Discussion:
pokerbot.com - winholdem - the facts
(too old to reply)
WinHoldemSupport
2004-06-04 19:34:40 UTC
Permalink
here are the facts about winholdem:

there are 4 subscription levels:
you can read about them here:
http://www.winholdem.net/wh_pricing.php

you can read our full license agreement here:
http://www.winholdem.net/license_agreement.html

here are the approximate customer percentages for each edition:

basic - 13%
speed - 3%
pro - 76%
team - 8%

the online poker casinos do not want you to use winholdem
(regardless of what subscription you license)
because they genuinely understand how effective it is.

paradisepoker will suspend your account if they detect any edition of
winholdem. so far there has not been a reported instance of paradise
stealing an account balance. there are people leaving paradise to play
elsewhere due to the privacy concerns. the winpp product allows you to
play on paradise undetected but you must have two computers to do so. you
can read the details of winpp here:
http://www.winholdem.net/antidetect.html; winpp is free.

partypoker will close itself in two hands if it sees the text 'winholdem'
in the title bar of any window on your desktop (this includes a browser or
email). the latest version of winholdem addresses this issue.

pokerstars seems to be taking a somewhat neutral approach. their software
vendor made some early mods to the client to attempt to avoid the
winholdem screen scraper but the current winholdem release addresses this.

winholdem is a programmable pokerbot. it plays only as well as the
formula set being used. there are some very crappy formula sets floating
around and there are some very strong formula sets out there. winholdem
is actually a pokerbot-bot ... or a bots bot. winholdem is just a tool
that allows anybody to build their own pokerbot. technically speaking if
adam develops a formula set for $20 NL tourney holdem and betty develops a
formula set for $1/$2 limit ring games ... they actually have two entirely
different bots because the formula sets are fine tuned for that specific
game in question.

if you want to build your own winholdem formula set, you will need an
understanding of holdem or the aptitude to learn holdem, and you will need
some logic skill specifically with C style programming expressions. we
have customers that are brand new to holdem and have never programmed a
computer in their lives; they bought themselves a C primer and they are
building their own formula set for the pure pleasure of it.

we have several retired COBOL programmers who love winholdem ... one of
them said that he always wanted to learn how to play holdem and he
regretted never learning C and that winholdem was the excuse he needed to
do both simultaneously.

everybody is entitled to a free 24-hour look at winholdem. if you are a
modem user and do not have a NIC with a unique macaddress, then you must
send an email requesting the trial version.

to date, in over 3 months of online sales we have encountered only one
single chargeback; and this was from a person who was trying to harm our
company by getting a public chargeback campaign started. many of our
users started with the basic or speed edition; eventually they upgraded to
the pro edition once they understood that we are very serious about the
pokerbot business.

we have, in certain cases extended the trial version for customers who
were interrupted with other events and were unable to use winholdem in the
first 24 hours after install.

it is not possible to license winholdem without first ensuring that it
runs safely and solidly on your sytem as intended. we believe this is the
best way to operate a download software business;

the winholdem team edition has caused controversy due to the
auto-card-sharing analysis features. the facts are that you do gain some
advantage by knowing the cards of another friend at the table. winholdem
has the ability to dynamically incorporate all card knowledge into the
realtime analysis; such knowledge can turn a good hand into the dead nuts
under the right circumstances; however, this does not happen nearly as
often as is generally believed.

most of the opc's have implemented analysis tools to detect potjacking and
cardsharing (which is something that team players do). the opc's take a
very dim view of card-sharing and team play and if you are caught you can
probably expect the worse (closed account all funds taken). this is a
fact we have never once tried to hide. you can read our license agreement
for proof of this (see link above).

you would think this would deter all card-sharing and team-play; we can
assure you it does not; players do not need winholdem to team-play in a
game of online holdem; they can use chat,voip,phone,etc. so in this
regard winholdem does not provide anything that does not already exist ...
except for dynamic card analysis (we assume that no human alive can
quickly calculate the correct odds for 3 known holdem hands with flop
xyz). this is the real value provided by the winholdem team edtion.

based on the distribution of sales we are seeing, we believe that more
than 10% of the online holdem population is engaged in card-sharing. this
would indicate that nearly half of all 10 chair tables have a two player
team present (independent of whether or not they use winholdem as their
sharing mechanism).

the default formula set for the winholdem team edition does not
auto-potjack. the default formula set is such that if two winholdem bots
are seated and sharing at the same table the resulting edge in the card
sharing knowledge will not register on the opc analysis radar. it will
look as if the two chairs are perfectly normal.

we believe that you place yourself at risk if you pot jack.

in conclusion we would like to say that there are some liars here on rgp
that continue to post falsehoods about our product. they either
misrepresent what winholdem is or lie about it altogether.

as always we will post retractions for any of the statements above it
anyone can demonstrate an error.

do well and win big,

winholdem management
http://www.pokerbot.com

_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
oxbody
2004-06-04 19:52:51 UTC
Permalink
Why is this not cheating?
Raider Fan
2004-06-04 20:02:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by oxbody
Why is this not cheating?
It obviously is cheating. That's why the sites are trying to detect it.
The scumbag (Winholdemsupport) doesn't care if it's cheating. He's trying
to make a buck.

