pokerbot.com - winholdem - request for comments
WinHoldemSupport
of game state history they would expect a piece of software to have
available to the user.
here is the list of what is currently available in winholdem:
http://www.winholdem.net/help/help-formula.html#symbols
there approximately 120 available winholdem formula symbols for use in the
various formula sets within the bot.
our development team is interested in the opinions of experienced poker
players,
thanks,
winholdem support
http://www.pokerbot.com
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
James Campbell
And if WinHoldem is big enough to have a support staff and technicians on
hand what is the business name, phone number, and address of your facility?
"WinHoldemSupport" <anon...@winholdem.net> wrote in message
news:wtu5c.10711099$Id.17...@news.easynews.com...
dealerbuttons.com
fille
kept copying itself to the chat window that referred to pokerbot and
winholdem, I believe it said reboot?? I didn't know what it all meant, so
I decided to take a look at the site based on this post and try to
understand what this guy might be up to.
Since when is the word collusion now replaced by the phrase 'card sharing
with your friends'? This is CHEATING - plain and simple.
So your site is producing software to encourage and enable cheating
online.
I hope all your unethical time and money spent developing this garbage is
a huge loss to your personal bankroll along with the cheaters who use your
software.
You don't deserve any assistance from any quality player since the persons
who would buy and/or develop your software are obviously not of that
category.
Dave's Fridge
"dealerbuttons.com" <anon...@dealerbuttons.com> wrote in message
news:6Wu5c.10804041$Of.18...@news.easynews.com...
Dave's Fridge
"fille" <anon...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:stx5c.10815959$Of.18...@news.easynews.com...
WinHoldemSupport
"> Since when is the word collusion now replaced by the phrase 'card sharing
> with your friends'? This is CHEATING - plain and simple."
the simple answer is - the very moment poker moved to an uncontrolled
internet environment. we will be happy to once again call it cheating if
you can demonstrate how the classic form of poker (humans only,no
collusion) can exist on the internet without having to rely on the honesty
of our opponents (the people trying to take all our money at the table).
what we hold in the highest contempt is your type of mentality that would
abuse those that are simply attempting to defend themselves either with
computer assistance and/or teaming. we are not accusing you of being
dishonest. however the moment that you demand that we just simply trust
that everyone else playing poker on the internet is as honest as you is
the moment you lose all of your value in the relationship. pokerbot.com
wants to increase the security of poker on the internet. you on the other
hand want the game to remain very insecure. you sir are the problem.
"> So your site is producing software to encourage and enable cheating online"
incorrect, pokerbot.com provides a means for internet poker players to
provide for their own safety and security because trusting other opponents
to provide this is a miserable failure and trusting the opc's to see to it
is also a failure. you do a grave disservice to new players entering the
world of online poker by asking them to just trust the security of the
game. ... your attitude is "oh dont worry little fishy ... just trust your
opponents to be honest and not collude and to not use computer assistance
and go ahead and sit at any table you want. dont worry about how good you
are there is no official player rating system so you can see how strong
your opponents are."
(one of the changes we'd like to see in online poker is a player rating
system that will protect a new guppy from sitting down at a table filled
with sharks.)
to sum up fille, you sir bear the burden of proof not us. if you want to
call it cheating then you show all of us how poker can exist on the
internet without having to just simply trust the ethics of people trying
to take your money. until then just shutup and dont ask us to trust anyone
until such a time as you can provide the level of security that we demand.
you disgust us.
winholdem support.
http://www.pokerbot.com
Raider Fan
< snip usual garbage from this scumbag >
>
> you disgust us.
>
> winholdem support.
> http://www.pokerbot.com
Us? Who's the us? You and who else? Why don't you take your spam and
constant bs somewhere else?
WinHoldemSupport
dont ignore the question.
please show me how to play poker on the internet with a 100% guarantee
that my opponents are not using bots and not colluding against me.
answer the question. if you refuse to do this then shutup or take part in
a rational discussion that doesn't ignore the issue.
winholdem support.
http://www.pokerbot.com
Jen
Just another noob trying to make a buck by rationalizing unethical
behavior/enablers.
"WinHoldemSupport" <anon...@winholdem.net> wrote in message
news:d9F5c.10756788$Id.18...@news.easynews.com...
James Campbell
the following:
Why don't you sign your posts Bornert, Ray ray.b...@hixoxih.com? Are
you ashamed to have your real name associated with your product?
And if WinHoldem is big enough to have a support staff and technicians on
hand what is the business name, phone number, and address of your facility?
"WinHoldemSupport" <anon...@winholdem.net> wrote in message
news:d9F5c.10756788$Id.18...@news.easynews.com...
WinHoldemSupport
dont ignore the question.
please show me how to play poker on the internet with a 100% guarantee
that my opponents are not using bots and not colluding against me.
answer the question. if you refuse to do this then shutup or take part in
a rational discussion that doesn't ignore the issue.
winholdem support.
http://www.pokerbot.com
OnlinePlayer
Trojan horse virus that loads on to your computer when you use it?
The claim is that the trojan horse allows the writer of the program
(winholdemsupport) to see your computer screen. Therefore he can see your
cards when you play poker. (Talk about "card sharing"!)
spaz
Now, what I have to say to winholdem, is that your means for justifying
this idiotic product of yours is a bit ludicrous to say the least. "We're
going to use a computer program that plays for us to make online poker
'more secure' for everyone. Take your ramblings elsewhere. I'm not sure
that ANYONE wants to deal with you as an INDIVIDUAL, OR your 'product'.
-!!
Raider Fan
> raider,
>
> dont ignore the question.
>
> please show me how to play poker on the internet with a 100% guarantee
> that my opponents are not using bots and not colluding against me.
>
> answer the question. if you refuse to do this then shutup or take part in
> a rational discussion that doesn't ignore the issue.
>
> winholdem support.
> http://www.pokerbot.com
Assuming you have at least one customer that was stupid enough to buy and
deploy your bot, I obviously can't give you a 100% guarantee that your
opponents aren't using bots.
The fact that you continue to post into this newsgroup over and over again
about your worthless product has nothing to do with your question. You're
trying to make a buck off the players that aren't very good.
My logic goes that a good player doesn't need a bot. You expect the
players to be good enough to fine-tune your program in order for it to
win. I don't think one plus one equals two here.
Additionally, the sites have clearly stated that bots are a violation of
their TOS and can cause the users' accounts to be seized. This has been
mentioned to you many times, yet you continue to ignore the ramifications.
No sweat off your butt, you got your $100. So what if they end up losing
thousands?
Jen
cheat? Unbelievable. Seriously, you must be joking. How does having a bot
mindlessly play a game of skill FOR you protect you against cheaters. Is
there some super-secret high tech INTARWEB device in your bot that rings the
Bat Phone when it suspects cheating? Does a Bat Signal go up? Fuck, I'd buy
it if it did because that would be one impressive mother fucker computer
app. But since it merely exists to rip people off, cheat online poker rooms
and gives you a reason to flood rgp with your huckster-esque blather about
"BLAH BLAH BLAH winpokerbot BLAH BLAH BLAH I'm a fucking moron trying to rip
you off BLAH BLAH BLAH I have no soul BLAH BLAH BLAH karma will someday bite
me in the ass BLAH BLAH BLAH", I'm gathering that you're either:
1. Frightfully clueless
2. A shameless moral black hole
3. Mildly retarded
I'm guessing, however, that you're a wonderful combination of all three,
with a heavy emphasis on the "mildly retarded" bit. As The Rock would say:
"Take your poker bot, shine it up really nice, turn that sumbitch sideways
and stick it straight up your candy ass!"
Have a nice day!
Jen
...coming in like El Nino...killing people and burning down your trees!
