Poker bots? Are they real.......

I've played on a certain site in a cash tourney where only a few of us talked at the final table.Not saying the rest were bots but they could've said something and seemed to make alot of tight plays.What do U all think???????????????

Alot of players ignore the text box, I usually do, especially something like a final table.

Talking online = distraction

Maybe they are like me and its best if they have their chat turned off!! I get pretty rude and use a lot of foul language! . That is why my chat is now off.

poker sites claim that they don't use bots...
but i think there are some who do...
having bots in tournaments and getting them to place in the money will save the sites $'s...
but what do i know... lol...

I see how they could have them finish at the final table or even in the cash and save in payouts just semme fishy at times.

There are real bots, but the players at your final table were not bots.

Bots are rigged!!!!!!! lol

Hi all,
I've heard of bots and shills but not really sure on what those terms mean apart from something to do with cheating, I do know for sure there are "house players" on quite a few poker sites, the poker room pays the house players either a percentage or a fixed rate for coming in the money in large tourneys, that is fairly rare though as they mostly play the ring games. If you search hard enough you'll even find proof.

Tony

yes they are real. There was a big scandal over at another forum where a poster had collected months of data and actually exploited them. Even a FT rep got involved and it was a big deal.

the scary part, was that the bots were killing the games. so yes, they are real and it really is only a matter of time before there are more sophisticated bots. Just look at how phil laak barely beat the computer program in HU NLHE

Just to clarify, there are Prop players and there are Shills. Both work for the place they play, but there is a significant difference.

Prop players are paid an hourly wage to start tables, keep games going, etc, but they play with their own money. They keep their winnings and they eat their losses. The only bonus they get is that hours wage. Also, prop players usually have to sit in short handed games or less popular games.

Shills are not only paid an hourly wage, but they also play with house money. There is no financial risk for them. Their goal (in order to keep their job really) is to win money at the games for the house using the houses money.

There is nothing wrong with Prop players at all, however using Shills is immoral at best.

It was not NLHE, it was limit...

maybe they speak german? or russian

Hi all,
Thanks Jack for clarifying that, so I should have used "shills" in place of "house players", one of the places I got this information from referred to them as house players that's why I wrote it that way. The reason I mentioned that I know for sure because I saw two statements confirming this from one ex-manager and one ex-shill (referred to as a house player) who both asked one too many questions and was fired and banned from the poker room.

I will see if I can find the details again, if so I will post a link.

Tony

as vanquish brought up, it was HU LHE, not NL, a world of difference, because HU LHE is really heavily mathematical. the day science creates a poker bot that can even compete well with a top HU NL player, i'll eat my hat. if it happens in my lifetime, i'll be shocked. it would have to be unbelievably adaptable

Depending on how old you are, you better have that hat ready......

While I don't think a bot will ever be a real force in playing consistent NLHE against humans, I think at one point, a bot will be capable of beating a top HU NLHE player in one session (or perhaps several sessions) simply by playing unpredictable big pot poker.

Yeah, but while this is absolutely true (just a matter of making the program hyper-aggressive), it won't prove anything. The random donk with no clue about poker strategy at all can sit down, get stupid lucky, and beat any poker pro. It happens. No matter how good someone is, they will eventually lose to someone else (even if that someone else is a computer program). The key is that the donk (nor the computer, IMO) could not do it consistently or for any significant number of times over the long term.