_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Gaash
2004-06-04 20:13:20 UTC
Permalink
Don't get it started ... basically the answer goes

If you think collusion is cheating, then it is cheating
If you think sharing your cards with others is cheating, then it is
cheating.
etc. etc.

But, Winholdem is not cheating because everyone is colluding anyway.
John Forsberg
2004-06-05 03:14:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gaash
Don't get it started ... basically the answer goes
If you think collusion is cheating, then it is cheating
If you think sharing your cards with others is cheating, then it is
cheating.
etc. etc.
But, Winholdem is not cheating because everyone is colluding anyway.
HUH? So if everyone is cold-decking that's not cheating? That's just
so very stupid. But I'm going to go out on a limb an guess that you do
in fact cheat and hence need some sort of rationalization for it. Well
there isn't any, if you collude you are a thief.
WinHoldemSupport
2004-06-05 23:21:39 UTC
Permalink
john,

a thief is one who takes the property of another without the consent of
the property owner.

if i freely choose to show you my cards and you freely choose to look that
is not stealing.

if two people are sharing cards in a game of online holdem that is being
honestly dealt, it does not change the fact that one of those two people
still must have a decent hand at the river to win the pot.

most people think that card sharing gives the teammates some magical super
human advantage; it most assuredly does not.

the most accurate statement about card sharing is that there is an
increased advantage that is not as big as most people believe it to be;
there is also increased risk of detection if you alter your otherwise
normal course of play based on the extra card knowledge. if you play
correctly and prudently you can avoid detection; if you are careless, you
very likely will get caught.

so regardless of how you or anybody else feels about card sharing, there
are a lot of people out there who just do not care what you think about
them whether they read your comments or not. my point is that you cannot
shame them or hurt their feelings as a means to modify their behavior;
they simply do not care about you; they do however care a great deal about
your money and doing what they can to win it from you.

here are two excerpts from the following page:
http://www.winholdem.net/quotes.html

Motive
"I am a poker player.
Poker is war.
When I play poker,
I am a killer.
If you are my opponent,
I do not care about you,
I am not trying to be your friend or consider your feelings.
I have but one purpose in mind -
To take all of your money any way I can by whatever means necessary.
The sooner you surrender your chips the better.
I am a poker player."
- Barracuda

Reality
"When I was young my mother taught me to play nicely.
I learned that lying was bad and sharing was good.
When I got older my father taught me to play poker.
I learned that lying was good and sharing was bad.
When I became an adult the internet taught me to play poker online.
I learned that mom and dad were both wrong."
- Throg

grow up john,
online holdem is not some nice friendly kindergarten playground.

winholdem support
http://www.pokerbot.com
Post by John Forsberg
Post by Gaash
Don't get it started ... basically the answer goes
If you think collusion is cheating, then it is cheating
If you think sharing your cards with others is cheating, then it is
cheating.
etc. etc.
But, Winholdem is not cheating because everyone is colluding anyway.
HUH? So if everyone is cold-decking that's not cheating? That's just
so very stupid. But I'm going to go out on a limb an guess that you do
in fact cheat and hence need some sort of rationalization for it. Well
there isn't any, if you collude you are a thief.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
WinHoldemSupport
2004-06-05 23:43:15 UTC
Permalink
john,

we apologize for the earlier rant but seriously we need to sell our
product and admitting that the team edition is a tool that promotes
cheating could have a negative impact on our sales. again i apologive
it's been a long day and ray has been working me to the bone.