"WinHoldemSupport" <anon...@winholdem.net> wrote in message
news:NEF5c.10848724$Of.18...@news.easynews.com...
WinHoldemSupport
very good, we respect you for having the courage to discuss the issue
without resorting to name calling.
>> "Assuming you have at least one customer ..."
we have many. im sure you know there are more fish than sharks. and
therefore it makes good business sense to help the weak - larger market
and all.
>> "I obviously can't give you a 100% guarantee that your opponents aren't
using bots."
and we agree with you. nor can you guarantee that they are not colluding
(they do not need our product to do this). and you need not feel
embarrassed that you cannot provide this guarantee, as long as you
recognize the right of the individual player to defend themselves as they
see fit. if you choose not to use a bot and/or team fine - your choice.
but if you demand others to limit themselves because you do then you are
overextending your expectation.
>> "You're trying to make a buck off the players that aren't very good."
capitalism is providing valuable product to a satisfied consumer market at
a profit. you're not a communist are you? winholdem has the ability to
return more than their $100 license fee to them. players get a free
24-hour look. so nobody is getting ripped off here. nobody is being
forced to use a bot. there is genuine consumer demand for what we have to
offer. btw, not all of our customers are guppies, we have some sharks as
well, players that genuinely understand the power of a finely tuned bot.
>> "... a good player doesn't need a bot."
we agree with you. this may or may not continue to be true depending on
how you come down on the issue of bots vs. humans.
>> "You expect the players to be good enough to fine-tune your program in
order for it to win."
not true. just before we went public. winholdem played a 5-day session
with the most conservative default settings possible, over 7000 hands ...
and it increased its table stake by 40%. it did this unattended by itself.
the variance was certainly more than a human could stand - it would get as
low as 100 big blinds below the high water mark before recovering and
advancing (this is something that a human cannot endure without going on
tilt - the average player cannot emotionally survive the statistical
reality of holdem without tilting).
>> "Additionally, the sites have clearly stated that bots are a violation of
their TOS and can cause the users' accounts to be seized."
this did not happen until winholdem went public. party and stars now have
updated agreements but paradise refuses to update their agreement saying
that there is no need.
furthermore, the only reason this policy exists is because the opc's
believe that is what players want. the policies would change today if
players changed their minds. and this is why we post here - to challenge
the outdated player expectations of online holdem. this should make
perfect sense to you. we want to sell pokerbots in the same way a sports
equipment manufacturer wants to sell shoes,balls,pads,bat,gloves,helmets
.. whatever. therefore it is in our best interest to attempt to promote
the form of online holdem that will increase the demand for our product.
this isn't going to happen overnight but it will happen.
understand that if online poker has a way to guarantee that nobody is
using a bot and that nobody is colluding then our business is dead right?
but as youve already admitted such a guarantee will never exist, therefore
there is a profitable business in selling pokerbot equipment to the public.
having said this, we view anybody promoting the non-bot, non-team form of
poker as a threat to our business. the opc policies that are bias against
bots and teaming are a threat to our business. but we do not blame the
opcs for this policy, they just try and do what makes players happy so
that players will continue to risk money in a rakable game - no big
mystery there.
so our strategy is to challenge the thinking of the player population at
large (this includes you). the community of bot/team players is growing
and like it or not it is here to stay. btw, the reason the b&m's are
silent on this subject is because we are good for their business because
what we do puts pressure on those players unable to conform to our way of
thinking about holdem such that they will possibly return to the b&m's to
play holdem.
>> "This has been mentioned to you many times, yet you continue to ignore the
ramifications. No sweat off your butt, you got your $100. So what if they end
up losing thousands?
this isn't an issue. a smart player limits their risk by making regular
withdrawals. and even though the opc's have implemented some winholdem
detection techniques, they will not be able to keep up. the cool thing
about this is that eventually players will hate the invasion of their
system privacy more than they want there to be no bots and they will
demand that the opcs cease and desist running rampant through their system
looking for stuff, at which point the opc's will return the burden of bot
security back to the player; and as you (a player) have already stated -
you cannot provide that security either for yourself or for others.
we will continue to put pressure on players that are anti-bot, anti-team
until they either leave the game or become a customer. you are either
part of the solution or part of the problem.
pokerbot.com is in the business of selling pokerbots.
you can expect us to actively work toward that goal.
winholdem support.
http://www.pokerbot.com
Matt
are not contributing anything that helps the problem. In fact, you make it
worse by facilitation collusion.
Matt
opponents aren't colluding against you.
Peg Smith
wrote:
>...Additionally, the sites have clearly stated that bots are a violation of
>their TOS and can cause the users' accounts to be seized. This has been
>mentioned to you many times, yet you continue to ignore the ramifications.
> No sweat off your butt, you got your $100. So what if they end up losing
>thousands?
You think he should be responsible for his customers not reading a
site's rules and regulations? He's a scumbag, Raider, but not for this
reason. This potential penalty just makes his customers *stupid*
cheaters.
Peg
James Campbell
truly are? Keep dodging the question, I will be here to reask long after
WinHoldem is gone.
Also anytime you want to match your bot against me name the time & table on
Party, PokerStars, Paradise, or UB and I'm there with bells on.
"WinHoldemSupport" <anon...@winholdem.net> wrote in message
news:6eI5c.10857963$Of.18...@news.easynews.com...
Bill
Look,I dont like his software either, but Mr WinHoldem makes avalid
point--Internet Poker is moving at the speed of light to team play.
The other issues of whether the software "allows draws to come in more
than the actual percentages would dictate" in order to equalize the
distribution of money and maximize rake is still being debated.
What is NOT being debated is that if you have not moved to team-baesd
play you are palying at a DISTINCT disadvantage. Online poker is NOT
real poker for many reasons--this is just one more--get it through
your heads
Nuts4daNuts
> Look,I dont like his software either, but Mr WinHoldem makes avalid
> point--Internet Poker is moving at the speed of light to team play.
> The other issues of whether the software "allows draws to come in more
> than the actual percentages would dictate" in order to equalize the
> distribution of money and maximize rake is still being debated.
>
> What is NOT being debated is that if you have not moved to team-baesd
> play you are palying at a DISTINCT disadvantage. Online poker is NOT
> real poker for many reasons--this is just one more--get it through
> your heads
Well here's ONE guy who doesn't have his head buried south of the border
and north of uranus. Online poker is a cesspool of corruption, cheating
gangs, collusion, and rigged action flops.
Paramecium T. Nougat
>
> What is NOT being debated is that if you have not moved to team-baesd
> play you are palying at a DISTINCT disadvantage. Online poker is NOT
> real poker for many reasons--this is just one more--get it through
> your heads
...because of people like you.
/joe
--
Don "Props" Langguth's PHP script is special in Alpharetta? In the Student
Center, Alison N. Smith always and verily cries out arv("Littering
and...?");, and then always attempts to educate Havoc's "say" and nova20
for sport death's switch. The rectum from the Fagemaster... [tape runs out]
Dave Hitt
<hitim...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Look at the 'soapbox' link - hliarious.
And he has a waving flag. All good sites have waving flags. It's not
the sign of a rank amateur. Honest.
Dave Hitt
----
Quick Hitts - Rapid Rants From the Hittman
http://www.davehitt.com/blog/index.html
Dave Hitt
<anon...@winholdem.net> wrote:
>raider,
>
>dont ignore the question.
>
>please show me how to play poker on the internet with a 100% guarantee
>that my opponents are not using bots and not colluding against me.
>
>answer the question. if you refuse to do this then shutup or take part in
>a rational discussion that doesn't ignore the issue.
How can it be a rational discussion if you're in it?
