"The Online games are not fair anymore"

[Rexas]

Rex...that example is results orientated only if you take in to consideration the opponent folde/calld. I'm only interested in the fact that EvilPie shoved due to information given to him by software giving him an ,in my opinion, unfair advantage.

The ONLY reason he needed that software to give him that information is because he wasn't paying attention to the table he was playing at. If you're paying attention then you have exactly the same information he does! HUDs only record what is seen, they don't tell you what to do and they don't give you any information that other players can't see. In this example, if I was playing that table and watching it WITHOUT A HUD, I would have EXACTLY the same information and be able to make EXACTLY the same decision in this spot. That information is open and available for everyone to see, there is literally no advantage to having a HUD in this example if you're watching the table.

Sorry to keep going on like this, but I find the whole thing pretty frustrating. This absolute myth that the "pros" are these big, bad, evil chatbox warriors who cheat their way to success just because they have a bit of software is completely wrong and frankly makes a mockery of all the work that I do to try and get ok at this game. HUDs aren't going anywhere (and contrary to what it sounds like, I would be very, very happy if every poker site banned HUDs tomorrow), and while they're here to stay I think we have to attack these misconceptions because if recs are genuinely stopping playing because they're worried about the power of HUDs then they have definitely been misinformed.

If they are not paying attention to the table, then why should they be allowed that information through a HUD? If you want to have the table information as someone playing 1-4 tables then play 1-4 tables and not 10. Take the information In and make a judgement on their fold to 3 bet %, PFR% and whatever other stat you want your HUD to collect, collate and display for you.

Why not?
A) As we've been through, it doesn't give an advantage over someone watching the table, if anything it hinders them.
B) If the regs didn't play as many tables then tournament guaruntees would end up being lower, there'd be less players in the comps themselves, and you'd actually find the regs play better because they're paying more attention. All this seems to be to the defecit of the rec.
C) As we've said, the information collected isn't anything new, it's already available to everyone. I've just got someone else looking at it for me. Online isn't the same as live because you have the option to play more than one table, so why should you effectively stop people from doing that?
D) I find playing 4 tournament tables pretty dull tbh, so I want to play more. However, I don't want to be at a distinct disadvantage against people playing less tables, so I use my HUD. Are you basically now saying that you should put people like me at a disadvantage for pretty much no discernible reason other than the recs think it gives me some sort of advantage (which as we've already said, it doesn't against them)?
E) Furthermore, HUDs aren't going to get banned. So, why should I pass up on the same information that all the other regular players have and put myself at a disadvantage against them? Because it's a morally better thing to do? Maybe, but it's literally throwing money away.
F) As has already been said, HUDs aren't expensive, they aren't a secret, and there are loads of videos online on how to use them. So why is it a problem if I want to play a few more tables and use this bit of software to help me watch them, because I get more enjoyment out of playing more tournaments?

Fwiw, I would consider myself a rec when it comes to tournament poker. I barely play them, and when I do I don't play very many.

[EvilPie]

In this example, if I was playing that table and watching it WITHOUT A HUD, I would have EXACTLY the same information and be able to make EXACTLY the same decision in this spot. That information is open and available for everyone to see, there is literally no advantage to having a HUD in this example if you're watching the table.

Agree with this 100%

The fact is though you wouldn't just be playing 1 table in order to take in all that information. You'd be playing 9 other tables in order to maximise your overall win rate because that's how many you can cope with when your HUD is active.

Maybe if you play at 1 table you're 30% better than Mr Rec. because you're focussing on that table. If you play 10 tables with your HUD active you are only 15% better than him so you think that you're actually handing him an advantage by sacrificing some of your edge.

In isolation this may appear true but what it actually means is that there's now 9 other recs who've got to face someone 15% better than them instead of just being up against each other on a level playing field.

It's not the effect a HUD has on a single table that's the problem, it's the overall effect of many HUDs in many extremely capable and well trained hands against many recs.

Imagine a player pool of 100 people with no HUDs allowed. 90 are recs, 10 are pros. Everybody plays 1 table each and the pros expect 30% roi due to their hard work, training and superior skill. If everybody puts £100 in the pros win £30 each and the recs lose £300 between them or £3.33 each.

Now let's throw in a few HUDs for the pros. They now play 5 tables instead of one but because they aren't as focussed on the one table their roi has dropped to 10% therefore giving up a huge advantage back to the recs.

However the player pool has now grown to 140 with the recs putting in £100 each and the pros 5 x £100. The pros roi has reduced but they are investing 5 times as much so each one of them wins £50 and the recs now lose £500 between them or £5.55 each.

So the recs haven't actually gotten any worse at poker, the pros are actually playing worse than they used to because they aren't as focussed on an individual table but still the recs are worse off.