winholdem support
Post by WinHoldemSupport
john,
a thief is one who takes the property of another without the consent of
the property owner.
if i freely choose to show you my cards and you freely choose to look that
is not stealing.
if two people are sharing cards in a game of online holdem that is being
honestly dealt, it does not change the fact that one of those two people
still must have a decent hand at the river to win the pot.
most people think that card sharing gives the teammates some magical super
human advantage; it most assuredly does not.
the most accurate statement about card sharing is that there is an
increased advantage that is not as big as most people believe it to be;
there is also increased risk of detection if you alter your otherwise
normal course of play based on the extra card knowledge. if you play
correctly and prudently you can avoid detection; if you are careless, you
very likely will get caught.
so regardless of how you or anybody else feels about card sharing, there
are a lot of people out there who just do not care what you think about
them whether they read your comments or not. my point is that you cannot
shame them or hurt their feelings as a means to modify their behavior;
they simply do not care about you; they do however care a great deal about
your money and doing what they can to win it from you.
http://www.winholdem.net/quotes.html
Motive
"I am a poker player.
Poker is war.
When I play poker,
I am a killer.
If you are my opponent,
I do not care about you,
I am not trying to be your friend or consider your feelings.
I have but one purpose in mind -
To take all of your money any way I can by whatever means necessary.
The sooner you surrender your chips the better.
I am a poker player."
- Barracuda
Reality
"When I was young my mother taught me to play nicely.
I learned that lying was bad and sharing was good.
When I got older my father taught me to play poker.
I learned that lying was good and sharing was bad.
When I became an adult the internet taught me to play poker online.
I learned that mom and dad were both wrong."
- Throg
grow up john,
online holdem is not some nice friendly kindergarten playground.
winholdem support
http://www.pokerbot.com
Post by John Forsberg
Post by Gaash
Don't get it started ... basically the answer goes
If you think collusion is cheating, then it is cheating
If you think sharing your cards with others is cheating, then it is
cheating.
etc. etc.
But, Winholdem is not cheating because everyone is colluding anyway.
HUH? So if everyone is cold-decking that's not cheating? That's just
so very stupid. But I'm going to go out on a limb an guess that you do
in fact cheat and hence need some sort of rationalization for it. Well
there isn't any, if you collude you are a thief.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Lester Hayes
2004-06-06 01:16:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by WinHoldemSupport
john,
we apologize for the earlier rant but seriously we need to sell our
product and admitting that the team edition is a tool that promotes
cheating could have a negative impact on our sales. again i apologive
it's been a long day and ray has been working me to the bone.
winholdem support
Enough of your incoherent babbling. You are a pathetic immoral piece of
shit loser who obviously doesn't care that he comes accross as a human
completely devoid of morals and ethics. The volumes of unreadable drivel
that spew forth from you will one day make an interesting case study for
some future sociology class interested in the lowest of the low that the
internet boom of the early 21st century produced. And just to make it
easier for those people to find this one man's opinion:

Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software

That oughta be good for Google to latch onto.
John Forsberg
2004-06-07 02:14:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by WinHoldemSupport
john,
we apologize for the earlier rant but seriously we need to sell our
product and admitting that the team edition is a tool that promotes
cheating could have a negative impact on our sales. again i apologive
it's been a long day and ray has been working me to the bone.
winholdem support
That's cool, I can imagine that Ray being a real bastard. Wouldn't it
be a lot simpler to *disable* the cheating features instead of
avoinding to mention them?
Lester Hayes
2004-06-06 01:16:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by WinHoldemSupport
john,
a thief is one who takes the property of another without the consent of
the property owner.
[... piles of crap clipped...]

Enough of your incoherent babbling. You are a pathetic immoral piece of
shit loser who obviously doesn't care that he comes accross as a human
completely devoid of morals and ethics. The volumes of unreadable drivel
that spew forth from you will one day make an interesting case study for
some future sociology class interested in the lowest of the low that the
internet boom of the early 21st century produced. And just to make it
easier for those people to find this one man's opinion:

Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software
Ray Bonert immoral unethical thief liar fraudster cheater shithead pathetic
useless crappy software

That oughta be good for Google to latch onto.
Gaash
2004-06-06 14:48:57 UTC
Permalink
You misunderstood the sarcasm in my response ... I was simply telling you
what Winholdem will say.
John Forsberg
2004-06-07 01:11:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gaash
You misunderstood the sarcasm in my response ... I was simply telling you
what Winholdem will say.
Crap, I had a feeling I was jumping the gun there. Well I need to
trust my reads instincts more I guess. Anyway sorry for the mishap,
it's been awhile since I read a winholdem response so I kind of forgot
what they looked like.
Gaash
2004-06-07 03:50:14 UTC
Permalink
lol no worries.
James Campbell
2004-06-04 20:24:55 UTC
Permalink
Ray seems to make a living off his trying to spin, illegal activity here is
his essay on why he shouldnt pay taxes...

http://www.hixoxih.com/soapbox/AreYouASlave.htm
Post by oxbody
Why is this not cheating?
WinHoldemSupport
2004-06-04 21:00:56 UTC
Permalink
ox,

winholdem basic edition:
the users essentially have a manual holdem calculator at their finger
tips, they have to enter the game state themselves while playing, the
winholdem analyzers then produce analysis, they have to push button in the
poker client themselves
(most people do not have a problem with this level of computer assistance
and do not consider this to be cheating)

winholdem speed edition:
the game state is automatically read by winholdem so the end-user does not
have to enter it manually (saves a lot of tedious time and mouse clicks).
the analyzers do their thing the formulas are processed but the user still
clicks the poker client buttons themselves.
(most players do not have a problem with this either and do not consider
this to be cheating)

