11–20 of 29 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Matt you hit the nail on the head. People like to think that if you can build a winning bot you can easily run it on a dozen computers and rake in millions of dollars. In reality, the logistics of running such an operation are prohibitively difficult--at least if you want to stay within the bounds of the law.
are you planning on writing the next in the series soon? pretty interesting.
Anything specific you want to hear about?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Net profit is a factor of many things that have nothing to do with the bot. How good of a system you have for getting new accounts/ip addresses, how well you can funnel money from one dummy account back to you, how well you avoid detection, etc. Still, you can easily determine the mathematical certainty for a given win rate and sample size.
Net profit is a factor of many things that have nothing to do with the bot. How good of a system you have for getting new accounts/ip addresses, how well you can funnel money from one dummy account back to you, how well you avoid detection, etc. Those are ancillary factors that have an effect on net profit. They are not metrics. Taking the story from the post, if my "friends and family" were asking me about the "succ…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Net profit is a factor of many things that have nothing to do with the bot. How good of a system you have for getting new accounts/ip addresses, how well you can funnel money from one dummy account back to you, how well you avoid detection, etc. Still, you can easily determine the mathematical certainty for a given win rate and sample size.
Net profit is a factor of many things that have nothing to do with the bot. How good of a system you have for getting new accounts/ip addresses, how well you can funnel money from one dummy account back to you, how well you avoid detection, etc. Those are ancillary factors that have an effect on net profit. They are not metrics. Taking the story from the post, if my "friends and family" were asking me about the "succ…
We're obsessed with the performance metric, big bets per hour for live players, big bets per 100 hands (BB/100) for online. Standard deviations, results ranges, levels of certainty. You obsess about that stuff or you end up broke. (Of course, you may do both.)
In fact if you read online poker forums, hands and win rates are rarely ever discussed with dollar values because they aren't very relevant. They're almost always given in terms of big bets, and most if not all online hand converters (which take a hand history from a poker site and print it out in an easy to read format for posting on forums) convert to that automatically.
The absolute dollar amounts are only useful for getting a very rough estimate of the level of competition given no other information.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Matt you hit the nail on the head. People like to think that if you can build a winning bot you can easily run it on a dozen computers and rake in millions of dollars. In reality, the logistics of running such an operation are prohibitively difficult--at least if you want to stay within the bounds of the law.
Yeah, I've gone through much of the rest of the process before between bonus abusing casinos, running a rakeback site, and my own poker play. Once upon a time Party Poker offered a guaranteed 10% APR on all balances up to $10k, paid out monthly given a certain relatively small level of pay. I imagine their multiple account detection process back then was relatively crude compared to what Stars has now, but it caused…
The money was a nice, but it really wasn't the primary goal. Plus, in order to maximize profits I would have had to tread in a lot of murky waters that I didn't want to be near.
For example, say you have a roommate run the bot. How do you get the profits from his poker account into your bank account? Not as easy as it might seem.
An interesting juxtaposition against the series being written at Coding the Wheel. Both are very clear about the difficulties involved - my suspicion is they push the "eating glass" type analogies primarily so that they don't appear to be encouraging further development. After all, the challenges involved appear to be what motivates them (and many Hackers) in the first place.
My initial impression is that he made some things way more complicated than they had to be and other things way simpler than they needed to be.
But who knows--there's definitely more than one way to do it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, soon. Anything specific you want to hear about?
Why was it so bad as to be comparable to eating glass?
This topic is important and deserves a long discussion--its one of the main things I want to write about in the future.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I've gone through much of the rest of the process before between bonus abusing casinos, running a rakeback site, and my own poker play. Once upon a time Party Poker offered a guaranteed 10% APR on all balances up to $10k, paid out monthly given a certain relatively small level of pay. I imagine their multiple account detection process back then was relatively crude compared to what Stars has now, but it caused…
Honestly I didn't even bother trying setting up multiple accounts. The money was a nice, but it really wasn't the primary goal. Plus, in order to maximize profits I would have had to tread in a lot of murky waters that I didn't want to be near. For example, say you have a roommate run the bot. How do you get the profits from his poker account into your bank account? Not as easy as it might seem.
Once you’ve agreed on a time period and a way to count the results, how can you be sure that the results weren’t a product of luck and variance instead of skill? That should only matter if your motivation for developing a poker bot was to develop a program that could demonstrate "skill" rather than one that could produce the highest profits (such as if you were a computer scientist). If you wanted to produce the high…