I'm not sure conflating HuDs and Sharky/Cartels is going to help anyone.

They are two very different issues in my mind, and I don;t think trying t cover everything off in 1 thread is going to work.

Based on what I was told by several HU regs, a blind matchmaking system would force a lot of regs to step down in buy in levels. There appear to be several skill levels at each buy in level, and not every reg can beat every level. They use sharky to avoid the regs they know can't beat them, while concentrating on the players they can beat. It's effectively organised bumhunting, but it's how HU poker seems to work.
The edges are so small in HU SnGs that player grab what they can to make a profit. It was the same pre Sharky, but the program has just automated the process, and removed the option for players without the software to game select in any meaningful way. They only way that no-one is going to be inconvenienced (in my opinion) is for Stars to implement the Sharky functionality into the client, allowing all players to work from the same point. Stars would also make the process a lot more transparent, which compared to the current situation can only be a good thing.

Following my article, certain elements in the poker world were less than happy to read it. Few are vocal about changing the status quo because they have the very real fear of losing their livelihood if they do.

Your excellent piece was heavily and belatedly edited.

Did someone from, say, Croatia, suggest you may wish to edit out any errors?.

While that is certainly a possible result, I'm going to keep my mouth shut in public on that particular topic.

Following my article, certain elements in the poker world were less than happy to read it. Few are vocal about changing the status quo because they have the very real fear of losing their livelihood if they do.

I can tell you that PokerStars are aware of the situation, and actually have Sharky on a list of approved programs. To actually ban sharky, they would apparently need to ban pretty much all scripts, making any action against sharky difficult to target.

Hey Guys,

I'm Rob, said author of the Flushdraw article. I'm happy to try and answer any questions about the situation, but I've not really looked at it much since I wrote that article a few months ago.

This is all a lot of arguing over degrees of advantage.

You have an advantage from having a HUD, everyone has accepted that, people are wasting a lot of time arguing about how much.
Pros make more money overall 12 tabling with a HUD than they would 2 tabling without one.
If pros make less money, recs lose less money.  
Recs losing less money, or losing it more slowly, is what Rob is trying to achieve.

This is the absolute crux of it, If there is a flaw in this argument then nobody has pointed it out yet.
[/quote]

Not going to argue against a good player playing 12 tables with at 50NL is more likely to make more money than a player without a HuD playing only 2 tables at the same limits. But a pro isn't going to play those limits with only 2 tables as an option, and is going to  move up as far as they can in order to make the same profit playing less tables.  That's 10 tables less at 50nl, and a lot of sites can't support that.

Also, why is there a serious argument against about pros beating recreational players? You wouldn't be complaining about a premiership team beating on from your local Sunday league. Better players are going to win more money, that's the way the game works. By artificially "protecting" rec players in the way suggested, you are both doing them a disservice, as well as ruining a game where the main advantage is still skill.
Rec players are never going to get better if they aren't challenged, and a game where you are not challenged loses it's appeal really quickly. A good example is some computer games where players get bored really quickly, and never play again. Poker doesn't have that, because there are no artificial barriers, the only barrier to getting better is your own skill and the time you put in.

Please don't turn online poker into easy mode. It's a jungle out there, and I for one think the evolution of the game needs that to stay.

Ok, a few quick caveats to my post,
First, I'm a professional Poker Journalist, and I've been playing poker for longer than I care to remember. Second, I've used a HuD ever since I took online poker even remotely seriously.