winholdem pro edition:
the poker game state is automatically scraped by winholdem.
analyzers run automatically
and buttons are automatically pressed in the poker client by winholdem for
the end user. the pro edition is a fully functional pokerbot.
many opcs do not like the pro edition because it can play unattended. and
they demand that you (the human) be there at the keyboard/mouse 100% of
the time.
(some players are against fully automatic bots but they are not willing to
call it cheating)

winholdem team edtion:
same as pro except you can auto-card share with others at the table and
winholdem will incorporate all known card knowledge into the analysis.
(all opcs hate and fear the team edition)
(most players consider any form of card sharing to be cheating)
(about 8% of winholdem customers have the team edition)


so it is inaccurate to say that you think all winholdem users are cheating
..

winholdem support
http://www.pokerbot.com
Post by oxbody
Why is this not cheating?
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
ruylopez
2004-06-04 20:09:25 UTC
Permalink
FACT: Ray POS Zee who wrote this program has admitted on this site that
when he played online poker he was "EATEN ALIVE"! He blames this on other
player's cheating, when in fact it is his own stupidity!

FACT: He's written this scam, unusable program, for which he himself says
the target audience is college kids with C programming experience! Talk
about easy to use!

FACT: If you are caught using this program your online bankroll will be
seized immediately! If you are not caught your bankroll will be seized by
the other players who actually know how to play!

FACT: Ray will take the money you pay for this POS and burn it trying to
play online poker with his own feeble brain! So if you can find him, you
can get your money back at the tables!

_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
ruylopez
2004-06-04 22:16:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by ruylopez
FACT: Ray POS Zee
MY BAD

Ray Bonnert.

_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
John Forsberg
2004-06-05 03:16:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by ruylopez
Post by ruylopez
FACT: Ray POS Zee
MY BAD
Ray Bonnert.
You need to apoligize again, his full namne is Ray Piece of Shit *Bornert*.
ruylopez
2004-06-05 04:27:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Forsberg
Post by ruylopez
Post by ruylopez
FACT: Ray POS Zee
MY BAD
Ray Bonnert.
You need to apoligize again, his full namne is Ray Piece of Shit *Bornert*.
MY BAD

_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
James Campbell
2004-06-04 20:12:13 UTC
Permalink
For those unfamiliar with WinHoldEm here is the standard response from the
RGP community.

Here are the facts on WinHoldEm pokerbot:

1) People using WinHoldEm have had their accounts closed/suspended owners
of those accounts may or may not have gotten their money back from their
account.
2) Almost all of the Poker Sites have a way of detecting WinHoldEm.
3) After 12 hours of using WinHoldEm you can expect to earn $2.38 an hour
at $3/$6 or less than 1/2 BB per Hour. This data was provided by an actual
test of the product.
4) It will take you roughly 50 hours just to make the $100 back you spent
on the program. If during that time or anytime after the poker site detects
your bot your account can be closed and bankroll may be confiscated.
5) WinHoldEm.com is registered to:

Name : Ray Edward Bornert II
Address : 4143 Red Laurel Way
City/State/Zip : Snellville, GA 30039
Phone Home : 770-736-7870
Phone Fax : 770-736-7890
Phone Mobile : 770-309-7870
E-Mail : ***@hixoxih.com
DOB : 1961-OCT-02

6) Providing software with the intent to fraud may or may not be a
violation of FTC or Government regulations and can be reported to the
Attorney General of the State of Georgia, Mr. Thubert Baker
(http://ganet.org/ago/), the Federal Trade Commision (www.ftc.com), and the
Internet Fraud Complaint Center which is a joint operation between the FBI
and White Collar Crime Center (www.ifccfbi.gov).

