Does this include also plo not only nl-games?

PTR = pokertableratings
PT = pokertracker

So let me see if I got this straight. We'll be playing a game without physical tells, without betting patterns, with unknown "faces" every hand, while randomly changing seats at the table. How is this related to poker, in your opinion ?

Wrong.5NL had the biggest lobby on Rush

PT3 has never used screen scraping, but HM did.

I had played 100,000 hands on rush in one month and my winrate went from
5bb to 2.5bb. Patience is a skill that fish just mastered so to speak. They didn't pay me off with their j2 off anymore or went all in with 44; they just folded more to play more optimally.
Zoom will be fun for 1 day, but obviously there too many cons.

But PS has been doing everything wrong since 2 months; therefore, I'm sure that zoom's gonna create problems that they haven't forseen yet.

So, I'm impatiently looking forward to seeing the next PS's blunder.

The game did not dry up because of HUDs, the games dried up because all the fish went broke faster and the games got infested with rakeback grinders. After FTP changed rake structures games got alot better. But then BF happened and everything changed like every 2 weeks.

I dont think you can compare all that happened with Rushpoker to Zoompoker because of all these events.

How did PT get a live hud?

wtf? Rush never dried up (until FTP shut down). If players are expected to take meticulous notes on hundreds of players while they're playing Zoom, the games would run A LOT SLOWER, thus ruining the whole point of Zoom. HUDs are necessary for a smooth, fast and fun gaming experience.

this ! rush was ****ing profitable till the end at every limit.

I'm not sure exctly, but I know I've seen a PT representative say they looked at screenscraping and decided aginst it.

LMAO, I don't think so cousin. Playing regular tables is more profitable.

nobody is forced to play zoom/rush just keep playing normal games then BUT DON'T TELL ME HUDS SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED IN ZOOM WHILE YOU HAVE NO PROBLEM USING IT IN NORMAL GAMES

I'm really dreading this, split pools ftl.

It's also an extremely stupid concept to begin with, I can't believe any self respecting player would actually prefer rush over regular play.

More hands per hour. A lot more.

The player pools will be fine, the concept is BRILLIANT and is the future of poker, and you'll just have to get over yourself and your self imposed limitations because there will be a LARGE number of "self respecting" players that will prefer Zoom to the old style tables.

+1, Zoom is the future of poker and now you can say it's bad and bla bla bla but you will be playing it someday without even noticing youre doing it.

4tables of 6 max zoom =about 1200 hands.
24 normal tables= about 1850 hands.

Quote from cardchat:
-Hands per hour argument is bull****. It's as simple as this, if you want to play more hands per hour, just play more tables of standard ring games instead of playing rush poker. It's as simple as that. Ive heard several people argue that the amount of hands you can play per hour will negate for the decreased edge, this is just plain bull****. If you want to play more hands, play more tables. I personally can play more hands 15 tabling regular ring games (which I know I have an edge) compared to gambling it up playing 4 tables of rush poker.

However 24 tabling + 4 zoom tables would be nice, but I ain't sure whether it's gonna be possible or not.

The difference is I can play 4 tables of rush pretty easily though. I can't 15 table normal games, not even close.

Zoom will be amazing. Let's face it would you rather sit and wait to fold Q,2 off or get rid of that chit and get a new hand asap. Some supernova's i play with take 20 seconds a hand and they make the game boring.

-more hands per hour
-no table selecting
-no bumhunters
-no waiting lists
-more poker less robotic grinding (volume of 16+ tables while playing 4)
-faster games (no 24 tablers who takes forever to fold trash hands)

seriously the only downside i see is splitting player pool into rush and non-rush players and slightly less table dynamics (which will develop between regs on higher stakes pretty fast anyway)

add no ****ing grimming and you got a
QFMFT

- fish like zoom, because they normally play only few tables of "normal" CG (lets say 2-4). That means they fold and have to wait 15-60 secs until they can play the next hand.
@Zoom they play 2 tables, but if they fold they only have to wait 2-3 secs to get a new hand ... way more fun for fish

- you can take time for decisions. If you're 24tabling you have only some seconds, but in zoom you can take your time (sit out the other three tables) to make a decision (or notes) in big pots

- start your session immediately, no table selection or waiting list

- not everybody is able to play their a-game on 24 tables the same time

- 4 Rush tables were nearly the same as 16 normal tables on FTP

- with huds there was a special dynamic between regulars, even 4 or 5-betting with air

I can see other drawbacks:

-a big one: Note taking on villains is more difficult especially when you don't watch the hand go to showdown against two other opponents;
-lower WR;
-no table selection; therefore, lower edge;
-reads taking more time to converge; consequently, increase of variance;
-tigher games;
-the fish fold their pure trash hands now;
-the dynamic and my image is different;
-If you wanna become phil Ivey, then zoom won't be for you;
-fish lose more quickly because of the rake;
- hud problem but i'm not sure;
-the fish are more patient because they will be able to;
-Nearly impossible to know whether a player is on tilt;
-zoom might kill other games;
-grudge, sometimes the fish wants to get his money back against me, or he's
confused because I 3bet him twice.

So, it's somewhat strange that you saw only two obstacles.

Then don't play it, I know what I'm gonna do ones ZOOM or RUSH poker returns GRINDGRINDGRINDGRINDGRIND