Rob Yong and DTD..Your views

[Doobs]

In basic $$ terms so you can understand in that sense

Without a hud Player might win $20 per hour per table when 4 tabling, if he increases to 8 tables he might win $12 per hour per table, when he increases to 12 tables he might only win $6 per hour per table.

In this example. 4tabling he makes $80 per hour, 8 tabling $96 per hour, 12 tabling $72 per hour. Player should 8 table

Now with a hud he might make $20 still per hour per table when 4 tabling but $13 per table per hour when 8 tabling and $10 per table per hour when 12 tabling.

so 4tabling he makes $80 per hour still, now he makes $104 8 tabling and $120 12 tabling. So he should 12 table


Now as a "rec/fish" 1tabling v the player above. You obviously will lose less to the player when he is 12 tabling than when he is 4 tabling


Obviously the "good" player above isn't the type you are trying to attract with this venture anyway so that works in the "recs" favour, just theoretically they will lose their money quicker in the above scenario.

That doesn't really follow.

If the pro is forced to play less tables then the ratio of recs to pros improve.

By your own maths a pro playing less tables without a HUD makes less cash than one playing more tables with a HUD.  So overall each pro makes less money, so if each pro is making less money then it can't be the case that recs are losing money more quickly.  The recs must lose more money in those circumstances and that will be down to a healthier rec/pro ratio.

I think the reality will be that the pros will still have tables on the side other than the DTD cash tables, so he isn't going to be producing much better win rates than he does with a HUD anyway.  And I think some of the newer players who have done most of their improving with a HUD in place are going to find it harder to adapt than someone like you who doesn't use one, or someone like me who has done a lot of playing without one.

I don't think it is entirely clear whose argument will win, but I don't think anybody can be clearcut on this, and I really hope it succeeds.  Don't know what you can do about the multiaccounters and data miners though.  I mean just because you have a picture of somebody up on your screen it doesn't mean you are playing him.

FWIW My PC broke a couple of months ago, and I haven't reinstalled the HUD yet.  A bit lol sample size, but profits fell [ ]

snap

yep, Yours popped up just as I was posting, welcome back, you almost made an appearance in the whatever happened to.. thread.   Pity you highlighted my typo, I have edited it to "The recs must lose less money in those circumstances.

[Pinchop73]

In basic $$ terms so you can understand in that sense

Without a hud Player might win $20 per hour per table when 4 tabling, if he increases to 8 tables he might win $12 per hour per table, when he increases to 12 tables he might only win $6 per hour per table.

In this example. 4tabling he makes $80 per hour, 8 tabling $96 per hour, 12 tabling $72 per hour. Player should 8 table

Now with a hud he might make $20 still per hour per table when 4 tabling but $13 per table per hour when 8 tabling and $10 per table per hour when 12 tabling.

so 4tabling he makes $80 per hour still, now he makes $104 8 tabling and $120 12 tabling. So he should 12 table


Now as a "rec/fish" 1tabling v the player above. You obviously will lose less to the player when he is 12 tabling than when he is 4 tabling


Obviously the "good" player above isn't the type you are trying to attract with this venture anyway so that works in the "recs" favour, just theoretically they will lose their money quicker in the above scenario.

That doesn't really follow.

If the pro is forced to play less tables then the ratio of recs to pros improve.

By your own maths a pro playing less tables without a HUD makes less cash than one playing more tables with a HUD.  So overall each pro makes less money, so if each pro is making less money then it can't be the case that recs are losing money more quickly.  The recs must lose more money in those circumstances and that will be down to a healthier rec/pro ratio.

I think the reality will be that the pros will still have tables on the side other than the DTD cash tables, so he isn't going to be producing much better win rates than he does with a HUD anyway.  And I think some of the newer players who have done most of their improving with a HUD in place are going to find it harder to adapt than someone like you who doesn't use one, or someone like me who has done a lot of playing without one.

I don't think it is entirely clear whose argument will win, but I don't think anybody can be clearcut on this, and I really hope it succeeds.  Don't know what you can do about the multiaccounters and data miners though.  I mean just because you have a picture of somebody up on your screen it doesn't mean you are playing him.

FWIW My PC broke a couple of months ago, and I haven't reinstalled the HUD yet.  A bit lol sample size, but profits fell [ ]

snap

 

Edit: D'oh, thought you meant the last sentence.

[mumblesrock]

Clearly there is one massive winner in this whole saga and that is the tech companies producing and supplying HUDs and software!! they prob making hundreds of millions of pounds at a guess!!   
Hope this goes viral and every poker operator takes note and bans these types of activities!!!

