Pokerstars

[Lilred36]

do they use bots to get that many players? or are there that many bad players online? bots or no bots your opion please.

[sand]

sites love grabbing cash but gotta just jump through whoops to get it back out

[ScareCrowAKA]

I don't really trust online poker at all. Thats why I only play free games. I will never deposit money into a account unless it was won -free money. I agree how it is funny how the people that complain about the sites keep playing at them. That makes no sense.... Also I think playing in the 9-18 people ring games is crazy. Im pretty sure collusion is pretty common and all it would take is 4 good players to take all the cash. I have noticed all the paired boards and flush/straight draws online but I havnt played enough live to comment about it being anymore then normal.... The comments about the sites making enough money from rake and fees i think is funny. These are large companies that want to make money, if you think they wouldnt need to tweek the system a little to get the most profit they could without turning people off thier sites. I think that is a little naive.... But I can't comment on the hands and such. Like I said I havnt been playing long enough and I only play free games. However, regaurding the free games. I do think that the best way to get new players to deposit money into your site is to give them a little tast of winning and the perception that they are better then they think they are.

[ffcowboy76]

ScareCrow, let's look at the math of the rake. I play at both Stars and FTP, so this applies to both sites. If you watch the number of hands played per hour on a table, you will see that online you average 40 - 60 hands an hour. Now, if you are playing 10c/25c NL you will see an average rake of about 50c per hand. If you average 50 hands an hour, that is a income for the site of $25 an hour PER table. I've noticed on FTP that at certain times there are over 30 tables playing at that limit. That is an income of $750 AN HOUR for that limit. Now, goto the 1/2 NL and look at the rake. It's usually around $3 a hand. Again you are hitting an average of 50 hands an hour. That is $150 an hour per table, with around 20 tables playing. That is an additional $3000 an hour. See why sites don't want to be seen as cheating players. They make more money than you can imagine through rake.

If I could make $100 an hour by having 1 table running 24/7 in my house, I would do it in a heartbeat. I don't care who wins or loses, so long as I make my rake. Live casino's do the same thing, only the hands per hour is lower.

I do know that some sites employ players they use as "filler" on a table. They will tell you to join a certain table and you play there until the table is almost full. Once it's full they move you to a different table. You play on your cash, but they pay you per hand played, based on level. I've received a couple of those offers from different sites. I've never done it because I have a hard time trying to profit over a short time at a table.

[ScareCrowAKA]

So you dont think they set up the hands -to get as much people into the pot as possible... inorder to get more from the rake?

[bkniefel]

I think there are definately bots. It is unlikely that they host that many consistant players.

[ffcowboy76]

If they set up hands it would be something do inside the software. That is a really big secret to keep quiet. The hardest thing about keeping a secret quiet is the number of people involved. To alter software and keep it hidden requires that only certain people be allowed to check the code. Someone would of let it slip by now. Look at how fast the AP cheating story made the rounds in the poker world. If a site was setting up hands, you would of heard about it by now and the site would end up with no players and $0 in income. I don't see risking the amount of money they make to attempt to gain a few bucks extra. All sites cap their rake at somewhere around $4 max, no matter the size of the pot. When you get to the 2/4 NL or 3/6 Limit level you see the rake capped every hand.

[ScareCrowAKA]

good points, but how many people still play at the sites where cheating was discovered? The same amount, less, or more? I think they would make as much money as they do now even if something like this came out. The PR would just spin it

[ffcowboy76]

I checked back in on AP not to long ago, quite some time after the cheating incident. The site isn't "dead," but it isn't near as busy as it used to be. No site will completely dissolve after a cheating incident, but they will see way reduced traffic and a way reduced rake from hands. Why risk losing money on a low return venture? That, if I know anything about business, doesn't sound like a good venture.

[ScareCrowAKA]

Ok. Thanks for the input. IS this why AP and UB merged?

[ffcowboy76]

I don't know the timeline on the AP and UB merger vs the timeline on the cheating incident. I do know that the cheater was either an employee or former employee that told them their software was susceptible to hacking. The incident in a nut shell was this: He hacked the software and was able to see everyone's hole cards during the game. He ended up winning around $200,000 in a tournament with this hack. Someone asked for the hand histories to see what happened and AP screwed up. They sent histories with EVERY hole card of everyone. Through basic deduction people figured out something was up and approached AP with the information. They issued multiple apologies and attempted to make the situation right, which I don't know what they did.

[NeverWinHere]

So you dont think they set up the hands -to get as much people into the pot as possible... inorder to get more from the rake?

ABSOLUTELY NOT! Also, there is a cap on the rake at each limit.

[NeverWinHere]

I don't know the timeline on the AP and UB merger vs the timeline on the cheating incident. I do know that the cheater was either an employee or former employee that told them their software was susceptible to hacking. The incident in a nut shell was this: He hacked the software and was able to see everyone's hole cards during the game. He ended up winning around $200,000 in a tournament with this hack. Someone asked for the hand histories to see what happened and AP screwed up. They sent histories with EVERY hole card of everyone. Through basic deduction people figured out something was up and approached AP with the information. They issued multiple apologies and attempted to make the situation right, which I don't know what they did.

The person that was playing didn't see everyone's whole cards, there was another person who saw everyone's cards, who then told his buddy at the table.

[ffcowboy76]

That is incorrect. All of the reports stated that the person that won had access to everyone's hole cards.

Here is a link to the many reports
http://www.natarem.com/2007/10/17/ab...ating-scandal/

[NeverWinHere]

That is incorrect. All of the reports stated that the person that won had access to everyone's hole cards.

Here is a link to the many reports
http://www.natarem.com/2007/10/17/ab...ating-scandal/

I got my information from an AP employee.

[ScareCrowAKA]

I was right. ah ha ha. Conspiracy!.. lol actually I was pissed after losing 3 times in a row after the the board came out. KQQKK, JAKJJ, AK2KA. However, this type of stuff still does not ease my suspicions.

http://www.pokerrng.com/poker-room-robots.asp

[pokehermaster12]

When i used to have money online, i felt that some HU players in ring games played basically the same. I believe that there are bots on stars, but not necessarily run by stars.

[whatsthemattr]

Unfortunately it is very hard for sites to catch/prove that bots are in the game or exist. An amusing story came about a while ago about Hevad "Rainman" Khan. His account on Pokerstars was banned because of supposed use of a "bot". Hevad was playing over 40 sng's at a single time. He sent a screen shot of his computer screen playing in this sng's. His account was reinstated and Pokerstars apologized. Several accusations have been made on various sites, but administrators are hesitant to act because of their looking foolish if they are wrong. An interesting topic because of the many people that regard the use of a bot as cheating yet there have been very few attempts in trying to regulate or control the use in the sites. On pdcpoker there is a player that many believe to be a bot, some of you may have seen "his" name nolimit6. If you ask around it is a pretty unanimous group (those who have been around for >1 year) that have played against "him" and believe "he" is a bot. They have reported and nothing has been done by pdcpoker.