Rob Yong and DTD..Your views

[Pawprint]

The discussion about HUD's makes for an interesting read, but this is starting to cloud the main point of the blogs.

Rob has stated that he is falling out of live with the poker industry.  From all the responses, it would appear that no one wants to see that happen.

He has stated that he believes wholeheartedly in the new club cash tables and the benefits that they could bring to providing recreational players with a safe, trustworthy environment for them to play a bit of cash poker once or twice a week without feeling they are sat in a shark infested tank.

Those that use HUD's and are saying they make little difference.  No problem with that view, these tables won't let you use HUD's, but as you say, no real advantage anyway, so play poker and support what Rob is trying to achieve.

Those recreational players that have been put off by playing online cash because of the perceived unfair playing field, up against all those regular players with thier HUD's and hand databases, no problem either.  These tables ban HUD's and you can play as little or as much cash poker you like at all levels knowing you are winning or losing based on the ability of yourself and the others at the table (And soon you will know exactly who they are), and of course the luck of the cards.

I can understand regular players that make a decent living from online poker not perhaps switching their entire bankroll over the DTD and exclusviely playing on there, but for recreational players that are making a choice about where to play their poker, these Club Cash Tables have got to be a really strong USP, and everyone should do their bit to ensure the message heard by as many players as possible.

I can't see a reason why any player would not register and play one night a week, once a fortnight, or arrange with a bunch of mates to play some online cash once a month.  It's a small ask in my opinion, and the UK poker scene would be less favourable without these guys running DTD and pushing the boundaries.

[AlexMartin]

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?

It collects information PERFECTLY yes, but it doesn't collect PERFECT information. As proved in the example I gave of myself and my friend both with 12-15,000 hand samples on the same player and DRASTICALLY different information, obviously a very extreme case, but the point stands. PERFECT information is gethered by you sat there, watching you man play, and is really only available (or close to) in live poker.

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.

the stakes recs are allowed to play at is the biggest protection they have (hence party being capped at 1knl ring). Pros making more money is not a direct relation to recs losing less. Winrates are small in 2013, bonuses and rakeback are a huge factor.

[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?

Really disagree here. One of the main problems with 1 tabling is you get paranoid.

FFSSSSSSS this skandi keeps 3betting me. Put stubborn hat on and not fold to him anymore etc.

So often I see people typing in chat box

"you are so fkn crazy"
"mr bluffer"
"bluffing again"
"you never bluff"
"obviously got it you havent played a hand all night"

Whenever I search these guys they are ALWAYS one tabling. Its a really really common thing.

If somebody isnt capable of realizing somebody is overly aggresive when they are 1 tabling then they will never ever win at poker anyway and the advantage that the reg currently holds with the HUD doesnt matter. The main point we are talking about is non drooler recs vs regs and the non droolers definitely notice things when 1 tabling. Its their night of fun, they have their glasses on, their hoody on and they are one tabling the night away.

You disagree with me?

yes and rugby is shit!

Not as shit as Newcastle United

I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make here, but let's not sidetrack this debate further.

[Hippy80]

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.

[AlunB]

Just saw how many typos are in that...

Poker journalist? Story checks out.

[scotty77]

HUDs aren't the problem that people make out.  Its an issue that is way blown out of proportion.

Sky don't allow HUDs or tracking software.  Someone actually created a working HUD and within a few days they moved and did a very simple thing (on the face of it, I'm sure it was a bit more complex to get to work behind the scenes) that stopped it from working.

But you log into Sky peak time and you will still see 4 regs each table all playing between 8/12 tables (despite the fact that everyone goes LOL Sky software I can't 3 table on there).  

This is a case on all limits and a lot of them clearly aren't 'professional' as in they have a normal day job but supplement the income with earning a few hundred a month on the side tax free online.

For DTD cash games to be a success the major thing that it will need to achieve is to find a way to massively incentivise recreational players to play short handed.  

The whole reg/rec/pro debate has just focused mainly on the bad side of the pros in the games but the fact is that pros are needed in the game to start and maintain games.

At say 500nl a rec sits at a brand new table then the table is snap full within a few minutes.  At 50nl at a new table then that a rec sits at by himself and the pros/regs/grinders don't notice because they are already on loads of tables.  The only time a pro/reg will play shorthanded is when they are the ones who start the tables.

The GP promotion is excellent for that as it gives everyone a goal to keep grinding.  In the future to try and maintain and build on this tho DTD need to come up with a promo that will give some long term benefits for playing an 8 handed table at 3/4 players or less.  Once you have 3/4 players always online then it becomes so easy to have active tables that fill.  

Recreational players just don't like waiting around when they want to have a spin, and especially on iPoker where you have the normal cash tables and casino games on top to tempt them away, this is gonna be your biggest hurdle.  Confident that Rob and the team can find a way of meeting the goals outlined in the blog tho!

[scotty77]

Also a lot of the issues that arise from online poker is the anonymity of it all.

