3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes - Page 41 - Internet Poker

Everything else should be legal since you cant properly draw a line. Check this out: A hud shows you "Villain folds 80% to cbets on Flop" (Fold to cbet Flop), a badge shows you on its popup "Villain folds 80% on A high flops". There isnt much of a difference between that for me. If you ban the one thing, you would have to ban the other thing as well. And tbh, I dont wanna play poker without a hud after paying for it. It was always legal, it should stay legal. If PokerStars thinks new fancy live advice stuff needs to be regulated, I have no problem with that. Ofc I dont wanna play against robots. Imo auto notes and normal HUDs are totally fine and btw. enough for the game.

You guys sound like you don't use NoteCaddy but you use a HuD so ban notecaddy but let me keep my HuD.

Pokerstars needs to move to these anonymous tables although via something a bit more personal as I posted in my last post. Any software needs to be based in the client and open to all. Maybe some outside 3rd party software such as stackandtile, tableninja, etc can be allowed as outside 3rd party software. Nothing that helps the player makes decisions in game and if something like that is allowed make it open to all. Everything else banned. Just read some of skier, raidalot, or Greg Nice recent posts. Those guys get it.

With anonymous tables by session if Pokerstars wants to implement some sort of client HuD they could work that into the software. If outside parties tried to run more sophicated HuD software, notecaddy type software, other software under the radar they would be risking a much larger penalty and the HuD data they would be getting would only be sessioned based so certain stats, badges, etc that normally take a lot of data to hold any weight wouldn't be worth very much in game. This would be a deterrent for a lot of players to try and break the rules. It just wouldn't be worth as much.

Quote

06-16-2015 , 08:49 PM

#1002

worried

banned

Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 527

Quote:

Originally Posted by devera

Not that it wouldn't be obvious, but here's the warning to all of you engaged in lame flame wars - WAY WAY TOO LONG, DON'T READ.

I'm taking the time (quite a lot of it) to write this because I trust PS Steve & Co will read it. Not to be disrespectful to all of you 2p2-ers, but if 1 user reads this post entirely that's already 1 more than I'd expect, considering how the thread derailed.

So let me dive into it. With the recent incredible development of poker related software, people seem to have forgotten the very spirit of this game and now they can't see the forest for the trees.

Poker is a game of chance with incomplete information. Because of that, you have to do a lot of abductive reasoning through the course of a hand, which is a fancy way of saying there are a lot of educated guesses that you're forced to make.

EDUCATED. GUESSES. That IS the spirit of the game.

So how to preserve it, with the avalanche of ever-more-advanced software popping up? Simple - any software, tool or means of assistance that kills the spirit of the game has to go. Period. It's that simple, really. So now apply this to any piece of software, tool, add-on etc that's out there.

HUDs - I'm talking about the classic "static" HUDs, that everyone knows. Do they cripple the spirit of the game? NO. You still have to make an educated guess about what those numbers actually mean and put them into context, regardless of how many you have in your HUD. If anything, going hud-less actually cripples the nature of the game, since you'd be forced to make guesses which are less and less "educated" and more of a gamble. Playing hud-less online poker at multiple tables leaves you almost completely in the dark about your 40+ simultaneous opponents while playing 500+ hands per hour, whereas live you can get a lot of info about your 7-8 opponents while playing 20 hands per hour (poker style & knowledge, behavioral info, conversational info, emotional info etc), a luxury you do not have online, so you use your HUD. So for online multitabling HUDs are a must and not a "cheat". Because with a HUD, however complex, you still have to envision ranges, interpret what a 40% stat means for this villain, what the same 40% stat means for that other villain and so on. Educated guesses.

NC-type automatic badges - Again, the same simple question: do they cripple the spirit of the game? YES and whoever says otherwise simply doesn't understand the spirit of the game. What educated guess are you making when you see that badge telling you villain is exploitable with his BTN steals, cause he either folds too much to 3bets or calls the 3bet but then folds to the cbet in BTN vs SB dynamic "at an exploitative frequency"? What educated guess are you making when you rub your hands with excitement seeing a villain just sat at your table and he has that "smart" badge you created that tells you villain folds at an exploitative level if you double barrel on Q/K/A turns (yes, you can define this type of badge)? How is it not clear that this is stepping all over the very idea of "poker" and it turns into a coders race? You stop making educated guesses about your opponent, you just hope he has a lot of badges, so you can pound him properly, like the bad ass "poker professional" you are.