If this sounds like a good proposition for you then by all means buy
WinHoldEm!
Post by WinHoldemSupport
http://www.winholdem.net/wh_pricing.php
http://www.winholdem.net/license_agreement.html
basic - 13%
speed - 3%
pro - 76%
team - 8%
the online poker casinos do not want you to use winholdem
(regardless of what subscription you license)
because they genuinely understand how effective it is.
paradisepoker will suspend your account if they detect any edition of
winholdem. so far there has not been a reported instance of paradise
stealing an account balance. there are people leaving paradise to play
elsewhere due to the privacy concerns. the winpp product allows you to
play on paradise undetected but you must have two computers to do so. you
http://www.winholdem.net/antidetect.html; winpp is free.
partypoker will close itself in two hands if it sees the text 'winholdem'
in the title bar of any window on your desktop (this includes a browser or
email). the latest version of winholdem addresses this issue.
pokerstars seems to be taking a somewhat neutral approach. their software
vendor made some early mods to the client to attempt to avoid the
winholdem screen scraper but the current winholdem release addresses this.
winholdem is a programmable pokerbot. it plays only as well as the
formula set being used. there are some very crappy formula sets floating
around and there are some very strong formula sets out there. winholdem
is actually a pokerbot-bot ... or a bots bot. winholdem is just a tool
that allows anybody to build their own pokerbot. technically speaking if
adam develops a formula set for $20 NL tourney holdem and betty develops a
formula set for $1/$2 limit ring games ... they actually have two entirely
different bots because the formula sets are fine tuned for that specific
game in question.
if you want to build your own winholdem formula set, you will need an
understanding of holdem or the aptitude to learn holdem, and you will need
some logic skill specifically with C style programming expressions. we
have customers that are brand new to holdem and have never programmed a
computer in their lives; they bought themselves a C primer and they are
building their own formula set for the pure pleasure of it.
we have several retired COBOL programmers who love winholdem ... one of
them said that he always wanted to learn how to play holdem and he
regretted never learning C and that winholdem was the excuse he needed to
do both simultaneously.
everybody is entitled to a free 24-hour look at winholdem. if you are a
modem user and do not have a NIC with a unique macaddress, then you must
send an email requesting the trial version.
to date, in over 3 months of online sales we have encountered only one
single chargeback; and this was from a person who was trying to harm our
company by getting a public chargeback campaign started. many of our
users started with the basic or speed edition; eventually they upgraded to
the pro edition once they understood that we are very serious about the
pokerbot business.
we have, in certain cases extended the trial version for customers who
were interrupted with other events and were unable to use winholdem in the
first 24 hours after install.
it is not possible to license winholdem without first ensuring that it
runs safely and solidly on your sytem as intended. we believe this is the
best way to operate a download software business;
the winholdem team edition has caused controversy due to the
auto-card-sharing analysis features. the facts are that you do gain some
advantage by knowing the cards of another friend at the table. winholdem
has the ability to dynamically incorporate all card knowledge into the
realtime analysis; such knowledge can turn a good hand into the dead nuts
under the right circumstances; however, this does not happen nearly as
often as is generally believed.
most of the opc's have implemented analysis tools to detect potjacking and
cardsharing (which is something that team players do). the opc's take a
very dim view of card-sharing and team play and if you are caught you can
probably expect the worse (closed account all funds taken). this is a
fact we have never once tried to hide. you can read our license agreement
for proof of this (see link above).
you would think this would deter all card-sharing and team-play; we can
assure you it does not; players do not need winholdem to team-play in a
game of online holdem; they can use chat,voip,phone,etc. so in this
regard winholdem does not provide anything that does not already exist ...
except for dynamic card analysis (we assume that no human alive can
quickly calculate the correct odds for 3 known holdem hands with flop
xyz). this is the real value provided by the winholdem team edtion.
based on the distribution of sales we are seeing, we believe that more
than 10% of the online holdem population is engaged in card-sharing. this
would indicate that nearly half of all 10 chair tables have a two player
team present (independent of whether or not they use winholdem as their
sharing mechanism).
the default formula set for the winholdem team edition does not
auto-potjack. the default formula set is such that if two winholdem bots
are seated and sharing at the same table the resulting edge in the card
sharing knowledge will not register on the opc analysis radar. it will
look as if the two chairs are perfectly normal.
we believe that you place yourself at risk if you pot jack.
in conclusion we would like to say that there are some liars here on rgp
that continue to post falsehoods about our product. they either
misrepresent what winholdem is or lie about it altogether.
as always we will post retractions for any of the statements above it
anyone can demonstrate an error.
do well and win big,
winholdem management
http://www.pokerbot.com
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Lynx
2004-06-04 20:51:13 UTC
Permalink
Ray, you don't seem to be picking up on the fact that people at this site
don't think much of your POS product. (They don't seem to think very
highly of you either, for that matter.)

Are you unable to bring yourself to read the responses to your ludicrous
posts, or are you just a slow learner?

_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Jeff Harper
2004-06-07 04:26:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by WinHoldemSupport
based on the distribution of sales we are seeing, we believe that more
than 10% of the online holdem population is engaged in card-sharing. this
would indicate that nearly half of all 10 chair tables have a two player
team present (independent of whether or not they use winholdem as their
sharing mechanism).
That's very interesting/disturbing. Would you mind explaining why you
believe so much collusion is present?