And considering that you ignored my simple question (how many cars,
houses and boats do you own) at least a dozen times, and then evaded
it while pretending to answer, you're in no position to demand that
anyone else answer one of your questions.
I'll answer your original question, out of the goodness of my heart.
You can improve the program by making it not play like shit.
You're welcome.
WinHoldemSupport
> You are defending your actions by saying that two wrongs make a right. You
> are not contributing anything that helps the problem. In fact, you make it
> worse by facilitation collusion.
we are not trying to fix the collusion problem. we do not see it as a
problem. we see it as an exciting business opportunity. we want to
forever change online poker. we are making a direct attack on users
expectations. do you remember a time when you did not need virus software
running on your machine? well the days of you safely expecting to play
poker on the internet without computer assistance are over.
matt, just so we are perfectly clear on this. we are not trying to make
collusion go away because that is a lost cause. (but we have already said
that we are very willing to admit that we are wrong if anybody can show us
how we can play holdem on the internet and guarantee that others are not
colluding against or using a bot). we are trying to increase collusion in
order to alter player expectations. so ill say it again, we are not
trying to stop collusion, we are trying to create a demand for it. sorry
to rock your world, but i thought we made that clear to everyone.
we want to sell pokerbots to the general public, so we want collusion and
bots to be a problem ... because that creates a market for our product.
do you understand this? does everything make sense now?
so just to be perfectly perfectly clear to anybody reading this post.
pokerbot.com is not trying to deter bots or deter collusion. we are not
trying to make these two things go away. on the contrary we are trying to
make them commonplace such that nobody would dream of playing online
holdem without an auto-scraping, auto-analyzing, auto-playing,
auto-teaming piece of poker equipment.
we are not trying to hide this fact. so everybody can quit acting so
shocked.
winholdem support.
http://www.pokerbot.com
Dave Hitt
<jame...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Speaking of ignoring the question... This is the 3rd time I've asked you
>the following:
Good luck, James. I asked him a question about a dozen times, and he
ignored it. Then he finally responded with evasion.
So you'll probably have to ask it at least nine more times. (Which
you really should do, because it shows all the other readers here
exactly the kind of person he is.)
>
>Why don't you sign your posts Bornert, Ray ray.b...@hixoxih.com? Are
>you ashamed to have your real name associated with your product?
>
>And if WinHoldem is big enough to have a support staff and technicians on
>hand what is the business name, phone number, and address of your facility?
>
Dave Hitt
WinHoldemSupport
i do not know how to give you that guarantee.
you may want to see our last post.
b&m's are not our focus. our focus is online holdem.
online holdem is very different than live holdem.
expectations can and will be different.
winholdem support.
WinHoldemSupport
all in due time,
according to the master plan.
you can play against winholdem anytime you want at poker professional.
however there is nothing but risk for us to publically tell you that we
will seat a bot against you at an opc. the net result of that would just
be to get one of our accounts closed. we will agree if you get either
party or paradise or stars to agree to provide a public account for the
bot ... tell them to setup an account for us and email the password to
sup...@winholdem.net ... we've asked several times but have declined. so
im not sure why you keep challenging us to something we cant accept.
we can arrange a game on poker professional any time you want.
winholdem support.
http://www.pokerbot.com
Matt
environment. My assertion is that you can make no guarantee in either
environment that people are not colluding, so why facilitate collusion to
guarantee that some people ARE.
Matt
WinHoldemSupport
>> "I'll answer your original question, out of the goodness of my heart.
You can improve the program by making it better"
we want to sell pokerbots to the general public. therefore
we are constantly improving the ability of winholdem. it is one of our
stated business goals. we understand that you want it to play strong; all
users want this, you're not alone in this sentiment.
winholdem support.
_________________________________________________________________
Nuts4daNuts
> matt, just so we are perfectly clear on this. we are not trying to make
> collusion go away because that is a lost cause.
I think that this is ultimately the reason that the Poker Shills hate this
product so much... because it exposes online poker as a corrupt cesspool
of scumbag cheaters and collusion gangs.
Noal McDonald
> Why don't you sign your posts Bornert, Ray ray.b...@hixoxih.com?
Why stop there?
Registrant:
Ray Bornert
4143 Red Laurel Way
Snellville, Georgia 30039
United States
Registered through: GoDaddy.com (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: POKERBOT.COM
Created on: 01-Jul-02
Expires on: 01-Jul-04
Last Updated on: 19-Nov-03
Administrative Contact:
Bornert, Ray ray.b...@hixoxih.com
4143 Red Laurel Way
Snellville, Georgia 30039
United States
7707367870
Technical Contact:
Bornert, Ray ray.b...@hixoxih.com
4143 Red Laurel Way
Snellville, Georgia 30039
United States
7707367870
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.DRAGON.COM
NS2.DRAGON.COM
Apparently, Ray uses "we" like the Queen of England does. It's rather
obvious that WinHoldem is a one man operation. Hell, give the man a
call at 770-736-7870 and tell him how much you love his product.
Paramecium T. Nougat
>
> Why stop there?
Because we're not rude assholes?
> Apparently, Ray uses "we" like the Queen of England does. It's rather
> obvious that WinHoldem is a one man operation. Hell, give the man a
> call at [...] and tell him how much you love his product.
Why don't I do one better and go to his house and throw rocks in his
window? After all, I live in Georgia.
The reason is that I don't believe someone deserves to be harassed just
because I disagree with them or their practices. Jeez, even if you think
the guy's a total douche, you don't need to be dragging his personal
information out here and basically trying to incite people to annoy him.
I recognize that the information is publicly available if you make the
effort to look for it, but that doesn't justify it. Would you be happy
if I posted your phone number here and some idiots started crank calling
you at night?
/joe
--
The Fagemaster hardly bogarts the terror from /home/pr0n! Knuth sends a fax
to Peters for the broken Playstation. In git.test, Di mumbles jmv("MORT
TEENY TINY TABLETOP!");. In Smyrna, the egregious AIDS from spacegirl will
go to Cash.
James Campbell
I find your comment "All in due time according to the master plan" very
humerous...
PokerProfessional.com is just another link to your own site, registered by
one Bornert II, Ray E. ray.b...@hixoxih.com. If your bot is so superior
you don't have to publically tell me you can tell me privately at
jame...@hotmail.com. We will play 30 hands and will post the results, for
all to see. Now either back up your product or cower in the dark corner Mr.
Bornert.
James
"WinHoldemSupport" <anon...@winholdem.net> wrote in message
news:kRJ5c.10863165$Of.18...@news.easynews.com...
WinHoldemSupport
can you expound on this please? we believe you.
in your opinion, why would a table shill hate winholdem?
thanks,
winholdem support.
fille
product and the cheating it represents if what you say is correct? Isn't
it just possible that there are a FEW cheaters (like yourself) and that
the majority of players respect the game, spot the cheaters and expose
them for what they are to protect the integrity and security of internet
poker.
Only losers need to cheat to win, I guess this makes you a loser and a
loser enabler.
I won't respond to any more posts. I only hope that ALL of the cardrooms
not only disallow connection to their sites if your software is detected,
but start cancelling accounts as well.
Collusion is not that difficult to spot and your 'users' will have to make
poker plays they would not otherwise have made in an effort to trap and
isolate the victims. Not even your software can hide this. I disgust you?
I find that hilarious and I think you're quite crazy.
Your banter about how righteous you seem to think your endeavor is
ridiculous. Let's just assume for a moment you were successful and
suddenly NO ONE could win unless they cheated with YOUR software. Well,
you'd be rich wouldn't you? You would destroy the online poker we know and
love. Poker has exploded. B&M cardrooms are reaping the benefit of online
poker because any novice can buy in online and win the WSOP. There is far
too much profit being made to let someone like you jeopardize the future
of online poker. You, SIR, will not succeed.