HuDs are a valuable tool for every player, regardless of how seriously they take poker, but they do not impact individual hands, or the outcome of those hands in any significant way. I know that sounds like a contradiction, but I'll try to explain.
All of the information a HuD collects while you play is information that is available to you already. A player at a live cash game will already have a very good idea about who is raising pots, and who is open limping. You get to know the table as you play, and you may play against the same players week in and week out, so you should have a better understanding of their game. That's what the HuD does online, it captures that information. Where a HuD really comes into it's own is to allow a player to sit at more tables, and not be at a serious disadvantage against the player who is sitting at only one. If anyone here has ever tried to multitable without a HuD, you know what I'm talking about, it's close to impossible to do it and stay as a winning player (some people I know can do it with 4 tables, but they are freaks).
People have been talking about sample sizes, and they are right to do so. For the length of most recreational players sessions, they are going to play maybe 1-200 hands at a single table tops. From that, you can only really take into consideration PFR (Pre Flop Raise) VPiP (Voluntary Put in Pot) and maybe 3 bet %. Any half decent player is going to have that information for a table playing the same amount of hands live. Given the size of most online player pools, you may never see most of these players again at your table, especially if you are only playing 1 at a time. HuDs have a very limited impact on any single hand.
Where a HuD really comes into it's own is away from the table. When you review your game (and any good grinder is going to spend a lot of time analysing their game) the statistics from a HuD can show you where you are losing money. Do you 3 bet light too often? Do you call out of position in three bet pots too often? Are you folding too often to aggressive players? This tool can really help analyse a players game, and the only information it uses is freely available Hand Histories.

The only thing a banning of HuDs would really cause is a drop in volume for players, and grinders having to play at a higher level to make rent. Volume is where the money is in this game, for both the player, and the operator. This actually hurts recreational players. It's going to be really hard to find a $0.01/$0.02 game on some sites, because all of the Russian multi table grinders are gone. The backbone of the online market is still the grinder, they hold open the games. the flesh however is the recreational players, who attach to that backbone.

Players who don't understand HuDs are understandably scared of them, but they really aren't the bad part of online poker. Collusion, poor operators, and unsustainable rake are all much more important, but because they aren't discusser out in the open, they get a lot less press.

There are issues with the market, but HuDs are not part of the problem.

This is an excellent post.

Just saw how many typos are in that... *Hangs head in shame*

And Pleno, it's not Matt. Some people may recognise my username, but I'm trying to fly under the radar if I can...

Ok, a few quick caveats to my post,
First, I'm a professional Poker Journalist, and I've been playing poker for longer than I care to remember. Second, I've used a HuD ever since I took online poker even remotely seriously.

HuDs are a valuable tool for every player, regardless of how seriously they take poker, but they do not impact individual hands, or the outcome of those hands in any significant way. I know that sounds like a contradiction, but I'll try to explain.
All of the information a HuD collects while you play is information that is available to you already. A player at a live cash game will already have a very good idea about who is raising pots, and who is open limping. You get to know the table as you play, and you may play against the same players week in and week out, so you should have a better understanding of their game. That's what the HuD does online, it captures that information. Where a HuD really comes into it's own is to allow a player to sit at more tables, and not be at a serious disadvantage against the player who is sitting at only one. If anyone here has ever tried to multitable without a HuD, you know what I'm talking about, it's close to impossible to do it and stay as a winning player (some people I know can do it with 4 tables, but they are freaks).
People have been talking about sample sizes, and they are right to do so. For the length of most recreational players sessions, they are going to play maybe 1-200 hands at a single table tops. From that, you can only really take into consideration PFR (Pre Flop Raise) VPiP (Voluntary Put in Pot) and maybe 3 bet %. Any half decent player is going to have that information for a table playing the same amount of hands live. Given the size of most online player pools, you may never see most of these players again at your table, especially if you are only playing 1 at a time. HuDs have a very limited impact on any single hand.
Where a HuD really comes into it's own is away from the table. When you review your game (and any good grinder is going to spend a lot of time analysing their game) the statistics from a HuD can show you where you are losing money. Do you 3 bet light too often? Do you call out of position in three bet pots too often? Are you folding too often to aggressive players? This tool can really help analyse a players game, and the only information it uses is freely available Hand Histories.

The only thing a banning of HuDs would really cause is a drop in volume for players, and grinders having to play at a higher level to make rent. Volume is where the money is in this game, for both the player, and the operator. This actually hurts recreational players. It's going to be really hard to find a $0.01/$0.02 game on some sites, because all of the Russian multi table grinders are gone. The backbone of the online market is still the grinder, they hold open the games. the flesh however is the recreational players, who attach to that backbone.

Players who don't understand HuDs are understandably scared of them, but they really aren't the bad part of online poker. Collusion, poor operators, and unsustainable rake are all much more important, but because they aren't discusser out in the open, they get a lot less press.

There are issues with the market, but HuDs are not part of the problem.