Jeff

Jeff Harper
Tampa, FL
WinHoldemSupport
2004-06-07 06:29:57 UTC
Permalink
in general any cross section of a given population will be distributed in
approximately the same way as the population as a whole.

almost 10% of winholdem users have the team edition (it is actually a
little more than 8%), the team edition will auto-share cards; so it is
safe to say that any customer who acquires the team edition is interested
in card-sharing in some capacity.

it is reasonable to assert that the 90% of winholdem customers that do not
have the team edition are probably not interested in card-sharing;

it would be innaccurate to say that the only people who are card-sharing
online are winholdem team edition customers. there are definitely people
out there that are going to card share without becoming a winholdem team
edition customer for $200.

the $200 price tag certainly means that the actual number of team edition
customers is less than what it would be if the price was much less or free.

it is not accurate to say that there would be fewer team edition customers
if we dropped the price. and it is not accurate to say that there would
be more team edition customers if we raised the price.

so the winholdem sales figures indicate that more than 8% of the online
holdem population is psychologically willing to engage in cardsharing.

we used the figure 10% just to make it simple to do the math. if 2 out of
20 people are cardsharing then on average if there are 10 tables (10
chairs each) then 5 of those table have a 2 person team seated.

so to sum up, we assert that the percentage of winholdem team edition
customers is indicative of the psychology of the online holdem population
at large.

we genuinely believe that at least 10% of the online holdem players are
very open to the idea of card sharing and if they have not already done
so, they will at some future time.

winholdem support
http://www.pokerbot.com
Post by Jeff Harper
Post by WinHoldemSupport
based on the distribution of sales we are seeing, we believe that more
than 10% of the online holdem population is engaged in card-sharing. this
would indicate that nearly half of all 10 chair tables have a two player
team present (independent of whether or not they use winholdem as their
sharing mechanism).
That's very interesting/disturbing. Would you mind explaining why you
believe so much collusion is present?
Jeff
Jeff Harper
Tampa, FL
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Jeff Harper
2004-06-07 16:04:37 UTC
Permalink
(Q) Tencigars: Would you mind explaining why you believe so much
collusion is present (nearly 50% of all online poker tables)?

(A) WinHolemSupport: in general any cross section of a given
population will be distributed in approximately the same way as the
population as a whole. almost 10% of winholdem users have the team
edition (it is actually a little more than 8%

------------------

I see two basic flaws in that reasoning.

(1) It is a 'hasty generalization' to conclude that, because
approximately 10% of WinHoldem customers purchased the collusion
version, approximately 10% of online poker players in general collude.

This is flawed because the WinHoldem customer base is NOT a
representative sample of online poker players. Simply, WinHoldem
customers are more predisposed to cheat.

Illustrating the flaw by analogy: 10% of violent criminals are
rapists, therefore 10% of the general population are rapists.

(Additionally, the WinHoldem customer group may have other
characteristics that distinguish it from the general online poker
population, and it may be too small to extrapolate from.)


(2) "10% percent of players" does not necessarily equate to "50% of
tables."

The assumption is that if 4 out of 40 players were colluders, 2 of the
4 tables would have a pair of colluders present.

The flaw is that there are other considerations not being taken into
account.

Examples:
(a.) Some colluding-pairs may end up at the same table, especially if
some limit ranges are more lucrative. This will reduce the percentage
of corrupt tables. (But make some tables more corrupt.)

(b.) Colluders may play multiple tables, in which case the percentage
would be greater.

(c.) Some colluders may only collude part-time, which would reduce the
percentage.

There are probably several other additional factors that must be taken
into account and thus prevent a direct simple correlation.

Jeff

Jeff Harper
Tampa, FL
WinHoldemSupport
2004-06-07 17:52:52 UTC
Permalink
jeff,

let us reason this way.
let the entire online holdem population be P
let P be divided into two groups - G1 and G2

by definition:
G1 are the players that do not card share when they play.
G2 are the players that do card share when they play.

just so we can have some simple numbers to work with here,
let
G1 be 90% of P
G2 be 10% of P

also let us say that these are the numbers that existed before winholdem
was released. and also by definition all winholdem customers come from
either G1 or G2.

we assert that all of the winholdem customers from the G1 group purchased
the winholdem pro, speed or basic edition; they did not purchase the team
edition.

we assert that some of the winholdem customers from the G2 group will not
purchase the team edition because of the price. (yet they will still card
share via whatever means they always have).

feel free to challenge the two assertions above (doing so only strengthens
our case).

so please explain why you believe that a disproportionally larger number
of G2 players are becoming winholdem customers and why a disproportionally
smaller number of G1 players are becoming winholdem customers,

because the facts do not support this position.