Delaware Mike
<anon...@winholdem.net> wrote:
>answer the question. if you refuse to do this then shutup or take part in
>a rational discussion that doesn't ignore the issue.
>
I'll answer the question. There's no way that you can be 100% sure
that other players aren't using collusion or bots against you. The
online poker sites do their best to stop collusion and discourage
bots, but obviously it isn't foolproof.
Now to continue this discussion rationally, answer these questions.
Since Party Poker is the largest online poker site, we'll use it for
our questions:
1) Do you admit that collusion and bots are the exception, rather than
the rule, on Party Poker. To define "exception" and "rule", would you
admit that less than 5% of all online players are either colluding or
using bots?
If your answer is no, don't bother with the next two questions, and
have a nice, albeit paranoid, day. I'd personally estimate that the
percentage of colluders and bot users is aggregately less than 1% of
all online players seated at any time on Party Poker.
If you answered yes, then continue:
2) Given that over 95% (over 99%) of all online players do not collude
or use bots, can you justify the sale and promotion of a software
application that both implements collusion and allows bot play? In
other words, is it fair to use collusion and/or a bot against the over
95% (over 99%) of all players who are honest in order to supposedly
"defend" against the less than 5% (less than 1%) who do?
If you answered "no", then don't bother with question 3. Have a nice
and honest day. If you did justify its use, then on to question 3
3) Given that you justify bot and collusion use despite the fact that
over 95% (over 99%) of all people are innocent of such wrongdoing and
would therefore be equally innocent victims of bots and collusion,
have you considered seeking professional help for your delusions?
Thanks
Nuts4daNuts
> 1) Do you admit that collusion and bots are the exception, rather than
> the rule, on Party Poker. To define "exception" and "rule", would you
> admit that less than 5% of all online players are either colluding or
> using bots?
>
> If your answer is no, don't bother with the next two questions, and
> have a nice, albeit paranoid, day. I'd personally estimate that the
> percentage of colluders and bot users is aggregately less than 1% of
> all online players seated at any time on Party Poker.
Well if you truly believe that, then you're either a dumb ass or a poker
shill. Collusion and cheating are rampant online.
Nuts4daNuts
> nuts,
>
> can you expound on this please? we believe you.
> in your opinion, why would a table shill hate winholdem?
Because it exposes online poker as a cesspool of corruption. The poker
shills don't want this truth exposed.
Nuts4daNuts
> Your banter about how righteous you seem to think your endeavor is
> ridiculous. Let's just assume for a moment you were successful and
> suddenly NO ONE could win unless they cheated with YOUR software. Well,
> you'd be rich wouldn't you? You would destroy the online poker we know and
> love.
As crooked as online poker is, that would be a good thing. This is what I
meant in another post when I stated that the poker shills hate winholdem
because it exposes the corruption that is rampant in the online poker
rooms.
Deep Throat
> On Mar 16 2004 6:34PM, WinHoldemSupport wrote:
>
> > nuts,
> >
> > can you expound on this please? we believe you.
> > in your opinion, why would a table shill hate winholdem?
>
> Because it exposes online poker as a cesspool of corruption. The poker
> shills don't want this truth exposed.
WinholdemSupport and Nuts4daNuts, now there's a real Brain Trust.
Paramecium T. Nougat
>
> As crooked as online poker is, that would be a good thing. This is what I
> meant in another post when I stated that the poker shills hate winholdem
> because it exposes the corruption that is rampant in the online poker
> rooms.
Teenagers hate school shootings because they expose the murderous rage
in all high schoolers.
/joe
--
Lex Spoon rubs Billings, and then practically yells ntfmbv("<froth>");.
WinHoldemSupport
30 hands is too short.
also, are you wanting to play heads up or do you want to bring friends and
play against 1 bot or more than 1.
tournament? what?
winholdem support.
http://www.pokerbot.com
> ....
James Campbell
to do Tournament.
"WinHoldemSupport" <anon...@winholdem.net> wrote in message
news:ANQ5c.10797732$Id.18...@news.easynews.com...
WinHoldemSupport
> How is it possible that there are so many posters vehemently against your
> product and the cheating it represents if what you say is correct? Isn't
> it just possible that there are a FEW cheaters (like yourself) and that
> the majority of players respect the game, spot the cheaters and expose
> them for what they are to protect the integrity and security of internet
> poker.
no, there are many colluders out there. but most prefer not to deal with
the public back lash and therefore they are never going to post in a
public forum because there is nothing to gain by doing so. if they did
for some reason decide to post they would have 78 layers of email
obfuscation between them and the public. most humans cannot deal with "not
being liked" by other humans.
> Only losers need to cheat to win, I guess this makes you a loser and a
> loser enabler.
we completely disagree with this. most of our customers are pro users (no
built in auto-sharing - although this isn't saying much ... they could
still use chat or headsets to collude). almost all of our winning
sessions are bots running unattended overnight - which by the way is the
coolest thing - to get up in the morning to see your bot has doubled its
table stake - you just haven't lived until you have this experience.
> I won't respond to any more posts. I only hope that ALL of the cardrooms
> not only disallow connection to their sites if your software is detected,
> but start cancelling accounts as well.
and we of course hope this doesn't happen. we hope that players world
wide will completely forsake the expectation of no-bots, no-teaming while
playing online. this will allow everyone to get along. and it will
finally allow players to explore poker theory in team play. it will
provide jobs and incomes to authors who will be able to devote entire
books on how to collude at a professional level. there will be chapters
on how to properly double-team a trio ... and how to play trio against
quad and quint. how to play solo against a duet ... etc. poker gets much
better, and more interesting, not worse.
> Collusion is not that difficult to spot and your 'users' will have to make
> poker plays they would not otherwise have made in an effort to trap and
> isolate the victims. Not even your software can hide this. I disgust you?
> I find that hilarious and I think you're quite crazy.
we disagree. we have seated two bots together many times with no ill side
effects. you just need to know what you're doing. the sooner we get rid
of the cat and mouse game, the sooner everybody can begin to learn how to
take poker to the next level. we want everybody to collude. we like the
idea of sitting down with a friend at a table not knowing the composition
of the opponents, mind you that knowing the composition would be quite
nice but if we are allowed to hide our relationship then our opponents
certainly are allowed to hide theirs as well. the problem is the opc
policies. they just need to back off and present the mechanics of poker
and forget about bots and collusion altogether. just make it an
acceptable part of the game.
> Your banter about how righteous you seem to think your endeavor is
> ridiculous. Let's just assume for a moment you were successful and
> suddenly NO ONE could win unless they cheated with YOUR software. Well,
> you'd be rich wouldn't you? You would destroy the online poker we know and
> love. Poker has exploded. B&M cardrooms are reaping the benefit of online
> poker because any novice can buy in online and win the WSOP. There is far
> too much profit being made to let someone like you jeopardize the future
> of online poker. You, SIR, will not succeed.
we cant jeapordize poker, we can only make it better than it already is.
collusion is just bluffing at a more complex level.
WinHoldemSupport
On Mar 16 2004 8:46PM, Delaware Mike wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 15:35:37 GMT, "WinHoldemSupport"
> <anon...@winholdem.net> wrote:
>
> >answer the question. if you refuse to do this then shutup or take part in
> >a rational discussion that doesn't ignore the issue.