[EvilPie]

I'm going to use some capital letters the same as Rexas to hopefully help me out.....

The ONLY reason people buy HUDs is to increase their profit.

Professional poker players take money OUT of poker.

Recreational poker players put money IN to poker.

Unless MORE money comes IN than goes OUT it all grinds to a halt.

The FASTER pros take it OUT the SOONER it grinds to a HALT.

[EvilPie]

D) I find playing 4 tournament tables pretty dull tbh, so I want to play more. However, I don't want to be at a distinct disadvantage against people playing less tables, so I use my HUD. Are you basically now saying that you should put people like me at a disadvantage for pretty much no discernible reason other than the recs think it gives me some sort of advantage (which as we've already said, it doesn't against them)?

Way to win a debate bro

[collster]

Rex....read A...then read D.....see any contradiction?

[UgotNuts]

...

[nirvana]

Online poker is really only designed for people with no life and predators. Just mindless shiz tbf

[GreekStein]

Online poker is really only designed for people with no life and predators. Just mindless shiz tbf

Truly spoken like someone who has never even had a punchers chance

[nirvana]

Online poker is really only designed for people with no life and predators. Just mindless shiz tbf

Truly spoken like someone who has never even had a punchers chance

Never stops me swinging though plus I totes crushed 1-2 limit back in the day

[titaniumbean]

I'm going to use some capital letters the same as Rexas to hopefully help me out.....

The ONLY reason people buy HUDs is to increase their profit.

Professional poker players take money OUT of poker.

Recreational poker players put money IN to poker.

Unless MORE money comes IN than goes OUT it all grinds to a halt.

The FASTER pros take it OUT the SOONER it grinds to a HALT.

we all seem to be forgetting the sites aren't helping, not in the slightest. No ones interests are aligned so nothing meaningful is going to be done.

you are also all forgetting that in Matts rejam example he may have made the wrong decision because of stats which haven't converged given such a small sample. As with everything in poker you cant even just straight up judge if he was right.


either way arguments along the lines of you've put in lots of work I don't want to have to wouldn't hold water in any other industry, let alone given the fact that in this one you can still just bink a 20/80 or 45/55 or w/e and show a sudden profit.

[MANTIS01]

Do like the way EvilPie has rolled itt, nailed a lot of points.

Anyways, it appears that serious players use software so they can play a lot of tables without paying full attention. The amateur however plays less tables so can concentrate on the action more closely. That's what I've learnt over the last few pages. So what exactly are dem mad poker skillz the serious players have?

[rfgqqabc]

Do like the way EvilPie has rolled itt, nailed a lot of points.

Anyways, it appears that serious players use software so they can play a lot of tables without paying full attention. The amateur however plays less tables so can concentrate on the action more closely. That's what I've learnt over the last few pages. So what exactly are dem mad poker skillz the serious players have?

Betting/calling/raising/folding

[MANTIS01]

Do like the way EvilPie has rolled itt, nailed a lot of points.

Anyways, it appears that serious players use software so they can play a lot of tables without paying full attention. The amateur however plays less tables so can concentrate on the action more closely. That's what I've learnt over the last few pages. So what exactly are dem mad poker skillz the serious players have?

Betting/calling/raising/folding

After not paying attention and seeing if the computer says so?

[Jamier-Host]

Maybe the answer is limiting the number of tables anyone can play. Can't help but think the reason live poker is looser and more fun is because people would get bored sitting playing nut spots all night. Hence having even a minority group of grinders who can load up HUDs and monitor a dozen tables at the same time playing a bit slow and nitty means the "quality" of the games for someone looking for a fun gamble goes down considerably.

Sure, there would still be people with the discipline to do this on one or two tables, but hopefully would have less impact and probably squeeze them up the stakes as would be less viable to make a living from what used to be "casual" levels (100NL or less)

[EvilPie]

we all seem to be forgetting the sites aren't helping, not in the slightest. No ones interests are aligned so nothing meaningful is going to be done.

They provide you with a platform in which to ply your trade.

They spend millions on advertising and sponsorship to try to tempt more "fish" in to the shark infested waters in which you ply your trade.

Just because they want to take their slice of the cake don't start claiming they aren't doing anything to help.

either way arguments along the lines of you've put in lots of work I don't want to have to wouldn't hold water in any other industry, let alone given the fact that in this one you can still just bink a 20/80 or 45/55 or w/e and show a sudden profit.

In the professional world where people have jobs and compete with each other to get those jobs and the rewards that go with them of course you're correct.

It's the recs we're talking about though, the people who bring money in to the game. They're the customers. Name me one other industry where the customers have to put in the same amount of work as the professionals selling them a service?  

The bink argument is obviously ridiculous. We're talking long term here where we know the binks are meaningless. Without those binks (Moneymaker being the obvious example) there wouldn't be any recs for you to play against.