[Sheriff Fatman]

I've read both of Rob's recent blogs and, to be honest, haven't really figured out what I think of the whole thing as yet.  However, I do have some concerns with some of the things he's suggesting as to how they will work in practice.

There are some elements to the online game that are fundamentally different to the live version, which means that you can't police one in the same way as the other.  In simplest terms, there is absolutely no way of knowing whether you're playing one person, or multiple people crowded around a screen sharing thoughts.  In a live game, turning around to my railers and asking for their thoughts before making a decision is not an option, but there's no way to prevent it happening online (so no point trying to do so).

The whole industry of tracking databases, HUDs, etc developed due to one of these differences - the availability of hand histories from the sites.  These are intended to provide players with some form of security regarding collusion, etc and it'd be fair to say that I wouldn't play on any site that didn't have them.  However, short of restricting the time and nature by which they can be accessed, there's no way to prevent them being utilised for other purposes, such as tracking, etc.

I'm a rec player, and I've been using PT/HEM pretty much from the outset.  The primary purpose of this is simple - it makes keeping records of my play much easier.  This far outweighs any other benefits I derive from them, and is effectively the 'show-stopper' in any argument about banning them from their use, and this is where I'm unclear on where Rob's online games stand.  If you want me to agree not to use a HUD during the session, then fair enough, no problems (although unless you have a way to enforce this, I have no confidence that others won't be saying the same and still using them).  However, if the restriction extends to saying I'm not allowed to download the hand history and import the session into PT as part of the record-keeping exercise, then the chances are I wouldn't sign up to these tables.

The conflict in this is that I 'should' be exactly the type of rec player that Rob is appealing to in these blogs, but I don't necessarily agree with him that all these things are bad things.

As for multi-tabling, one of the main reasons for me doing this is to try and hit the various milestones that the sites have in their VIP schemes (e.g. Supernova, Gold, Silver, Bronze, etc), or to clear deposit bonuses when they arise.  At very low stakes, it's virtually impossible to get anywhere in this respect without multi-tabling and the alternative is to play higher stakes and potentially outside your bankroll if there's a short-term target to be achieved.  Rush/Zoom tables have helped with this, but even for the rec player, volume of hands becomes a relevant factor at times.  There's a cost to doing this, as playing multiple tables naturally worrsens my game on each one, but if the ultimate target is a +EV proposition (e.g a bonus) then it often makes sense to do this.

This is no different, in essence, to chasing promo bonuses on online casinos using autoplay on blackjack (which used to be possible in c2005, but probably isn't nowadays).  The game itself is -EV, but provided the bonus outweighed this, then it was a great way to bankroll build with little effort at the time.

In short, not all tracking and multi-tabling activity is done by the so-called online pros, which is why I find myself 'stuck in the middle of the argument' when reading Rob's thoughts on this.

[RacePoker]

HUD's and tracking software are two very different things.

Re:HUD's

I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a HUD will show you an opponents mucked cards.

This is a definite edge for me, knowing what a guy has called you down with gives you a massive indication of how good they are and what their style is.

Regarding other stats, VPIP, %3bet, %cbet, etc .... I don't feel this gives me any sort of an edge that a 1 tabling rec can get from simply watching the action at their table.

Re: Tracking Software

Tracking software is an invaluable tool for anyone trying to improve their game, I play 6 max PLO cash and was a losing player for at least the first 9 months.  Reviewing hands, learning %'s in different situations, working out where I was losing money would have been a lot harder without access to the information Holdem manager provides.

[AlunB]

I think the detailed discussion of the relevance of HUDs and training sites, misses the main point of why this initiative is, potentially, going to achieve it's aims.
It is simply this.

Think this will get me back on DTD online to be honest.

Lots of players don't feel comfortable playing in nameless games, against people they don't know at all, who they think may be taking advantage of them by technology, or other means.
It doesn't matter if you think that some of their discomfort is unfounded, or irrational, that is just how some players feel.

It's not rocket science to recognise this, and Rob isn't the first person to try and do somethig about it (anonymous tables, ability to change SN, no regs tables etc...), but I think his ideas are pretty solid, and have a fair to better chance of being relatively successful.

Couldn't agree more. As I said its a great concept and idea but just pointing out the hud stuff is basically irrelevant to it all, other than peoples misconceptions of how it works etc.