> >
>
> I'll answer the question. There's no way that you can be 100% sure
> that other players aren't using collusion or bots against you. The
> online poker sites do their best to stop collusion and discourage
> bots, but obviously it isn't foolproof.
their best is not good enough. stop apologizing for them. there is no
need to do it. its not their fault. it is an impossible task. nobody can
provide a guarantee and thats the point - there is a serious security flaw
in the game - one that cannot be fixed without changing the game. online
holdem as you want it depends way too much on human ethics. we do not
want to play a game that is this heavily dependent on human ethics.
therefore we are publically announcing to everyone that we consider bots
and teaming to be a normal acceptable part of internet holdem (regardless
of what they think). the sooner we get everyone rowing the same direction,
the sooner we can force the opcs to change their every increasing
intrusive policies into our lives and just deliver the mechanics of poker
and forget about policing bots and/or collusion ... just let it go. some
players will leave the game because they could not accept the change,
others will join because of how cool it is. but the main thing that would
happen is that all this nonsense about whining and complaining about bots
and colluders would just cease. and we could just get on with letting
poker evolve into what it was meant to be on the internet. at that point
everybody could focus on advanced theory and policing the opcs to make
sure they are dealing fair.
> Now to continue this discussion rationally, answer these questions.
> Since Party Poker is the largest online poker site, we'll use it for
> our questions:
>
> 1) Do you admit that collusion and bots are the exception, rather than
> the rule, on Party Poker. To define "exception" and "rule", would you
> admit that less than 5% of all online players are either colluding or
> using bots?
i cant agree to this number. if you can rephrase the question in such a
way that i do not have to accept your numbers then i will be glad to
answer.
> If your answer is no, don't bother with the next two questions, and
> have a nice, albeit paranoid, day. I'd personally estimate that the
> percentage of colluders and bot users is aggregately less than 1% of
> all online players seated at any time on Party Poker.
>
> If you answered yes, then continue:
>
> 2) Given that over 95% (over 99%) of all online players do not collude
> or use bots, can you justify the sale and promotion of a software
> application that both implements collusion and allows bot play? In
> other words, is it fair to use collusion and/or a bot against the over
> 95% (over 99%) of all players who are honest in order to supposedly
> "defend" against the less than 5% (less than 1%) who do?
>
> If you answered "no", then don't bother with question 3. Have a nice
> and honest day. If you did justify its use, then on to question 3
>
> 3) Given that you justify bot and collusion use despite the fact that
> over 95% (over 99%) of all people are innocent of such wrongdoing and
> would therefore be equally innocent victims of bots and collusion,
> have you considered seeking professional help for your delusions?
>
> Thanks
_________________________________________________________________
WinHoldemSupport
(we agree)
and in your opinion,
what constitutes a poker shill?
winholdem support.
WinHoldemSupport
we will set this up. not tonight obviously.
everyone has gone home.
how bout thr. night?
winholdem support.
James Campbell
"WinHoldemSupport" <anon...@winholdem.net> wrote in message
news:eLR5c.10892486$Of.18...@news.easynews.com...
Nuts4daNuts
> nuts,
>
> (we agree)
> and in your opinion,
> what constitutes a poker shill?
The people in the poker industry who try to maintain the image that online
poker is honest rather than the truth: corrupt, crooked, and rife with
collusion and cheating. They gang up on and flame anyone who exposes how
truly corrupt the game is because they make money advancing this illusion
of "honest online poker". If people knew the truth they wouldn't play (and
the poker shills wouldn't make any money).
Noal McDonald
> Noal McDonald (42.623% quality rating):
> > Why stop there?
>
> Because we're not rude assholes?
Fortunately, I'm not so hindered. ;-)
> > Apparently, Ray uses "we" like the Queen of England does. It's rather
> > obvious that WinHoldem is a one man operation. Hell, give the man a
> > call at [...] and tell him how much you love his product.
>
> Why don't I do one better and go to his house and throw rocks in his
> window? After all, I live in Georgia.
>
> The reason is that I don't believe someone deserves to be harassed just
> because I disagree with them or their practices. Jeez, even if you think
> the guy's a total douche, you don't need to be dragging his personal
> information out here and basically trying to incite people to annoy him.
That's the thing. It's not his personal information, per se. It's from
the registration of his winholdem.com domain. (Available at
http://whois.godaddy.com) That is where one would look up business
contact information. My suggestion that people call his business
number and voice their opinion about his product is entirely
appropriate. I'm certainly not suggesting that people throw rocks at
his house or anything of the sort.
> Would you be happy if I posted your phone number here and some\
> idiots started crank calling you at night?
Certainly, not. But that's apples and oranges. I'm not selling
anything and you wouldn't be advocating people contact me for business
purposes.
Regards,
Noal
Octo
> matt,
>
> > You are defending your actions by saying that two wrongs make a right.
You
> > are not contributing anything that helps the problem. In fact, you make
it
> > worse by facilitation collusion.
>
> we are not trying to fix the collusion problem. we do not see it as a
> problem. we see it as an exciting business opportunity.
And that is why we see you as a scumbag.
<snip>
> we are not trying to hide this fact. so everybody can quit acting so
> shocked.
>
There is a difference between shock and disgust. (Though I admit you have
said some shockingly stupid things.)
Jen
your
> > product and the cheating it represents if what you say is correct? Isn't
> > it just possible that there are a FEW cheaters (like yourself) and that
> > the majority of players respect the game, spot the cheaters and expose
> > them for what they are to protect the integrity and security of internet
> > poker.
>
> no, there are many colluders out there. but most prefer not to deal with
> the public back lash and therefore they are never going to post in a
> public forum because there is nothing to gain by doing so. if they did
> for some reason decide to post they would have 78 layers of email
> obfuscation between them and the public. most humans cannot deal with "not
> being liked" by other humans.
Please provide us with your market research and hard numbers, since you
claim there are "many" colluders on poker sites. I would like to see
percentages. I mean, you've OBVIOUSLY had to do some market research in
order to support your business model, right?
Paramecium T. Nougat
>
> Fortunately, I'm not so hindered. ;-)
At least you have a sense of humor about it :)
/joe
--
Your mother's rectum is self-referential. Wayne detonates Myke, and then
manually revitalizes the fetus pot pie from IHOP.
WinHoldemSupport
we have no more market research than you do.
we have our many years of gambling experience.
and online experience.
we cannot provide you with a list of every card carrying colluder in
cyberspace.
in fact, if i said right now, that i am colluding this very moment,
how is that proof. proof is a very strong word jen.
so let us agree that neither you nor i can prove any numbers regarding the
lion population.
here's what we do know:
there is a population of gazelles who want:
1) to associate with other gazelles and romp and play and make sweet
gazelle love on the savannah
2) they also want a lions free savannah.
so i assume you will agree here about what gazelles want.
now lets talk about what they can actually have.
they can have #1 for sure.
they cannot be guaranteed #2.
now jen, i would like for you to admit that it is a severe violation of
gazelle ehtics and morality to tell other innocent gazelles that they need
not worry about #2.
and please refrain from asking the lions to obey the gazelle ethics.
the lions do not care about gazelle ehtics.
winholdem support
http://www.pokerbot.com
_________________________________________________________________
Jen
good business model is built on, something to justify your business plan,
the REASON for the development of a bot so you don't spend countless hours
developing and (poorly) marketing a product that there may be little/no
market for and you go into some National Geographic rant about lions and
gazelles? I'm beginning to suspect that my "mild retardation" hypothesis was
incorrect. You're just plain loony. Or at the ass-end of a very bad acid
trip.
THAT'S the foundation of your business plan? Gazelles and lions? The circle
of life? Is there a Lion King revue included in the download of your product
so while the many TENS of people that use your product (and that's spotting
you like six people) can be treated to a rendition of Hakuna Matata while
they.........errrrrrrrrrr..........have their bot play poker for them?
That'd be one talented app if it could play poker AND perform various parts
of The Lion King at the same time. Shit.
