as they are living off their low stakes earnings. They are withdrawing a huge chunk of their bankroll every month to live off. They are generally also players who cannot beat the game at 2 or 3 levels higher and so are content to multitable low limits 'professionally'.

Take away their database and/or their HUD and there is no way they can play so many tables as well. They use HUD statistics to make their decisions much more than what they themselves have noticed on the table or would notice without a HUD/large db.

Imposter wrote: »

If you you are making mistakes yet you continue to play too many tables then that's your own problem.

A lot of the regs take ages to move up the levels as they are living off their low stakes earnings. They are withdrawing a huge chunk of their bankroll every month to live off. They are generally also players who cannot beat the game at 2 or 3 levels higher and so are content to multitable low limits 'professionally'.

Take away their database and/or their HUD and there is no way they can play so many tables as well. They use HUD statistics to make their decisions much more than what they themselves have noticed on the table or would notice without a HUD/large db.

Everyone makes mistakes everyday, trust me on that.

Decisions require thought. Bots don't. They are pre-programmed. In fact the absolute 16 tablers who do play "robotically" are great. I love playing against them, as they are so simple to play against.

Imposter wrote: »

Yes I did read it and read it as the typical prizes a site would offer.

Reading it the other way why do you assume a losing player wouldn't withdraw after a winning spell?

Either way more hands played = more rake for the site. Multitablers play more hands. The total in circulation is largely irrelevant.

No it was nothing to do it prizes. I meant it as Mellor said, that a winning multitabler will typically take money out and spend it on non-poker items, and that money will never return to the poker site so will not generate any more rake.

Whereas if the losing player loses his money at a slower rate, then that chunk of money will generate more rake.

Therefore your premise that multitabling is good for sites isn't totally true.

hotspur wrote: »

... Dataming and HUD's help inform our profiling of other players but they don't make our decisions for us. Every decision we make on a poker table is 100% our decision about how to play the specific hand at that particular time based on our own poker ability and thought processes. This makes it categorically different from a bot.
.

The key here is inform. Because of a combination external software processes that can be run overlaying the poker client, some of which are in direct contravention of the rules others of which are a grey area and some of which are legal, the decision making becomes relativly trivial and mechanistic instead of something that even a good player would be forced to spend some seconds thinking about.

hotspur wrote: »

It can never be said that a bot is merely an automated version of you doing what you would do anyway.
Living tissue bots FTW.
Is it fair that some of us have superior brain software when our opponents aren't aware of it and risk their money in ignorance?

Never say never ;-)
I'm not so sure that a bot cannot an automated version of what you would do anyway, IMO that is mostly what the non poker bots that I am surrounded by and that is just what I would expect a good poker bot to do. And the whole point is that it isn't just superior brain software that allows the smart guys to play n tables profitably.

I just do not accept that in essence there is enough significant difference between a player plugged into a complex set of tools allowing them the facility to extend their intellectual capicity to play far more tables and make better and quicker decisions than would otherwise be possible and what we are calling a bot.

OK then, some questions for a multitable grinder who is already using all the tools -
Imagine a script that reads in the preflop action and automatically folds all 4+ gappers from seats UTG to MP1 when there is a raise in without you having to look at the window or press any buttons.
Now we have something that is just as trivial as a bet pot script and achieves nothing more than making life a little less tedious for the multitabler.
If I told you I could sell you that script right now would you want it? would it be useful to you?
If it was available free and you knew that many other players were using it how would you feel then?

Imagine now if you will a script that after you have raised in position examines the board, your hand, the preflop action and your opponents stats. Maybe it looks something like:
If Myhand greater or equal to TPTK
And
Opponents fold to CB > 30%
Then
CB 70% pot

Now what do we think? Are we cheating yet?

What if the script is very configurable so you can configure it to take the decision that you would always take in a particular situation. Who is taking the decision, you or the script? The agency comes from you the player not from the script.
And if it were that such scripts were widely available it is my assertion that those who profit from them would justify them in the same way as they do the tools that they use now.

Excellent post Strew, makes a lot of sense

I would expect a variation of your auto-fold script would probably allow most multitablers to increase their number of tables by about 50%

"Semi-bot" players?

opr wrote: »

I was pretty sure the auto fold thing exsisted.