winholdem support
http://www.pokerbot.com
Post by Jeff Harper
(Q) Tencigars: Would you mind explaining why you believe so much
collusion is present (nearly 50% of all online poker tables)?
(A) WinHolemSupport: in general any cross section of a given
population will be distributed in approximately the same way as the
population as a whole. almost 10% of winholdem users have the team
edition (it is actually a little more than 8%
------------------
I see two basic flaws in that reasoning.
(1) It is a 'hasty generalization' to conclude that, because
approximately 10% of WinHoldem customers purchased the collusion
version, approximately 10% of online poker players in general collude.
This is flawed because the WinHoldem customer base is NOT a
representative sample of online poker players. Simply, WinHoldem
customers are more predisposed to cheat.
Illustrating the flaw by analogy: 10% of violent criminals are
rapists, therefore 10% of the general population are rapists.
(Additionally, the WinHoldem customer group may have other
characteristics that distinguish it from the general online poker
population, and it may be too small to extrapolate from.)
(2) "10% percent of players" does not necessarily equate to "50% of
tables."
The assumption is that if 4 out of 40 players were colluders, 2 of the
4 tables would have a pair of colluders present.
The flaw is that there are other considerations not being taken into
account.
(a.) Some colluding-pairs may end up at the same table, especially if
some limit ranges are more lucrative. This will reduce the percentage
of corrupt tables. (But make some tables more corrupt.)
(b.) Colluders may play multiple tables, in which case the percentage
would be greater.
(c.) Some colluders may only collude part-time, which would reduce the
percentage.
There are probably several other additional factors that must be taken
into account and thus prevent a direct simple correlation.
Jeff
Jeff Harper
Tampa, FL
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Bill Ricardi
2004-06-07 18:04:49 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 17:52:52 GMT, "WinHoldemSupport"
Post by WinHoldemSupport
jeff,
let us reason this way.
let the entire online holdem population be P
let P be divided into two groups - G1 and G2
G1 are the players that do not card share when they play.
G2 are the players that do card share when they play.
just so we can have some simple numbers to work with here,
let
G1 be 90% of P
G2 be 10% of P
And let us say, for example, that G2 was further subdivided into:

G2a the percentage of winholdem users on Party Poker
G2b the percentage of winholdem users not on Party Poker

You see where this is going. The math only works as long as the
establishment ALLOWS the math to work. The EV looks good on paper,
until something like this happens. Then people lose their bankrolls
using your product.

So even though your math looks pretty, it doesn't hold up outside the
lab. In the real world, you have to calculate the chances of being
caught cheating. Your next formula should include that.

Party Poker just raised. The others may call. Are you going all in?

Bill Ricardi
Owner of Party Poker Tutor
http://www.partypokertutor.com
WinHoldemSupport
2004-06-08 00:12:30 UTC
Permalink
no bill i dont see where this is all going.
winholdem customers play everywhere not just party.

winholdem support
http://www.pokerbot.com
Post by Bill Ricardi
On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 17:52:52 GMT, "WinHoldemSupport"
Post by WinHoldemSupport
jeff,
let us reason this way.
let the entire online holdem population be P
let P be divided into two groups - G1 and G2
G1 are the players that do not card share when they play.
G2 are the players that do card share when they play.
just so we can have some simple numbers to work with here,
let
G1 be 90% of P
G2 be 10% of P
G2a the percentage of winholdem users on Party Poker
G2b the percentage of winholdem users not on Party Poker
You see where this is going. The math only works as long as the
establishment ALLOWS the math to work. The EV looks good on paper,
until something like this happens. Then people lose their bankrolls
using your product.
So even though your math looks pretty, it doesn't hold up outside the
lab. In the real world, you have to calculate the chances of being
caught cheating. Your next formula should include that.
Party Poker just raised. The others may call. Are you going all in?
Bill Ricardi
Owner of Party Poker Tutor
http://www.partypokertutor.com
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
James Campbell
2004-06-08 00:25:10 UTC
Permalink
Bill -

I must agree with Ray. WinHoldEm customers have had their accounts closed
on other poker sites besides Party. :)

James
Post by WinHoldemSupport
no bill i dont see where this is all going.
winholdem customers play everywhere not just party.
winholdem support
http://www.pokerbot.com
Post by Bill Ricardi
On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 17:52:52 GMT, "WinHoldemSupport"
Post by WinHoldemSupport
jeff,
let us reason this way.
let the entire online holdem population be P
let P be divided into two groups - G1 and G2
G1 are the players that do not card share when they play.
G2 are the players that do card share when they play.
just so we can have some simple numbers to work with here,
let
G1 be 90% of P
G2 be 10% of P
G2a the percentage of winholdem users on Party Poker
G2b the percentage of winholdem users not on Party Poker
You see where this is going. The math only works as long as the
establishment ALLOWS the math to work. The EV looks good on paper,
until something like this happens. Then people lose their bankrolls
using your product.
So even though your math looks pretty, it doesn't hold up outside the
lab. In the real world, you have to calculate the chances of being
caught cheating. Your next formula should include that.
Party Poker just raised. The others may call. Are you going all in?
Bill Ricardi
Owner of Party Poker Tutor
http://www.partypokertutor.com
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Jeff Harper
2004-06-08 00:04:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by WinHoldemSupport
jeff,
let us reason this way.
let the entire online holdem population be P
let P be divided into two groups - G1 and G2
G1 are the players that do not card share when they play.
G2 are the players that do card share when they play.
just so we can have some simple numbers to work with here,
let
G1 be 90% of P
G2 be 10% of P
also let us say that these are the numbers that existed before winholdem
was released. and also by definition all winholdem customers come from
either G1 or G2.
we assert that all of the winholdem customers from the G1 group purchased
the winholdem pro, speed or basic edition; they did not purchase the team
edition.
we assert that some of the winholdem customers from the G2 group will not
purchase the team edition because of the price. (yet they will still card
share via whatever means they always have).
feel free to challenge the two assertions above (doing so only strengthens
our case).
so please explain why you believe that a disproportionally larger number
of G2 players are becoming winholdem customers and why a disproportionally
smaller number of G1 players are becoming winholdem customers,
That's easy.