Please WinHoldemSupportDude, read your "gazelle" ethics post again and tell
me you don't sound like a total freakin' whack job. Thanks for the laugh
though...SECURITY!
"WinHoldemSupport" <anon...@winholdem.net> wrote in message
news:h706c.10851091$Id.18...@news.easynews.com...
Makonnen
news:uP06c.10517$O46...@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com:
> Holy fucking shit, I ask you for market statistics, you know, the
> stuff a good business model is built on, something to justify your
> business plan, the REASON for the development of a bot so you don't
> spend countless hours developing and (poorly) marketing a product that
> there may be little/no market for and you go into some National
> Geographic rant about lions and gazelles? I'm beginning to suspect
> that my "mild retardation" hypothesis was incorrect. You're just plain
> loony. Or at the ass-end of a very bad acid trip.
I dunno. pets.com got several million in VC funding with the whole lions
and gazelles thing.
I know that whenever I meet with potential VC's, the first thing they look
for is some nice nature-based metaphor they can get behind. Heck, I even
put pages for them to color before and after the income projections and P&L
statements. Make 'em bring their own crayons, though. They _are_ the ones
with the money, after all.
Makonnen
James Campbell
Life". I'm just curious...
"WinHoldemSupport" <anon...@winholdem.net> wrote in message
news:h706c.10851091$Id.18...@news.easynews.com...
Jen
"Makonnen" <tr...@trash.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94AF8295D738...@130.133.1.4...
I find this particular quote rather insightful towards the business plan and
the revenue model: "to associate with other gazelles and romp and play and
make sweet gazelle love on the savannah." If I were a VC, I'd stop right
there, whip out my checkbook and ask how much and who do I make it out to?
Better than that, as a customer, if a "representative" of a company that
sold me a product that based the worth of their said product based on the
"lion > gazelle" equation, I would wonder how I could get more, MORE, MORE!
I would have so much more faith in companies like, say Nike or General
Electric, if they would, for once, make an analogy that has absolutely
nothing to do with their business so as to completely confuse and obsfucate
the issue. I respect companies that, when asked for numbers and market
research, immediately ignore your question and break out with the animals on
the savannah metaphor, because lord knows, that's such a more powerful
marketing message than anything one of those Madison avenue joints could
come up with.
Here's my advertising pitch:
"Winholdem - eating gazelles like nobody's business!"
or
"Winholdem - the sky sure is purty!"
or
"Winholdem - please daddy, don't hit me again!"
The sky is the proverbial limit when your product, lacking any rational
business model or smart people to back it up, can simply go "look at the
shiny ball" and think that will appease those of us with opposible thumbs.
Please, cracka!
Jen
"James Campbell" <jame...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Js26c.30807$KO3.81101@attbi_s02...
> In your business plan did you make reference to Mufassa and the "Circle of
> Life". I'm just curious...
Ah James, you too see the huge marketing potential here! Winholdem is so
much more than just an amauter ugly app created by a morally devoid mentally
challenged individual with a meglomania complex (and, dare I say, an
obsession with gazelles)...it is a CROSS-MARKETING bonanza! It's a wonder
Disney hasn't latched onto Winholdem and come up with a partnership that
will allow adults and children alike to be amazed and amused by "Winholdem -
The Lion King Edition".
Why just mumble on about gazelles and lions, like the guy under the
underpass trying to squeegee your window as you uncomfortably wave him off,
when you can cash in with Disney and make your obsession and nonsensical
business analogy a reality! Dare I say, it's a win-win situation for
Winholdem. Oh shit...did you see that..."win-win"? I think I just came up
with yet another witty marketing/advertising campaign. Winholdem really
needs to hire me on as their marketing consultant/"watch the winholdem
support guy and make sure he doesn't take his soft helmet off or swallow his
own tongue" girl.
WinHoldemSupport
since you loved my lion king metaphor so much let us continue it bit
further:
we've discussed two creatures so far on the poker savannah - gazelles and
lions. just for the record here are the definitions we go by in the
context of online poker (b&m's are another subject).
lion:
you are a profitable player, you have taken more money out of the game
than you have put into it during your lifetime. your skills as a lion may
be good enough that your only source of income is online poker. you are
fast enough and strong enough to bring down a gazelle by yourself and have
done so many many times. you make withdrawals from your account regularly.
gazelles:
anybody that plays online poker and is not a lion. you may be good enough
to take money from other gazelles from time to time but you will
eventually be lion food. you cannot take on a lion and ever hope to win.
you have been lion food many times and when you are you just redeposit and
materialize right back into the herd.
there is also a third creature - the hyena.
nobody likes the hyena. lions do not like hyenas and gazelles do not like
hyenas and if it were possible lions and gazelles would join forces to rid
the savannha of every last dispicable one of them. hyenas are team
players; by themselves they cannot challenge any gazelle except a very
young one let alone a lion, but together they can take down a gazelle if
they can catch it. hyenas can also when starved challenge a weak lion and
take it down; hyenas have also been known to steal lion food, in the case
where a lioness has brought down a gazelle a pack of hyenas can threaten a
single lion and take the kill. hyenas are team players; they are the
colluders in the game; their only sense of ethics is whats yours is ours.
the only thing a hyena wants is to take what is yours and make sweet
hyena love on the savanna.
also jen, notice that i've not made a single reference to computer
assistance, all of the poker world characteristics mentioned above predate
the computer in the context of poker in general.
winholdem support.
http:/www.pokerbot.com
Dave Hitt
<anon...@winholdem.net> wrote:
>On Mar 16 2004 8:10PM, fille wrote:
>
>> How is it possible that there are so many posters vehemently against your
>> product and the cheating it represents if what you say is correct? Isn't
>> it just possible that there are a FEW cheaters (like yourself) and that
>> the majority of players respect the game, spot the cheaters and expose
>> them for what they are to protect the integrity and security of internet
>> poker.
>
>no, there are many colluders out there. but most prefer not to deal with
>the public back lash and therefore they are never going to post in a
>public forum because there is nothing to gain by doing so. if they did
>for some reason decide to post they would have 78 layers of email
>obfuscation between them and the public. most humans cannot deal with "not
>being liked" by other humans.
You don't have a problem with it, though.
I don't see how you could collude all that often, or all that long, on
a busy site. I've been playing party for months, and have yet to see
anyone I've made notes on a table with me. It would be very simple to
see if two or more people are playing at the same tables on a regular
basis, and then to examine their play and see if there is any evidence
of collusion.
I'm not saying it doesn't happen - I'm sure it does. But I don't
think it happens all that often.
You, however, want increase the number of people doing it. That (among
other things) makes you a scumbag.
>> Only losers need to cheat to win, I guess this makes you a loser and a
>> loser enabler.
>
>we completely disagree with this. most of our customers are pro users (no
>built in auto-sharing - although this isn't saying much ... they could
>still use chat or headsets to collude). almost all of our winning
>sessions are bots running unattended overnight - which by the way is the
>coolest thing - to get up in the morning to see your bot has doubled its
>table stake - you just haven't lived until you have this experience.
How would you know?
>and we of course hope this doesn't happen. we hope that players world
>wide will completely forsake the expectation of no-bots, no-teaming while
>playing online. this will allow everyone to get along. and it will
>finally allow players to explore poker theory in team play. it will
>provide jobs and incomes to authors who will be able to devote entire
>books on how to collude at a professional level. there will be chapters
>on how to properly double-team a trio ... and how to play trio against
>quad and quint. how to play solo against a duet ... etc. poker gets much
>better, and more interesting, not worse.
Team play. Just pathetic.
>we cant jeapordize poker, we can only make it better than it already is.
>collusion is just bluffing at a more complex level.
Poker has been around for, oh, a few years longer than you. How ever
did it survive, thrive, and get more popular, before you came along?
