Rob Yong and DTD..Your views

[DTD-ACES]

A new player would probably lose his money faster on DTD with no huds and no tracking software than on other sites. Assuming a good player is playing solely on DTD at the same time.

Reason being you are reducing the number of tables the latter could play which increases his winrate. So a "good" player playing a maximum of 4tables without huds/tracking software will win more on each table than he would compared to if he was playing 12 tables+ with huds and software. Therefore the "fish/rec" will lose his money faster because of this than if he was playing on other sites where the "good" player would be playing 12+tables

I really like the idea and concept behind it, and preventing collusion, multi accounting, blocking tables, excessive bumhunting is defo a great idea but its a different argument to the HUD/Pokertracker one. But if "Rec/fish" want to play people without these then maybe there is a market for it, even tho its gonna cost them more money longterm.

Sorry, why would a pro grinder play 12-24 tables then? Im really confused now

[Dubai]

Just an example. Player A wins 4bb/100 when 4 tabling without a hud. Without a hud he can 12 table but only wins 1bb/100. Its better for him to 4table here. But with a hud he might win 2bb/100 when 12 tabling. Now its obviously better for him to 12 table.

[Dubai]

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.

[pleno1]

I have a question.

What's the under/over on Pleno mentioning or posting a link to pokerstrategy again within the next 10 posts?

Okay. What % of PokerStratgey players use HUD's?

I lolled.

Lol at yourselves you obviously have no idea how one of the biggest and influential, if not THE biggest and influential poker sites work.

Pretty sad really!

I was actively trying to discuss but its just the same stuff around here.

[AndrewT]

If you're a rec player looking for a fun game, playing against a load of grinders playing 11/8 may not be that bad for your winrate as playing against five, one-tabling, super-focused, 'Newcastle just won so I'm content', Plenos, who can soul-read you before you've even seen your cards, but it's surely a lot less fun.

Poker is supposed to be fun. That's why there are more people playing Facebook poker than on Stars.

[Dubai]

Yes I agree, and that's the aspect that makes sense and how it should be marketed, particularly with a small and loyal player base. Just saying the whole "Huds are costing me money when I play" argument is a myth

[DTD-ACES]

A new player would probably lose his money faster on DTD with no huds and no tracking software than on other sites. Assuming a good player is playing solely on DTD at the same time.

Reason being you are reducing the number of tables the latter could play which increases his winrate. So a "good" player playing a maximum of 4tables without huds/tracking software will win more on each table than he would compared to if he was playing 12 tables+ with huds and software. Therefore the "fish/rec" will lose his money faster because of this than if he was playing on other sites where the "good" player would be playing 12+tables

I really like the idea and concept behind it, and preventing collusion, multi accounting, blocking tables, excessive bumhunting is defo a great idea but its a different argument to the HUD/Pokertracker one. But if "Rec/fish" want to play people without these then maybe there is a market for it, even tho its gonna cost them more money longterm.

Sorry, why would a pro grinder play 12-24 tables then? Im really confused now

This is great feedback actually. Can someone answer this?

[jakally]

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.

[pleno1]

for full transparency and because thread went the other way.

I would just like to say I think Rob is great, he is a breath of fresh air and if only 1% of the industry followed him in the way he trys to at least make a difference it would be a very very good thing. He is brave and stands up for what he believes in, HUGE respect in that regard.

Regarding pokertracker etc, I really dont see stars or the other sites ever changing. Pokertracker are actually the official sponsor for the EPT this year lol.

[DaveShoelace]

A new player would probably lose his money faster on DTD with no huds and no tracking software than on other sites. Assuming a good player is playing solely on DTD at the same time.

Reason being you are reducing the number of tables the latter could play which increases his winrate. So a "good" player playing a maximum of 4tables without huds/tracking software will win more on each table than he would compared to if he was playing 12 tables+ with huds and software. Therefore the "fish/rec" will lose his money faster because of this than if he was playing on other sites where the "good" player would be playing 12+tables

I really like the idea and concept behind it, and preventing collusion, multi accounting, blocking tables, excessive bumhunting is defo a great idea but its a different argument to the HUD/Pokertracker one. But if "Rec/fish" want to play people without these then maybe there is a market for it, even tho its gonna cost them more money longterm.

Sorry, why would a pro grinder play 12-24 tables then? Im really confused now

This is great feedback actually. Can someone answer this?

Simon is someone messing about with your forum account? People keep answering the questions you ask, here is the most recent one:

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.

[Dubai]

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.

[DaveShoelace]

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.

[BigAdz]

As someone that stopped playing online for two reasons

a, I knew I was getting left behind because I wouldn't/couldn't put the work in

b, when i did play, I felt(my perception anyway) that whenever I was in a tricky pot and loads of time was being taken by the other player, he was referring to HUD stats.

I don't mind being soul read by better players, but when its some geek just reading numbers and not making his own decisions that was time to call it a day.

As I said perception is the key, and for all the new kids coming in I wonder how many of the old school guys, now as old as 30/40(!) like my group of mates who all used to play 20 hours a week, don't bother any more for the same reason?

Might even sign up myself.

[pleno1]

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.

100%!!

As someone that stopped playing online for two reasons

a, I knew I was getting left behind because I wouldn't/couldn't put the work in

b, when i did play, I felt(my perception anyway) that whenever I was in a tricky pot and loads of time was being taken by the other player, he was referring to HUD stats.

I don't mind being soul read by better players, but when its some geek just reading numbers and not making his own decisions that was time to call it a day.

As I said perception is the key, and for all the new kids coming in I wonder how many of the old school guys, now as old as 30/40(!) like my group of mates who all used to play 20 hours a week, don't bother any more for the same reason?

Might even sign up myself.

he probably looked, then realised he didnt have enough sample then had no idea how you had actually been playing and made a bad decision! heh.

[pleno1]

But if this is the perception of HUDs from the recreational guys out there IM DELIGHTED that the topic has arised.

If its putting you off poker then it shouldnt! Seriously. It really isnt the demon you imagine and the guys will not be able to have a significant edge over you. As I said previoulsy if your playing less tables without a HUD you will have an advantage over the mass tabling guys.