First hit in google - http://www.texasautofold.com/

Opr

Automated tilt avoidance....

strewelpeter wrote: »

OK then, some questions for a multitable grinder who is already using all the tools -
Imagine a script that reads in the preflop action and automatically folds all 4+ gappers from seats UTG to MP1 when there is a raise in without you having to look at the window or press any buttons
Now we have something that is just as trivial as a bet pot script and achieves nothing more than making life a little less tedious for the multitabler.
If I told you I could sell you that script right now would you want it? would it be useful to you?
If it was available free and you knew that many other players were using it how would you feel then?

I don't see the point of your example.
You attempt to show how the legal tools are just as bad as bots. The whole point of the pro-PT camp is that the decisions are still human, we must decide and take the action, even if its jsut one button.
But you describe a script that is completely at odds with this. You say the differance is trival, yet I consider it to be key. I imagine that script would be illegal under the T&Cs of most, if not all, sites.

Imagine now if you will a script that after you have raised in position examines the board, your hand, the preflop action and your opponents stats. Maybe it looks something like:
If Myhand greater or equal to TPTK
And
Opponents fold to CB > 30%
Then
CB 70% pot
Now what do we think? Are we cheating yet?

As above.
Are we cheating? Em, yes. Who ever said different
How are either of these scripts relevant to PT/Hud/AHK etc.

What if the script is very configurable so you can configure it to take the decision that you would always take in a particular situation. Who is taking the decision, you or the script? The agency comes from you the player not from the script.

The fact that is would be our decision everytime means nothing. Its is acting on its own, which is the key point all along. I really don't see how the above is related to PT and the rest. If anything, its a basic bot

Mellor wrote: »

I don't see the point of your example.
You attempt to show how the legal tools are just as bad as bots. The whole point of the pro-PT camp is that the decisions are still human, we must decide and take the action, even if its jsut one button.
But you describe a script that is completely at odds with this. You say the differance is trival, yet I consider it to be key. I imagine that script would be illegal under the T&Cs of most, if not all, sites.

I'm pretty sure tools which read the board and tell you to call/fold/raise are also illegal. How do you prove they are different to HUDS? Afterall a human had to put the rules in at some stage and a human has to push the correct button.

Mellor wrote: »

Are you joking?
Everything you said there makes no sense, just because a person turned the script on or pressed a button at the start, how is that the same as the bet pot script.

Pretty sure this is a joke.

Not at all i see loads of similarities between the two. I may be drawing thin comparisons here and i do understand that but i still think they are valid ones.

I have never used the "bet pot script" but from my understanding of seeing it being used it works out the pot and bets it on sites that don't have this functionality ?

Using a "bet pot script" is an automated script working out something that you would otherwise have had to work out yourself. Correct ?

Lets say i use a "fold Trash script" and when pressed it folds all hands bar the ones i have asked it not too ? Is this not just working out something i would otherwise had to have done myself ?

Opr

zuutroy wrote: »

No, preflop it stops you having to move your mouse to the amount window, click in it, delete whats there, type '7' (or whatever) and then click 'bet', which is quite laborious if you're 8 tabling. Instead you can just right-click then click 'bet'. Post flop its essentially useless.

Yes this is my whole point it automates the whole process so it can be done much easier and quicker ?

Whats so different to me being able to right click a table when i get dealt a hand that saves me the hassel of having to look at my positon, my cards and then press fold or raise as this "is quite laborious if you're 8 tabling" ?

Opr

Because you, the player, decide when to use it.

In the hand, you decide to raise/bet pot, and the script makes it quicker/easier.
You make a unique decision for that hand. And impliment it.

The other script, you are not making a decision every hand. You have not decided anything, and are unaware of whats happening and what you are folding. You may have set the rules (which is meaning less), but the active decision to fold is not made by you.

strewelpeter wrote: »

The first script would not use data from PT / mined hands but the second one would.

How does the fact that the script uses info from PT have any affect on the morality or ethics behind PT. I accept that the script is unethical, but how does that somehow transfer by proxy to PT.

You claim that software that automates tasks (bots etc) are just as bad as mining software, AHK scripts etc. You give two examples of automating software. And when asked how they are relevant to the ethics of mining soft. You say its because they use info from the mining software. TBH, I find the connection a little weak.