Dave Hitt
----
Quick Hitts - Rapid Rants From the Hittman
http://www.davehitt.com/blog/index.html
WinHoldemSupport
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 05:20:18 GMT, "WinHoldemSupport"
> <anon...@winholdem.net> wrote:
>
> >On Mar 16 2004 8:10PM, fille wrote:
> >
> >> How is it possible that there are so many posters vehemently against your
> >> product and the cheating it represents if what you say is correct? Isn't
> >> it just possible that there are a FEW cheaters (like yourself) and that
> >> the majority of players respect the game, spot the cheaters and expose
> >> them for what they are to protect the integrity and security of internet
> >> poker.
> >
> >no, there are many colluders out there. but most prefer not to deal with
> >the public back lash and therefore they are never going to post in a
> >public forum because there is nothing to gain by doing so. if they did
> >for some reason decide to post they would have 78 layers of email
> >obfuscation between them and the public. most humans cannot deal with "not
> >being liked" by other humans.
>
> You don't have a problem with it, though.
i do not have a problem with my online opponents using a bot and/or
colluding against me. i have adjusted my expectations for an online
environment. i do have a serious problem with the innocent wandering into
the game not understanding how easy it is for others to collude and/or use
a bot. and i would like to draw attention to that fact in order to give
them a chance to either adjust their expectations before playing or
decline to play. that is a much more considerate thing to do than to
present the illusion that they are safe. i want people to play with the
exact same expectations i do - expect bots, expect collusion.
> I don't see how you could collude all that often, or all that long, on
> a busy site. I've been playing party for months, and have yet to see
> anyone I've made notes on a table with me. It would be very simple to
> see if two or more people are playing at the same tables on a regular
> basis, and then to examine their play and see if there is any evidence
> of collusion.
dave, you can card share all day long and not get caught, the act of
publishing your card info to a teammate changes nothing unless the
teammate alters their course of play based on that knowledge. in order to
prove this we conducted many experiments where we put bots at tables ...
transmitted the card info to the to/from teammate yet caused the bots to
play as if they never saw the cards and for all practical purposes the
transmission of card info was 100% moot because it was never used ... the
moment you use the info to alter what you know you have colluded which
means you now have knowledge you would not normally have without the
friend ... now here comes the point, you can still have that knowledge and
decline to alter your actions. good poker player knows what they would
would not do with without the card info. so it is quite possible to play
as if you did not know your friends cards. we ran many experiments to
prove this as well. now, you're probably saying what is the whole point
if you're not going to use the info to your advantage, and we agree. so
then the discussion becomes about what kinds of alterations to your
behavior will register on the detection radar and what kinds will not.
(blackjack books have similar discussions on how to avoid detection when
cardcounting ... how to play under the radar). in the future you will see
holdem books devoted to online holdem that have chapters on how to avoid
detection when teaming. (just like the blackjack books).
we can tell you that in the same way that blackjack books tell you not to
play in the same casino on the same shift more than once every 3 months,
you should not play with the same friend at the same online casino very
often. and if you do, tournaments are probably a better choice than ring
games.
in the same way that you increase your risk of being detected by
cardcounting at blackjack, you increase your risk of detection when you
collude in online holdem; we have never said anything contrary to this.
what we have maintained is that it is possible to fly under the radar. and
as such everyone should be made aware that it cannot be prevented if done
correctly.
and so we think it is very ethical to draw attention to it, especially for
new players coming into the game. we'd rather have a new player enter the
game with the full expectation of meeting bots and/or colluders (so that
they play more cautiously and aware) than have them play with their guard
down.
> I'm not saying it doesn't happen - I'm sure it does. But I don't
> think it happens all that often.
in the same way that cardcounting in blackjack happens everyday,
collusion in online holdem happens everyday ... 24/7.
> You, however, want increase the number of people doing it. That (among
> other things) makes you a scumbag.
incorrect. we want to make money from those already doing it by selling
them the winholdem team version. for some of those people the $200 price
tag is too much. for others it is not. however, bots in general
outnumber colluders 20 to 1 ... meaning that you are far more likely to
meet a bot than you are to meet some colluders. this ratio is based on
our sales distribution. certainly theres people colluding out there that
do not use our team edition. it is a no brainer that the number of
players that do not feel conflicted about computer assistance far exceed
the number that are not conflicted about colluding. and we've never said
anything to the contrary.
when we went into this business we were betting on the general end-user
desire for a bot. that bet is paying off. the team edition is not our
bread and butter - the pro edition is and we've always known it woudld be
this way. the team edition just gets people talking and creates marketing
velocity ... seeing as how news of winholem is planetwide at this point
partly due to the flame surrounding the team edition. the old adage (bad
press is better than no press).
> >> Only losers need to cheat to win, I guess this makes you a loser and a
> >> loser enabler.
> >
> >we completely disagree with this. most of our customers are pro users (no
> >built in auto-sharing - although this isn't saying much ... they could
> >still use chat or headsets to collude). almost all of our winning
> >sessions are bots running unattended overnight - which by the way is the
> >coolest thing - to get up in the morning to see your bot has doubled its
> >table stake - you just haven't lived until you have this experience.
>
> How would you know?
not sure what your question is here.
> >and we of course hope this doesn't happen. we hope that players world
> >wide will completely forsake the expectation of no-bots, no-teaming while
> >playing online. this will allow everyone to get along. and it will
> >finally allow players to explore poker theory in team play. it will
> >provide jobs and incomes to authors who will be able to devote entire
> >books on how to collude at a professional level. there will be chapters
> >on how to properly double-team a trio ... and how to play trio against
> >quad and quint. how to play solo against a duet ... etc. poker gets much
> >better, and more interesting, not worse.
>
> Team play. Just pathetic.
actually it is quite cool to say the least.
being in the same game with a friend has twice the entertainment value.
the world could be a better place if players could just abandon their fear
guilt and shame concerning teaming. you would have zero players entering
the game with false expectations.
> >we cant jeapordize poker, we can only make it better than it already is.
> >collusion is just bluffing at a more complex level.
>
> Poker has been around for, oh, a few years longer than you. How ever
> did it survive, thrive, and get more popular, before you came along?
wake up and smell the bandwidth man, we're not the ones responsible for
moving holdem to the internet and reducing the security against collusion
and bots to that of a EULA. it is simple evolution man. move something
to a new environment and it will be forever changed.
winholdem support
http://www.pokerbot.com
Jen
Since you spend an inordinate amount of time on here, trying to justify your
bot and deluding yourself into thinking you're somehow altruistic...
...WHEN DO YOU GET THE TIME TO ACTUALLY HELP YOUR CUSTOMERS, SUPPORT GURU?
I mean, I really hate to think of all the people who are forced to listen to
bad elevator musack while on hold, waiting to talk to a customer support
representative (or CSR, but I'm sure you're all down with the business
lingo). If I were having a problem with winholdem, besides buying it - which
would cause my soul to shrivel up into a cringing ball of goo - and hoping
that the karma police never catch up with me, how would I get the high level
of service I would come to expect from your company? What if I have a fatal
error? What if I can't find where I installed it? What if the righteous hand
of fate bitch-slapped me while using your collusion channel and I found toes
being licked by the eternal fires of hell? I would REALLY like to know if
these customer support issues will be given the proper attention - since you
seem completely pre-occupied with blathering on about winholdem and how it's
better than masturbation - when I call your 1-800 number and get shuffled
into your call center. Will I receive the one-on-one service anyone would
expect from a global Fortune 500 company such as winholdem?
These are burning issues for me and I would like to know if I can expect the
proper attention when I shell out my coin for your product.
