Not many poker bot authors know the history of backgammon and how bots killed that online game. Of course, "kill" is subjective. The game still exists online, there are still live players, and there are still gammon bots. I am an excellent backgammon player, but I can't beat the bots. Needless to say, I don't play anymore online.

There is a big difference between gammon bots and poker bots: gammon bots are unbeatable and were unbeatable as soon as they came out. Poker bots are still beatable! Someday that may change, but today is not that day.

BlueSilicon, this is actually a very good point, I think one that I cover in the interview, but you already bring many of the important things to consider in your post.

It is true that backgammon for real money is kind of killed. But let's take this example. It is not bots, in term of automated play that killed backgammon, but it is rather the fact that the game got theoretically solved (= what you say, "gammon bots are unbeatable"). Once a game is theoretically solved, you get good computer advisors. So if a lot of money are at stake one can play by using a second PC, even special backgammon hardware (calculator) and click himself, or hire someone to click. It's not the automation that killed the game, it's the fact that the game got solved.

Poker is actually similar. As long as the game is not extensively studied and the algorithms are not so advanced, people will build rule based bots with little tweaks on top, some will win, many will lose, that's what happens and this is not something that endangers poker. But once solid poker programs become available as advisors or source code, and e.g. a game like HU limit is almost to this point - I believe the respective poker games will degrade significantly, just as backgammon did.

Backgammon didn't die just because of bots. Most (big) sites have ranking systems that makes good player pay more rake when facing beginners which makes it almost impossible to earn money. The system forces people to play equal skilled players and those players will loose money due to the rake when beating each other...

Can you send some info / link about that "moving" rake?
Else, you can check with marscom and his lab of bgmmon can be profitable ...

I have read marscoms backgammon thread and it was actually that thread that made me start looking into backgammon. What I wrote above was my conclusion after reading from several backgammon forums.

Seems that this article has now been published also in the german edition of the Ace magazine:

http://acemag.net/current/

Does anyone knows how we can get that single issue? I have not seen poker magazines being sold in Germany, I guess you have to have been already subsribed.

-When did you create your first bot?
2006
- Is your bot a winning poker bot?
yes
- How long has it been a winning bot?
over a year
-What is the highest limit, you have tested your bot on?
$0.5/$1
-How many hands has your bot played?
very many
- How skillful do you need to be, to create a bot?
no need to be very skilled these days
-How long did it take to create your bot? (roughly)
about 2 years
-Do you believe, that bots will ruin internet poker?
not for a long time
-Should people fear poker bots, or should they just get better a poker? –and why?
for now they are not a very big threat, most are easily beaten
-Have you ever been banned from a poker site?
yes
-Will the bot community grow/is it growing?
yes

@cow_leecher: The request for this info kind of expired quite some time ago

@everyone: Please look some posts above if you missed it. It seems that some kind of article got published also in the german AceMag magazine, I'm looking for how to get it (or if anyone has it).

Just got the last few issues of the german version of Ace Magazine, on a first glance, it looks that they have reprinted the article from the Dannish version as is. If someone wants to doublecheck the english translation that we have (as I don't really spreche deutsches), let me know.

Good refreshing attitude indiana

Since I'm sure that nothing of any illicit nature is in the article, why punish those lowly level zeros among us? Just because some of us speak a dozen languages (ok fine that's english plus a bunch of computer languages but still!).

Astro, the issue here is that I don't know if I'm able to republish this article, and not really the secrecy.

But I guess as some time passed already anyway, I can just move the translation and things here.

You have an excellent point (re: respect of copyright). That would be great if you could move it though. Perhaps a quick email to the original author for permission (or is the native language version publically available?)

any update?

OK, here it is:

Interview in JPG in Danish
http://pokerai.org/files/article/interview.jpg

TXT (translation in English by Matrix)
http://pokerai.org/files/article/acemag ... ticle1.txt

TXT (translation in English by Ocean)
http://pokerai.org/files/article/acemag ... ticle2.txt

Only the most stupid will continue playing I think.
Any good player will have a hard time showing a profit, since the bots will milk every big fish around.

You mean only the bots + fishes will continue playing, and the human pros will stop? I don't see this situation as a bad one.

But this will not happen. There are bots since years, and we have sites that care 0% (don't care at all) about bots, they are quite packed with bots, but are still softer and more profitable than PokerStars or anysite that says they care about bots.

Yes exactly. That is pretty much how backgammon for money is rigth now.
But most winning humans are not pros of course.

See above. I don't see this soon. And it's not like that in backgammon - as over there you also have pros that use advisors to play. So it is a good example, actually. It shows that not the bots will lead to such situation, but the advnacement in solving the respective game.

Will anyone play chess for money online? Assume there were no chess bots. Still - noone would play chess for money, because everyone can install chessmaster on the PC next to it. Even the fishes will get this idea.

The main learning is that once a game become sufficiently solved, and these algorithms become sufficiently well known - the game will be challenged, and there is no way to avoid that, neither to slow it down. And this has absolutely nothing to do with bots.

Indiana, you almost changed my opinion.