Yes +1 from me btw, I am also keen to encourage the sentiment behind this concept, just also want to point out HUDs are not the villains people think they are.

Let's not fall into the trap of being binary on this. It's not HUDs are evil or HUDs are fine. It's a hell of a leap of logic to say that HUDs don't help good players play or get better through using them when they are learning. Even if that's just positive reinforcement of the correct decisions. And the fact that most people don't use them properly is irrelevant (same as it is with training sites) because those are the recs we're talking about anyway!

HUDs arguably turn the game into something different (tables full of rakeback grinders) and that's arguably just as big a problem for the image of poker.

I'm not a hater of HUDs or training sites by any means. Simply trying to give some more texture to the argument.

[theprawnidentity]

I have never played online cash games for all the reasons Rob and Trumper have said, the thought of HUDs, tracking software etc makes me feel a bit sick as its just a form of 'cheating', ive been playing poker for the last 5 years and have known about these devices for many years and chose not to play, im sure that many new players in this industry who feel the same and therefore chose not to play - hence contributing to the decline in this industry!!!!

Could you please give a well reasoned explanation of why you think this is the case?  How are regs using HUD's to gain such a massive edge over recreational players?  Do you feel that reg's have less of an edge in an evironment where HUD's are not in play?

[MC]

<3 DTD and everything they've done.

But these cash games are highly unlikely to be revolutionary in any way. I think they are a nice idea for DTD, and Rob's modest target seems reasonable for number of table hours. So hopefully they work out in that respect, but I don't see anything else coming of them.

What would you describe displaying Real Names, Photos and Location of all players as?

Can someone answer my question on the % of cash game pros that currently use HUDS, and why this % is going to the trouble of doing so if it it correct that they don't increase their win rate? I don't understand this?

Perhaps I used the wrong wording. It is revolutionary in that it has never been done before, but as Keys said it isn't going to change the landscape of poker in any way imo. On the other hand, giving players the choice of playing your new tables can't be a bad thing.

having reread this thread, I think what everyone agrees on is that;

a. some people believe that HUD's are an advantage and dont want to play against players who use them

2. some people believe they are not an advantage, in fact, playing more tables with tracking software could actually be less profitable in some players cases

Therefore, logic dictates that the case for banning tracking software is overwhelming as there is no upside for any parties in allowing racking software or HUD's - as far as I can see, no one actually benefits from tracking software, whether that be the  site, recreational or new players and even professional players.

Everyone wins by banning tracking software/HUD's it looks like to me.

Cheers Simon

Dubai has already illustrated that they can be good for regs by allowing them to win more $$ per hour, even if their win-rate per table is reduced. The site will benefit from the increased rake of them playing more tables, and regs playing more tables means that more tables/SNGs get started which again = more rake. Although as Keys wrote there are other variables to consider that make this whole picture more complicated.

[pleno1]

I have never played online cash games for all the reasons Rob and Trumper have said, the thought of HUDs, tracking software etc makes me feel a bit sick as its just a form of 'cheating', ive been playing poker for the last 5 years and have known about these devices for many years and chose not to play, im sure that many new players in this industry who feel the same and therefore chose not to play - hence contributing to the decline in this industry!!!!

Could you please give a well reasoned explanation of why you think this is the case?  How are regs using HUD's to gain such a massive edge over recreational players?  Do you feel that reg's have less of an edge in an evironment where HUD's are not in play?

HUDs are properly used and designed for beating OTHER REGS not recs.

[AlunB]

Dubai's contention that fish will lose less against the multi-tabling reg than the super-focused reg is convenient for the argument but not true as it isn't the whole picture. If the 4 tabling reg wins 4bb/100 and the 12 tabling reg wins 1bb/100 then it stands to reason you'd want to play the 12 tabling reg, but that fails to take account of the fact there are 3 times as many of them. If you're on a 6max table with one 4bb/100 proshark, you and 5 of your recfish mates have to pay his wages, so you pay 0.8/100 each. If instead you are on a table with 3x 1bb/100 multiregs you only have to pay 3bb/100 in wages, but you only have 2 recfish mates to share the burden, so you each pay 1bb/100. Not drastic, but if you take account of the rakehole (roughly 40bb/100 at 100nl) then in scenario 1 you each pay 44/5 = 8.8bb/100 while in scenario 2 you each pay 43/3 = 14.33bb/100, a 63% increase.

