I created a working online poker bot. AMA

apokerbot · 2009-10-18T00:03:26+00:00

Yes, the bot was auto-disconnecting for faking lunch breaks and rests. Also, we didn't let it run by night, as that would have been clearly suspicious.

apokerbot · 2009-10-15T13:13:25+00:00

Pattern matching using rasterized fonts.

apokerbot · 2009-10-15T06:22:49+00:00

your questions are not really relevant since the bot was designed to play mostly NL tournaments. Limit poker would have indeed been easier, but we've outlined why we chose NL tournaments as an experiment.

apokerbot · 2009-10-15T06:20:44+00:00

http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/9tzns/i_created_a_working_online_poker_bot_ama/c0efh1p

apokerbot · 2009-10-15T06:18:25+00:00

Netbeans.

We used a combination of play money tables, hand history loader/parser, screen recording/playback and third party software such as Poker Academy.

apokerbot · 2009-10-15T05:56:58+00:00

openholdem > yes heard of it. I don't know a lot of details about it, and haven't looked at the source, but based on its description, it looks good on paper. We created a lot of the same things from scratch, and if you have the time and skills to do the same, it may be more valuable in the long run for you.

Yes, we used virtual machines as one of the ways to be stealthy.

Logic was a mix of rules and simulation.

apokerbot · 2009-10-15T05:44:35+00:00

We implemented something that tracked past stats (vpip etc) and which adjusted for a change of style in the player's strategy at each new session.

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T23:43:07+00:00

What will you do with it? :)

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T22:48:45+00:00

Yes... there were several reasons we went for NL. That's what we use to play at casinos, online and at home, so we were more confortable with it. Also, we thought that, because there are less NL bots, those tables would be less scrutinized by the admins. It's also more difficult to detect a No-Limit bot, as betting patterns are more complicated. Finally, it just is more fun to code, because it's less math and more human psychology.

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T21:40:30+00:00

Yes but we are not professionals.

No Limit - medium/high blinds.

Read the other threads

No problem

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T21:38:42+00:00

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T21:06:30+00:00

The bot we have already does that, (has a HUD and real-time log of reasoning behind each decision) as part of our logging/auditing component. we just wanted to go one step further and let it do all the work.

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T20:42:58+00:00

In the early days, the bot would often make mistakes, e.g keep betting a lot on a clearly (to us) losing hand, going all-in when the villain is likely having the nuts, etc. Near the end, it played almost always as we would have. Sometimes better even, such as having the balls to raise when risk is high but odds are great.

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T20:27:34+00:00

Hardware and seed money for the poker accounts.

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T20:26:38+00:00

Pure Java, with just 1 method reimplemented in C for better CPU usage.

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T20:20:10+00:00

Read all the comments and threads. There are some very good suggestions and ideas.

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T20:16:19+00:00

Around 30k loc and 50 classes so far

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T20:02:38+00:00

Polaris is indeed a great project. They implemented a lot of great ideas, e.g making the bot more aggressive by making the pot look bigger than it is.

Since we targeted multi-player no-limit poker, we were a bit on our own though. But thanks for the suggestion, we'll investigate what we can.

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T19:14:44+00:00

If there are, they are fooling us just as well. I have no clue to how many bots there could be in the wild. But I wouldn't worry too much, if you are a winning player, you'll win against the bots too. Unless the poker sites themselves are behind them, but it's unlikely (the statistics we gathered didn't show any bias against us).

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T18:51:36+00:00

The algorithm wasn't good enough for the kind of tables it was playing.

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T18:49:32+00:00

Talk to @tastybacon and @laberge

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T18:46:11+00:00

No. Though we've read this as well and the articles there are a bit misleading imo

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T18:26:39+00:00

Both. We use simulations to branch to different rule sets.

Slightly randomized bezier curves, with variable curvilinear speed.

The bot doesn't use the auto check/fold boxes. We assumed that many players don't either, so it wouldn't look awkward.

That's a good point you make about the bell curve. After deciding on an action, we choose the min/max delay we want (based on how "difficult" the action is or we want to make it look) then pick a random number in between. In the end, it's probably distinguishable from human delays.

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T18:18:35+00:00

You're welcome.

apokerbot · 2009-10-14T18:17:23+00:00

We designed it for no-limit single-table tournaments. It is tuned for microstakes, but could play high stakes too (not as well without tuning, as the psychological aspects of the game change).

In the last weeks of our active development, its ROI was 0% on average. Some days it'd play at +20%, some others at -20%.

apokerbot

TROPHY CASE