blonde poker forum

Another article about banning Online Poker software, this time on Bluff

Beginning another thread as the "Rob Yong and DTD" thread got heavily into a lot of this and it probably needs its own area rather than being DTD-centric

The opening part of the article reads

"As Phil Galfond and Rob Yong call for the need to make wholesale changes in order to preserve the future of online poker, Michael Copley of PokerWinners argues that banning tracking software and databasing websites could be for the benefit of all.

 As poker players it’s our job to maximise our profitability and to find every ethical edge we can gain. It’s hardly surprising, then, that the majority of serious poker players use some form of poker software, such as Hold’em Manager, PokerTracker, SharkScope, PokerTableRatings or TableScan Turbo, as a way to maximise their edges.

 Through my position as MD of PokerStaking.com, I spend hours each day analysing players through Hold’em Manager to identify leaks or using SharkScope to identify strengths and weaknesses in game selection, as well using a HUD display in my own games to increase awareness of my opponents’ action. Contrary to popular belief, it takes hundreds of hours to learn the full benefit of these tools and only a few will ever learn to use them effectively.

 You are probably expecting me, then, to argue the benefits of these tools and to fight to keep them, but actually I believe it may be for the greater good to move towards a more purist poker world."



www.bluffeurope.com/PokerMagazine/Levelling-the-Field_147.aspx

God this is tilting.

Merging stacks tho....

As a 'rec', I'm not sure where I stand with this one. I'm all for analysis of hands/stats etc post-play to aid improvement, which seems the main argument put forward for retaining such software. At the same time, I can't see how pro's do not gain at least a marginal edge by using poker software correctly in-game to analyse opponent's previous patterns, whether it be how regularly they raise/3-bet/fold on flop/turn/river/enter hands, etc... the margins of success can be very fine in poker.

For those who use poker software regularly, how 'tilting' would it be to not have use of em? If it has the argued minimal impact players like Dave have suggested, why is it important to keep them? Say there was a consensus that most poker players preferred not to have poker software and it could be demonstrated it would encourage/retain newbies and weaker players (a lot of assumptions there I know!), what's the big deal in binning it?

I'll await Alex Goulder's next video installment to demonstrate what they really can do ...

I mean for me personally I'd feel absolutely fine without software, I very rarely check postflop stats and use it as more of a guide on new opponents. I know the tendencies of every h/l player who I regularly play with, but without my hud I would struggle to play 12 tables because I wouldn't have easy access showing when someone is playing 50/2 or 6/4 for example.  I pretty much try to have a very solid basic game which I use vs all opponents and by the end of the session I have less tables I can focus and try to exploit my opponents. On cash tables I tend to play a much smaller number of tables so rarely bother with a hud. Most of my cash game volume this year has been in 8game/horse/6O which have few games that are properly trackable.

Would be so tilted in Galfonds spot to even be associated with this. He proposed some great practical changes to be made by the pros to make the games more accessible to recreational players and his article has been hijacked by Team DeLorean who want to take us all back to '05 where knowing what beats what made you a winner at online poker.

Do people multi table zoom / speed games?

8 at a time

If that's really true I don't get it.

I mean you're either involved in a hand or moving on to a new hand anyway.

Its to kill time for those annoying scenarios where you are in the big blind and some sod takes a full 2 seconds to think about what they are doing before its your turn.

I tend to 8 table zoom and do a rubix cube at the same time, and watch netflix.

Lol.

Ha!

Nothing like enjoying the moment, eh?

Question.

In your entire online poker life, how many times (to the nearest million), have you seen, after some unfortunate sod has disconnected, this in the chat box?

ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz

I don't get cross at poker, or "bad beats" or all that nonsense, but when people type that I can't help but think what sad, unoriginal, unthinking souls they must be. I mean, really, is that the best they can come up with?

They must be spiffing table company in real life.

ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz

Waiting time between hands. Or lets say you bet on the flop on one table and a guy is tanking you have all of the others. Waiting in the bb. Or simply waiting on the button to potentially steal with any two cards but not twidlling your thumbs.

So do the extra hands you get make up for the inability to concentrate fully on one table?

its all about hourly i guess. you can play about with the maths.

if you play 100nl and play 1 table (250 hands per hour) and you win rate is 2bb/100 then you will make 5 dollars per hour.

If you play 100nl and play 4 tables (225 hands per hour) and you win at 1bb/100 then you will make 9 dollars an hour

There isn't a lot to concentrate on though Red. Zoom is sooo fluid with constant table changes that just playing one table doesn't increase your observations that much imo. Just playing hands and situations.

As pleno stated most of the waiting is either when you are BB or when you are waiting to see if all others fold so you can steal in position

That makes sense.

Just out of curiosity, would you say that those win rates are poor, average, or about as good as it gets?

if anybody can win in 2013 then its good I guess.

I suggested on another thread:

I understand. It just seems to me that when I play I'm either deciding what to do in a situation or moving on to the next hand.

Mind you, I can't fart and chew gum at the same time.

Do tracking software, HUDs etc. afford "pro"s a bigger edge online than re-entry on multipe days affords them in live events?

From my point of view a staked pro who is able to fire six bullets at a tourney in which I and many others are only prepared to fire one or possibly two has an enormous edge, especially when he almost certainly has considerably more ability than me and my ilk in the first place.

If this is true then what is the difference?

Isn't that balanced out by the fact that the tournament offers you more value that it does him?

DimSum77 made this point about re-entry a while back in a thread about merging of stacks. His argument was that the re-entry option was much more disadvantageous for the recs than the merge option because effectively we had to beat the pro's more than once.
Re-entry appears to be here to stay though and strangely, despite accepting his argument is valid, I still feel less at ease with merged stacks than I do with re-entry.

As for HUDs, good luck with knowing my style based on the volume I play online.

This argument is so frustrating to me, as no-one really listen/reads my posts cos they are too long lol but this isn't REALLY what I said.

1. HUDs/Tracker software is very useful IF i) you know how to use all of the stats ii) you have a significant sample of hand on someone. The existence of HUD's and tracking software impacts the casual recreational player, imo, very minimally.

If they were to be removed completely would that make a better enviroment for online poker? Yes absolutley. Would it solve the problems that are really affecting the recreational player pool at the moment, imo, NO

The main result of a ban of tracking software right now would be un-noticable for the casual players, and the "good" regular players who stick the rules will get fucked by the slimy pro's if they find a way round this ban. This is my main concern with a ban on tracking software

2. Seems like there is a bit of hysteria about banning these HUDs right now because people have it in their heads you gain some Zen-Like advantage from having one, so I'm well up for them being banned as it will be conforting news to the casual players but it's (imo ofc) NOT going to solve the immediate problems.

3. Rob's scheme with the real name display is the beginning of a change that WILL be very positive for online poker and is directly targetting the main problems, the scummy behavior that exists is a lot easier to commit behind the annominity of an online screen name, none of that will go on in Rob's cash games online because you know who the person is, and he will take action against anyone damaging the spirit of the game (he's proven this) Yes, banning HUDs/TS fits in nicely with the ethos of these changes and I am all for it I just don't believe its any where near a solution on it's own.

PUNISH THE GUYS WHO RUIN ONLINE POKER WITH THEIR BEHAVIOR, AND YOU NATURALLY REWARD THE GUYS WHO SUPPORT THE GAMES POSITIVELY
That's how we'll save online poker. HUDs and tracking software are in the grand scheme pretty irrelevant.

tl;dr

mod of the year, shoe in for the advent calendar.

Sense of humour bypass still holding up I see Patrick.

Or should I call you member of the year? (modern definition)

Impossible question to answer really as they are so very different. I guess the difference is that in re-entry its easy to profit from that, if you've been busted from a comp in level 3 and expect to still make money buying in again at level 4 then walk to the cash desk, hand your money over and you have snap made money.

