Not true at all, I play much higher, and I hate HUDs.

2006 "sharks":

"hey guys let's get these site to let us play 24 tables each. we'll all make so much more money. and fish are all idiots they'll play no matter what and keep redepositing."

idiots.

Yes, broke fish don't redeposit. Non broke fish who only see sets or bigger pairs or lose constantly with QQ to AK or vice versa give up too. Back when poker was bigger online middle aged men played. Very few will go near a virtual room anymore.

legal u.s poker

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. Even if the number of new players could reach 2003 levels (I strongly doubt they ever will) they will be annihilated so quickly it's unlikely they will have any desire to return. Back then the regs didn't have such a huge edge v the fish, so they had a fighting chance and could keep a bankroll for a while. They also got to play vs 2 or 3 other fish so their stupid plays could actually work sometimes. In all it was a fun time for them to play and they could win some money now and again.

Imagine being a new player now logging onto Stars. You will almost certainly be the worst at the table and the regs will all have a very solid strategy to beat you. All the basic mistakes you make as a beginner will be pounced upon and your chances of winning likely rely on running way above ev. I'm not sure about you but to me that sounds awful. A new player will either get beat, or have to join training sites so that they can become yet another reg in the never ending reg pool.

You're right that there are scenarios where new money will come into the pool, but it won't last very long and certainly not long enough to count as another boom.

Unfortunately this looks like it will happen state by state. More a drip feed of new players than the mass influx of fish that people are hoping for.

I agree with you, but we dont need to go back to 2003, more like 2011.

Don't agree. The new players won't be as new or as bad as they were in 2003.

zynga turning into a real money game

Well if they aren't as new or as bad that makes the chances of another poker boom even more remote.

You need to do these things:

1. Make the world economy better.

2. World wide legislation where governments allow all countries to play with each other.

3. More tv poker where pros extravagant lifestyles gets showcased & celebrated.


All those things need to happen & poker in some fashion needs to be rebranded to the public cause even if those things occur poker has lost alot of its mystique n is abit stale now.

Aside from black Friday, I doubt any single event or factor hurt poker (and Las Vegas for that matter) than the housing equity crash that started in 2008.

So many people were cashing out equity from their houses and dumping it in all areas of life including poker. I am pleasantly surprised live poker has held up so well.

this is a joke right?

And lol at anyone blaming HUDs.

I believe I read that zynga abandoned the idea of using real money, but isnt zynga still running with play money? If they were bought by someone like the Rational Group maybe it could still happen.


People are talking about HUDs killing fish and therefore killing action, this is not at all true due to various aspects, let me point a few.

HUDs do allow multitabling, this means that u r multiplying the presence of regs but these regs will also be fighting each other, making edges smaller keeping money bouncing around and keeping registrations going. Also because theres so much action, a fish will quickly get the action we wants and therefore he'll be kept hooked in the action addiction, and possibly redeposit on the same day. Also many recs are aware of HUDs and enjoy seeing stuff like VPIP and AF while playing. The HUD is a way to bring something new to the game and keep it interesting. Even because recs enjoy multitabling too.

I wonder how many backgammon players from the 70's are still waiting for the next Backgammon boom?

This. amazingly .....it still hasnt sunk in to most of them, in fact there appears to be glory in break even hyper volume

the whole anti hud movement goes along the lines of trying make games more friendly for the fish.

but it comes down to simplicity really the only major difference huds can do is give regs and edge over other regs. without huds regs would still destroy the randoms.

with or without anonymous tables.

the thing, is that when you play even $1.50 sit and goes sometimes you can get a table full of regs it happens.

the fish/rec does not stand a chance then at any stakes.

if you shop around of course you will always find easier games it just involves that much more effort in game selection.

we cannot make the games more rec friendly per say, as I have pointed out on many occasions the only way to do so would be to get rid of the regs, and the only way to do that is either to outright ban them/restrict them or to make it not possible to make any proper money.

Neither of those scenarios work for us. What is the point in playing if we cannot ever make much money. I may or may never reach the point where I make six figures annually but that is what motivates me to play. and many like me the idea of reaching that level.

if all the small stake grinders like me quit sites will have much less games running the recs wont get the action much and the money sites can make will be greatly diminished.

really it just needs more advertising. and better marketing, there is so many un tapped markets etc.

Interesting observation.... I play low to high stakes mtts since 2008. I dont use HUDS. I own one.
All the people like yourselves just want to keep your head buried in the sand and defend your huds.
When EVERY thread pops up regarding the decline of online poker turns into Anti HUDS then I think its time you at least accept and be open to the masses opinions.

all this "strategy" talk ruined poker. forums like 2+2 shouldve been only here to ref players, not providing tons of books and links to coaching. people feel bad to see others winning

Most players who took poker serious were using HUDs back then. I recently found an old email from Pokertracker from when I upgraded from PT2 to PT3 in 2008.

If anything, your post shows that games were very good in 2008 despite people using HUDs.

Yes maybe, but were the HUDS as widely used and even a fraction as sophisticated as they are now 7 years on?

I dont think HUD is a problem.

We need better marketing , less regulation and more fish projection. Thats it I think!

Yes and 99% of these are from russia, ukraine, moldova, romania, balts etc. If you removed the eastern countries poker would have a ton of fish in the micros

As I said, people who were serious about poker used them. I don't think there was anyone in my group of poker friends without one.

While they weren't as sophisticated, they showed the stats that were most important to figure out if someone was a recreational player or not. That was everything you needed to know to masstable up to the midstakes.
There was a ton of marketing back in the day, but the caravan passed and moved to countries where there was still potential for growth. Pokersites had huge marketing budgets in the US and Europe but that had already stopped before black friday.