G2 players are already colluders; it follows that a large percentage
of them would be interested in a cheating tool, and there are few
available.

G1 players are non-colluders and mostly non-cheaters; it does NOT
follow that a large percentage of them would be attracted to your
program.

Most will NOT seek out a program to do their thinking for them. A
large percentage will view even the manual version of your program as
"unsavory." Many will fear being branded a cheater for using even the
manual version. (The responses to your posts on here bear witness to
these sentiments.) And the G1 players who ARE attracted to the manual
version may choose one of your competitors, such as No Hands.

Jeff

Jeff Harper
Tampa, FL
WinHoldemSupport
2004-06-08 00:50:45 UTC
Permalink
jeff,
Post by Jeff Harper
G2 players are already colluders; it follows that a large percentage
of them would be interested in a cheating tool, and there are few
available.
agreed that there are few if any besides winholdem team edition available.
agreed that this group is likely to have a predisposition for the team
product. however, you are very wrong by saying that this group is more
interested in computer assistance (of any kind) than the G1 group. our 3
months of dealing candidly with the online holdem population proves you
wrong here.
Post by Jeff Harper
G1 players are non-colluders and mostly non-cheaters; it does NOT
follow that a large percentage of them would be attracted to your
program.
it seem that you probably do not fully understand the difference between
the 4 winholdem editions. see this page for details:
http://winholdem.net/wh_pricing.php

while we agree that nearly 100% of the G1 group is not interested in the
winholdem team edition; they are very very interested in the pro edition

what you are attempting to assert is that only those in the G2 group
become winholdem customers ... and you are just plain wrong.

we get support emails regularly from customers that want to be 100% sure
that the pro edition has absolutely none of the teaming tools found in the
team edition; they make it very very clear that they are not interested in
teaming whatsoever.

by and large the vast majority of winholdem customers are from the G1
group.

having said that, let us for the moment pretend that you are correct -
that all winholdem customers are from the G2 group (even those with the
basic edition and speed edition), then jeff, the total percentage of
online card-sharing players is a lot larger than 8% and this just makes my
case here.

now we are willing to admit is that there may be some players in the G1
group that have decided to move to the G2 group. but we believe that if
this is so the numbers are small.

winholdem support
http://www.pokerbot.com
Post by Jeff Harper
Post by WinHoldemSupport
jeff,
let us reason this way.
let the entire online holdem population be P
let P be divided into two groups - G1 and G2
G1 are the players that do not card share when they play.
G2 are the players that do card share when they play.
just so we can have some simple numbers to work with here,
let
G1 be 90% of P
G2 be 10% of P
also let us say that these are the numbers that existed before winholdem
was released. and also by definition all winholdem customers come from
either G1 or G2.
we assert that all of the winholdem customers from the G1 group purchased
the winholdem pro, speed or basic edition; they did not purchase the team
edition.
we assert that some of the winholdem customers from the G2 group will not
purchase the team edition because of the price. (yet they will still card
share via whatever means they always have).
feel free to challenge the two assertions above (doing so only strengthens
our case).
so please explain why you believe that a disproportionally larger number
of G2 players are becoming winholdem customers and why a disproportionally
smaller number of G1 players are becoming winholdem customers,
That's easy.
G2 players are already colluders; it follows that a large percentage
of them would be interested in a cheating tool, and there are few
available.
G1 players are non-colluders and mostly non-cheaters; it does NOT
follow that a large percentage of them would be attracted to your
program.
Most will NOT seek out a program to do their thinking for them. A
large percentage will view even the manual version of your program as
"unsavory." Many will fear being branded a cheater for using even the
manual version. (The responses to your posts on here bear witness to
these sentiments.) And the G1 players who ARE attracted to the manual
version may choose one of your competitors, such as No Hands.
Jeff
Jeff Harper
Tampa, FL
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Jeff Harper
2004-06-08 02:29:57 UTC
Permalink
there is not a scientific basis for these statements
You dispute premises that I think are obvious.

I dispute the assertions put forth in their place.

It's pointless to argue this further.

Jeff

Jeff Harper
Tampa, FL

_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com

Loading...