To get a true picture you have to look at a macro level, not just what happens on 1 table. The whole enterprise is funded by losing players (or more accurately, players losing), they are the numerator. Mass multi-tabling adds more reg-clones and more rakeholes, they are the denominator. HUDs and such like only increase the denominator, therefore fish have to pay more and they're bad for "the poker ecology". They aren't bad for the sites though, not even in the long term, and obviously they aren't bad for any individual pro that uses them or they would just stop using them, so I can't see any impetus for change happening in the future except government regulation. This development by DTD won't change the landscape imo, but it will provide players with a choice, which has to be a good thing.

Great post. And agreed there is no real impetus for change. They are definitely good for the sites.

[SuuPRlim]

Problem with this argument about HUD's and tracking software is that one side of the argument has never really seen/used them, and don't get me wrong I understand exactly why people are skeptical about them but for the most part people have vastly the wrong end of the stick about it.

Please Note: I'm not defending HUD's and tracking software because I make lots of money from them and want to continue doing so, I'm trying to add balance to the argument - my personal preference would be for them not to exist - as I explained in my post on the other thread

So when I said tracking software doesn't benefit me "much" what I MEANT was - I'd make more money at online poker without it, but in the current state of things I make more money by having it, and mostly at the expense of clawing back advantage the other regs using it have as opposed to directly taking that from the recreational players.

People seem to be under the impression that players using HUD's and TS (tracking software) are gaining a Zen-Like advantage and can almost see the recreational guys hole cards, this just isn't true, all it does is provide you with INFORMATION, and it's up to the player to specifically to be able to process it, and if I'm totally honest i'd say 90% of the people who use TS don't have the knowledge to really use 80-90% of the information they have aqquired, I certainly fall into that category.

Here is a screenshot of my HUD in action.

Click to see full-size image.

I have it set so it's barely visible unless I run my mouse over it (so i'm not even actually looking at it 80%+ of the time) as you can see when I run my mouse over it it displays like this;

Name and number of hands I've played with the player, 8,100 in this instance.
VP 18 PR 14 3b 7
This means he voluntarily plays 18% of hands, he raises pre-flop 14% of the time and he 3bets 7% of the time.

Basically for 6max plo this tells me he is VERY tight, so what do I do with this information, I fold to his opens more pre-flop, and I don't 3bet him with hands I would do against loser players. This information is not spectacular by any means and tbh I don't even need a HUD to tell me that.

54/46/62

These numbers mean he C-bets 54% as the PF raiser, he folds to C-bets vs the pre-flop raiser 46% of the time and in 3bet+ pots he C-bets 62% of the time. This is quite low (I use myself as a benchmark lol) so as result I raise less of his flop c-bets and bet IP when he checks a little less (he is chk-calling more as is isn't betting as often) so I'll take completely random stabs after he's checked less than vs players with a HIGHER C-Bet %.

2/2/1
This is his factor of aggression by streets - basically the ratio of time he takes an aggressive action to a passive one, this basically tells me he is quite tight, as a result when he bets 3 times I show it a lot of respect, as I would do to anyone  who is tight like he is.

So, 8,100 hands of data, $150 investment and a huge amount of tilt setting the software up and what have aI learnt about this regular player?
He is tight Pre-flop.
He Doesn't bet the flop as often as others
He Isn't prone to barreling off or late-street aggression

There is nothing here I wouldn't be able to have learnt in 3 sessions playing 1 or 2 tables with him.

Now this is a regular player I play all the time with, spose it was a recreational player with 250 hands, the stats would be almost useless (the VP/PR/3b stats would be useful for spotting if the were particulally high, for e.g if its like 76 / 44/ 18 then I know he's a bit mental, if its 76/4/1 then I know he's very passive etc but again, NOTHING i wouldn't have learnt from 20mins watching his play on 1 table)

When I say I barely even look at my HUD i'm not lying, and I wouldn't be surprised if 75% of the population who own them use them less than me, true enough though, at least once or twice a session I make a play specifically based on the information of my HUD which is where it pays for itself really. Watching gameflow, reading the dynamic is infinitely better than anything a HUD can give you.