The fact that DTD are going to integrate real names onto the cash tables, along with the Skype support and potential real life consequences for people who get out of line with their behaviour at the tables is gonna be a far great factor in getting people grinding on there than banning HUDs ever will.

[SuuPRlim]

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.

This isn't what he's trying to achieve IMO. Certainly not directly, creating a friendlier and more welcoming environment for recs by ousting the reg players whose shady antics are ruining the online poker scene for everyone.

Setting out with your objective to just stop weaker players losing as much seems very backward.

[AlunB]

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.

This isn't what he's trying to achieve IMO. Certainly not directly, creating a friendlier and more welcoming environment for recs by ousting the reg players whose shady antics are ruining the online poker scene for everyone.

Setting out with your objective to just stop weaker players losing as much seems very backward.

Nobody gambles at a casino because they think they can beat the games long term. But they at least want the illusion of being able to win and they want it to be fun.

I've long said that viewing poker as gambling and not as a sport is much better viewpoint for the long term health of the game.

[Pawprint]

It isn't going to be Rob and the team that find a way of meeting the goals outlined in the blog.

This is about players making a choice to support the tables and play a bit.

It's about players getting together and arranging to play a regular cash game once a week online, so tables fill up, and not just doing this because DTD are awarding £60 seats for every £25 raked.

I just don't see much of a downside for recreational players to choose to play on DTD Online.  Throw in the potential of signing up to the DTD Sponsorship Pounds, and it really is a great offering.

[SuuPRlim]

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.

This isn't what he's trying to achieve IMO. Certainly not directly, creating a friendlier and more welcoming environment for recs by ousting the reg players whose shady antics are ruining the online poker scene for everyone.

Setting out with your objective to just stop weaker players losing as much seems very backward.

Nobody gambles at a casino because they think they can beat the games long term. But they at least want the illusion of being able to win and they want it to be fun.

I've long said that viewing poker as gambling and not as a sport is much better viewpoint for the long term health of the game.

Yeh for sure, gambling is gambling some gamblers are better gamblers than others, but a fair and respectful platform to gamble on  is what we should offer.

The point I'm trying to make in regards to HUDs is that the big victims of the ban is going to be the "good" (in terms of behaviour) regular players, and the regulars who behave shadily will have another opportunity to exploit the good guys. Stamping those guys out and rewarding the good behaviour is what will make the improvement in online poker Rob (and all of us) want.

[millidonk]

2014 I want DTD cash tables to have video integration so I can watch the tears role down people's faces when I get there.


Down with anonymity, Down with HUDs, Down with the trumpets.

[AlexMartin]

2014 I want DTD cash tables to have video integration so I can watch the tears role down people's faces when I get there.


Down with anonymity, Down with HUDs, Down with the trumpets.

awesome

[AlunB]

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.

This isn't what he's trying to achieve IMO. Certainly not directly, creating a friendlier and more welcoming environment for recs by ousting the reg players whose shady antics are ruining the online poker scene for everyone.

Setting out with your objective to just stop weaker players losing as much seems very backward.

Nobody gambles at a casino because they think they can beat the games long term. But they at least want the illusion of being able to win and they want it to be fun.

I've long said that viewing poker as gambling and not as a sport is much better viewpoint for the long term health of the game.

Yeh for sure, gambling is gambling some gamblers are better gamblers than others, but a fair and respectful platform to gamble on  is what we should offer.

The point I'm trying to make in regards to HUDs is that the big victims of the ban is going to be the "good" (in terms of behaviour) regular players, and the regulars who behave shadily will have another opportunity to exploit the good guys. Stamping those guys out and rewarding the good behaviour is what will make the improvement in online poker Rob (and all of us) want.

Trouble is we've all spent years telling everyone that you can win big money at poker, just put some work in and you can win. Skill game! Trouble is we sort of forgot the zero sum game bit. We can all win!*

Casinos get rich by making losers happy. Poker needs to do the same.



*warning only 5% of you will actually win

[AndrewT]

Pro poker players are like the hot girls who go to nightclubs and sit by the bar drinking water until they get invited over to one of the VIP tables to share some champagne.

The club don't make any money from them, but they need some of them in there so the place is busy when the guys who are going to drop the money turn up.

If the girls started bringing in little machines to help them quickly work out which of the guys had the biggest wallet, so they could immediately pounce upon his table, and drink his champagne as quickly as they can, and brag loudly to the other girls about how they're totally crushing this guy's wallet, then the men are going to start having less fun and may not come back.

Trouble is we've all spent years telling everyone that you can win big money at poker, just put some work in and you can win. Skill game! Trouble is we sort of forgot the zero sum game bit. We can all win!*

Casinos get rich by making losers happy. Poker needs to do the same.

Exactly - it's like these nightclubs advertising 'Come here and everyone can drink free champagne'. Won't actually work. [/tortuousanalogy]