You don't just buy the tracking software and instantly profit from it, you have to set it up and learn how to use it etc and even once you've learnt how to use it there is loads of ways to mis-use or be mis-informed by it.

lol.

Great post dave, especially the 1st point - which is what a lot of people fail to understand.

btw if anyone would like to SEE my points highlighted in a practical light, you can sweat me playing online for 1hr one day and 95% gte you'll see exactly what online poker's biggest problems are.

in fact I might make a video.

 8h

I <3 to watch your video please mate . Lots to learn from the master

Are we tailking poker or ladies of the night?

can there be tables that don't allow it on sites that offer it on the normal tables?


both options win win.

Ha, these ladies will also operate in the day #flexible

I bet they are #gymnastics

I lol'd at Red's post

I lol'd at Pleno's post


and then I rolled my eyes and sighed at your riposte Tom. Can you not just let this go? Far more important things happening in the world than your ongoing spat with Pleno.

I'm happy to let it go. In fact I had done so and was conversing with Patrick pleasantly when he decided to have another pop.

That would be true if all parties were of equal ability.

but there are plenty of serial re-entry'ers (of seemingly lesser ability) who (variance aside) are most often just increasing the prize pool for the benefit of a one bullet player?

I htink it could be argued both ways, positive and negative impacts.

You certainly have a point and whilst it can be argued from both sides I've not heard one pro say that he/she didn't prefer re-entries as it obviously increases their edge over the field in much the same (albeit different) way that they can gain an edge over the field with online tracking software which btw amateur/rec. players are equally free to use should they so desire.

Stato and co having 5 entries into comps is much worse for poker than HUDs. People who are going for merges are fantastic for the playerpool but having the bigger winners punt x3 or w/e is obviously bad for everyone. This is somewhat balanced by some of the bigger gamblers or guys who try and merge due to amount of satellite comps etc. I never play a $162 on ftp that has re-entry as I know all the strong players will take 3 shots and the weakest players are more likely to have 1. I think it is all about finding balance and for the most part the deepstacks seem spot on. Things like big UKIPT events definitely have more prestige because of the lack of re-entry though, imo.

Stato having any entries into comps is bad for poker. Ban Stato imo, he's ruining the game, it's just not fair.

Anyone who confidently slowrolls 88 should be banned.

I don't think the re-entry thing is really relevant to this discussion, because its so many miles from the topic.

Yes, re-entries are going to benefit the winning players in a field, however, it's gambling and the better gamblers will have a financial edge over worse gambling there is nothing we can do about this, and this isn't what we are discussing, we're discussing how to make (online) poker a more pleasant platform for casual and recreational players. I don't actually think that r-entries de-value the experience of a tournament for this player pool, I actuallly think the fact it makes the prizepool bigger and you're playing for more money might add to the experience, it's only one tournament, once right?

There isn't really a relevant comparison from that and HUD's that I can see.

I was looking at this in a slightly different way. We were discussing in the pub the other day about Dec 2014 when the point of consumption tax comes in to play for online gaming in the UK.

Operators will have to apply for Gambling Commission remote licenses and adhere to GC statutes and rules too I would imagine. Now I honestly take my hat off to multi table grinders who utilise HUD but I can't see GC liking it too much. Operators could be forced to do as much as they can to stop players using them.

Does anyone else think this may happen?  It could put UK grinders in a tough spot.

I doubt it. Most of the rake is paid by the grinders after all. Bots are allowed on betfair

As individuals, yes, a "grinder" pays more than any individual little guy. Collectively, no, the "grinders" don'y pay most rake. The biggest slice of the Margin pie comes from small & medium recreational players. There are a LOT of small & medium limit players out there. They are VERY important to the poker economy, and to the grinders. Without them, it's all over baby. Look after them.