Another example of double-edged sword of the TS... the other day I was out for dinner with a friend of mine who plays the same games and we were chatting about another regular (I know, dullards!) and we both felt like we had drastically different statistics on him (I mean drastically) next day we had a look and realised my stats on him were 34/28/13 and Dave's were 26/18/7 - Intruiged I pulled up all the 15k hands I'd played with him, looked at hands THIS year and compared to last years and realized last year he was playing the crazy 13% 3b and this year he's been very tight, so I must have played mostly with him last year and Dave mostly this year. Either a drastic change in style, someone else playing on his account IDK - had I not realised this during an idle dinner time conversation the info on my HUD might have led me to some drastically bad plays, but the fact that I have the information stored on my computer allowed me to solve the problem pretty conclusively.

before anyone starts worrying that the cut-throat regular online pro's are dissecting your turn betting frequencies over a bottle of Shiraz at dinner, this type of analysis is only possible with a large sample of hands, 700 hands even isn't even close to enough - 200 hands of blind tilt, or 200 hands of watching breaking bad in the background and not paying attention will throw the figures way, way off

So the question, Why do people buy this software if it's not really that much use to them?

1) Once in a while it's VERY useful - and at $150 an 2 hours work it only has to be useful a few times in the first month to be worth the money.

2) Other regular players are using it, some are VERY good with the information and like it or not you do really need it to try pull back some of the edge they are gaining over you.

3) We all convince ourselves we're going to learn how to use it, and become huge sharks with all the figures, hardly anyone does this (certainly not me)

4) THIS IS FAR AND AWAY IT'S PRIMARY USE FOR EVERYONE WHO OWNS IT

Click to see full-size image.

Click to see full-size image.

TO TRACK YOUR OWN RESULTS Yes, you could just look at your account balance before and after but its WAY more fun to have graphs, pretty colors, and the AdjEV (adjusted EV, how your winnings would look without the all in pots, if you have 60% equity in a 1k pot you get 600 back) stat which shows how "lucky" or "unlucky" you have been.

Few closing points

1. Tracking software is again more of a reg vs reg battling tool, not a weapon that is used to skin recreational players

2. There is no magic to it, it simply provides info you have to have the knowledge to read and interpret

3. Most of the information would be readily obvious playing 1 table and REALLY concentrating

Like I said I'd love there to be no HUD's (I love making graphs though!!) but the incentives Rob is purposing, if successful, will hopefully put an end to some much, much wider and more pressing issues than the use of HUD's and TS, so it's really frustrating watching the argument get sidetracked onto HUD's at every step, as it would be DISASTROUS if this issue were to hinder the progress these initiatives could make if we work and support the DTD online games.

[SuuPRlim]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a HUD will show you an opponents mucked cards.

This is a definite edge for me, knowing what a guy has called you down with gives you a massive indication of how good they are and what their style is.

If you were at the table, with or without a HUD you can see what your opponent call/mucked with by looking at the hand history, it's usually in the top left hand of the table and its very obviously marked so it's defo not a sharky trick that only the regs know.

[AlunB]

3. Most of the information would be readily obvious playing 1 table and REALLY concentrating[/b]

I've heard this argument a lot. It makes a MASSIVE assumption that people are willing or even capable of doing this. It's bollocks really. How can something that collects information perfectly not be an advantage?

Like I said I'd love there to be no HUD's (I love making graphs though!!) but the incentives Rob is purposing, if successful, will hopefully put an end to some much, much wider and more pressing issues than the use of HUD's and TS, so it's really frustrating watching the argument get sidetracked onto HUD's at every step, as it would be DISASTROUS if this issue were to hinder the progress these initiatives could make if we work and support the DTD online games.

I do agree with this. It's a side issue. But it's interrelated with lots of other issues so it can't just be ignored.

[RacePoker]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a HUD will show you an opponents mucked cards.

This is a definite edge for me, knowing what a guy has called you down with gives you a massive indication of how good they are and what their style is.

If you were at the table, with or without a HUD you can see what your opponent call/mucked with by looking at the hand history, it's usually in the top left hand of the table and its very obviously marked so it's defo not a sharky trick that only the regs know.

I know this now .... but had no idea before I used a HUD.

Most of my friends play poker and are good rec players. None of them knew that.

It's also very difficult to check after every single hand ....

[AlexMartin]

Targeting pro's and hud users is kinda rough. What next? You wont be allowed to run equity calculations or excel sheets looking for breakeven points? You get out what you put in, some people work harder. Poker especially ring NLH is not a recreational-freindly card-game anymore, luckily most rec's dont realise this yet.  Poker has been dying for years, banning huds wont help recreation players loss-rates, will just mean the pro will put in more effort elsewhere to achieve that edge.

My main concern still is that cheating/colluding/superusing has always been found via hand histories (by the players themselves, i dont trust any site beyond stars anymore). You stop allowing hand histories, you get criminal activity. Banning huds online would also be pretty much impossible, screen-sweeping software is so good nowadays some programmer would have one out within a month of launch.