Jen
:: killing people and burning down trees :: http://douglas.min.net/essay/
"WinHoldemSupport" <anon...@winholdem.net> wrote in message
news:wtu5c.10711099$Id.17...@news.easynews.com...
> we are soliciting suggestions from quality poker players about the types
> of game state history they would expect a piece of software to have
> available to the user.
>
> here is the list of what is currently available in winholdem:
> http://www.winholdem.net/help/help-formula.html#symbols
> there approximately 120 available winholdem formula symbols for use in the
> various formula sets within the bot.
>
> our development team is interested in the opinions of experienced poker
> players,
>
> thanks,
WinHoldemSupport
we're not a poker player insurance company.
if you license our product you transfer zero risk to us.
you are responsible for how your bot plays.
winholdem just runs whatever formula set you decide.
if you do not like the default formula set
and you do not have the poker skills necessary to
modify the formula set to your liking then
you should not become a customer plain and simple.
you get a 24-hour free look.
modem users have to register their email and contact
customer support to get their license activated.
NIC users should get immediate access upon download for 24-hours.
we do not offer phone support at this time.
there is no need. we give excellent customer service via email.
feel free to send an email to our support address.
you can find it at our website here:
http://www.pokerbot.com
you obviously are conflicted about bots,
and we dont want you to damage your eternal soul here,
so maybe you should just play it safe and forget about winholdem.
hope this helps,
winholdem support
http://www.pokerbot.com
On Mar 19 2004 3:43PM, Jen wrote:
> One question:
>
> Since you spend an inordinate amount of time on here, trying to justify your
> bot and deluding yourself into thinking you're somehow altruistic...
>
> ....WHEN DO YOU GET THE TIME TO ACTUALLY HELP YOUR CUSTOMERS, SUPPORT GURU?
Dave Hitt
<anon...@winholdem.net> wrote:
It's been a while since I've seen some really really bizarre rational
for blatant cheating. Could you supply some, please?
>dave, you can card share all day long and not get caught, the act of
>publishing your card info to a teammate changes nothing unless the
>teammate alters their course of play based on that knowledge. in order to
>prove this we conducted many experiments where we put bots at tables ...
>transmitted the card info to the to/from teammate yet caused the bots to
>play as if they never saw the cards and for all practical purposes the
>transmission of card info was 100% moot because it was never used ... the
>moment you use the info to alter what you know you have colluded which
>means you now have knowledge you would not normally have without the
>friend ... now here comes the point, you can still have that knowledge and
>decline to alter your actions. good poker player knows what they would
>would not do with without the card info. so it is quite possible to play
>as if you did not know your friends cards.
Wow. Amazing. And you really believe this, don't you?
If you're not going to alter your play based on knowing what your
friend has, then what is the point of having that information? It
might as well not be there.
Even if someone intended not to alter their pay with this information,
it's impossible. If I'm holding AA, and I know my friend has A x,
that's going to alter my play significantly, as I know my outs have
changed. Ignoring that would be impossible. If I'm holding AA, he's
got K K, he folds, and there's a K rag rag on the flop, I know the guy
betting into me can't beat my pair with K trips. That's if I *wanted*
to play honestly. But the number of people who want to play honestly
while using your team "feature" is approximately none.
> we ran many experiments to
>prove this as well. now, you're probably saying what is the whole point
>if you're not going to use the info to your advantage, and we agree. so
>then the discussion becomes about what kinds of alterations to your
>behavior will register on the detection radar and what kinds will not.
>(blackjack books have similar discussions on how to avoid detection when
>cardcounting ... how to play under the radar). in the future you will see
>holdem books devoted to online holdem that have chapters on how to avoid
>detection when teaming. (just like the blackjack books).
Not in any book that any respectable player will recommend.
>
>we can tell you that in the same way that blackjack books tell you not to
>play in the same casino on the same shift more than once every 3 months,
>you should not play with the same friend at the same online casino very
>often. and if you do, tournaments are probably a better choice than ring
>games.
Thanks for the advice on how to cheat. I'm sure that weasels will
find it useful, until they're caught.
>in the same way that you increase your risk of being detected by
>cardcounting at blackjack, you increase your risk of detection when you
>collude in online holdem; we have never said anything contrary to this.
>what we have maintained is that it is possible to fly under the radar. and
>as such everyone should be made aware that it cannot be prevented if done
>correctly.
It can be prevented, just not 100%. It can be made rare enough that
it's not a serious problem.
>and so we think it is very ethical to draw attention to it, especially for
>new players coming into the game. we'd rather have a new player enter the
>game with the full expectation of meeting bots and/or colluders (so that
>they play more cautiously and aware) than have them play with their guard
>down.
Bullshit. You aren't just providing advice, YOUR PROVIDING A TOOL TO
MAKE IT EASYER TO CHEAT!
>incorrect. we want to make money from those already doing it by selling
>them the winholdem team version. for some of those people the $200 price
>tag is too much. for others it is not. however, bots in general
>outnumber colluders 20 to 1 ... meaning that you are far more likely to
>meet a bot than you are to meet some colluders.
That must be why I've been wining so consistently lately. I'm playing
your bots. Please, tell me when and where to find them, so I can play
them some more.*
> this ratio is based on
>our sales distribution. certainly theres people colluding out there that
>do not use our team edition. it is a no brainer that the number of
>players that do not feel conflicted about computer assistance far exceed
>the number that are not conflicted about colluding. and we've never said
>anything to the contrary.
>
>when we went into this business we were betting on the general end-user
>desire for a bot. that bet is paying off. the team edition is not our
>bread and butter - the pro edition is and we've always known it woudld be
>this way. the team edition just gets people talking and creates marketing
>velocity ... seeing as how news of winholem is planetwide at this point
>partly due to the flame surrounding the team edition. the old adage (bad
>press is better than no press).
So your better off offering a cheating version than you would be just
offering a TOS violating version. Great marketing plan.
>> >> Only losers need to cheat to win, I guess this makes you a loser and a
>> >> loser enabler.
>> >
>> >we completely disagree with this. most of our customers are pro users (no
>> >built in auto-sharing - although this isn't saying much ... they could
>> >still use chat or headsets to collude). almost all of our winning
>> >sessions are bots running unattended overnight - which by the way is the
>> >coolest thing - to get up in the morning to see your bot has doubled its
>> >table stake - you just haven't lived until you have this experience.
>>
>> How would you know?
>
>not sure what your question is here.
Then read it again, Sparky. It's pretty clear.
Am I getting smart with you? How would you know?
>> Team play. Just pathetic.
>
>actually it is quite cool to say the least.
>being in the same game with a friend has twice the entertainment value.
>the world could be a better place if players could just abandon their fear
>guilt and shame concerning teaming. you would have zero players entering
>the game with false expectations.
So cheating is quite cool in your book. Thanks for clearing that up.
And everyone who enters a tournament expecting to win has false
expatiations, with the exception of one player.
>> >we cant jeapordize poker, we can only make it better than it already is.
>> >collusion is just bluffing at a more complex level.
>>
>> Poker has been around for, oh, a few years longer than you. How ever
>> did it survive, thrive, and get more popular, before you came along?
>
>wake up and smell the bandwidth man, we're not the ones responsible for
>moving holdem to the internet and reducing the security against collusion
>and bots to that of a EULA. it is simple evolution man. move something
>to a new environment and it will be forever changed.
Sometimes for the better, and sometimes for the worse. And you can
always be sure that there will be weasels out there with new ways to
cheat, and age old justifications for their dishonesty.
*Back to playing your bots. Let's do it. Pick a site that allows
private tables. Post an invite here. Put two or three bots on the
table, and let the rest of us have at 'em (and each other, of course.)
In other words, put your money where your mouth is, boy.