NC-like scatter graphs, spike graphs, heat maps etc, relating hand strength to bet sizing, timing, action taken etc - As before, the same question - are these sort of graphs killing the spirit of the game? YES. How could they not, when you can see with a single click (or 2) that all my biggish river bets are value hands and all my smallish bets are bluffs? What educated guess are you making in that spot, when you're thinking whether to call me or not with your bluff catcher? What educated guess are you making when you see that almost all my turn checks (after flop cbet) are pure air hands (no A high, no pair, no draw) that can't stand a stab on the river? And to all of those who keep saying they could extract this kind of info while away from the table, in post session review or w/e - well f.king DO IT, ok? Saying "I can do it off the table with no software assistance (besides HM/PT), so it should be allowed" it's like saying to your examiner "I didn't learn for the exam, back home, with the provided books, a pencil and a piece of paper, but I could have done it, theoretically, so let me cheat by opening the book now, during the exam". I mean, really, people have gotten so freaking lazy and keep saying "I could do this and that using my db while offline and still get the same info", but no one ever does it anymore and just keeps adding software and tables, one after another. Cybot much? If you "could" do it but never actually done it, guess what? It means you can't really do it and you're just talking like a drug addict in denial. So stop using "I could do it" as an argument, it's getting pathetic.

Push charts and alike - I'm a broken record by now, but w/e - are they killing the spirit of the game by completely taking away our dear educated guesses? Captain obvious is being obvious now - YES. So somehow they have got to be removed. But how can that even be done, since you can always run a skier_5 (or HU cartel) type of software on a separate computer and get instant access to the perfect strategy? I think the "solution" for this one, however nasty, is just one. Read below on enforceability.

Range comparison & analysis software (Flopzilla, PokerStove, Odds Oracle etc) - Again, the question doesn't even have to be asked here, since the answer is clear if you're asking the right question - are they killing the spirit of the game if used while playing? YES. However, there have been voices pointing out it's "useless" to restrict running such software since you can't really do on the spot calculations using them. But that is not the point, because you can't use them on the spot now, but maybe 6 months from now there's a super flopzilla with all kinds of ranges that are accessible with 2 clicks max and there, you can safely xrai your 10% UTG villain's flop stab in 3bet pot on xxx flop. I know I'm kinda pushing it here with the example, but trust me, it's not that far-fetched as it looks. Just compare PokerStove with flopzilla and then infer a comparison between flopzilla and flopzilla 2016 or w/e.

And the list could go on and on and on, but it's really not that hard to decide on each individual new item, if you're asking the right question - is it killing the spirit of the game? Is the user of said software still in a position to make an educated guess in the hand, while still using its benefits?

And now onto enforceability of said restrictions:

HUDs - no need

NC-type automatic badges - easy one: it has to be done on NC's end. As for other future software that could appear down the road and offer similar functionality (but in some "stealth" mode, so it wouldn't be detected) - I'm pretty certain HM/PT developers can think of some ways to monitor what apps are accessing your live db (or any other db you have, for that matter), since any such app has to connect to the db for it to work. This info can (and should) then passed on to PS software and said cheater would be kicked out the lobby faster than saying "1,2,3 badge!". I'm just talking out of my ass now, I'm just saying I'm confident there are ways to enforce it.

NC-like scatter graphs, spike graphs, heat maps etc, relating hand strength to bet sizing, timing, action taken etc - Same as above. Kill the functionalities in NC and always scan for any similar acting software.

Range comparison & analysis software (Flopzilla, PokerStove, Odds Oracle etc) - This one is clear, so no issues.

Push charts and alike - I intentionally kept this one for last, since it's a nasty one. To put is simply - it can't be done, objectively. Whatever system of rules you put in place (like one A4 sheet with x characters and alike) can't really be enforced, because.. how could it be? What are you gonna do, ban a player for playing "too good"? Like live casinos kick out BJ card counters? What if they play just a tad short of optimal? Where will you draw the line between a player playing "almost in accordance to xxx push charts" or just below that level? It can't be done. So the solution is a simple one, although painful - NUKE THE FORMAT. That's it, it has ran its course. What did PS do when it was clear that 20bbs minimum entry rule was being mathematically exploited by shortstackers, in such a way that they weren't playing any poker anymore? You nuked it and replaced it with 40bbs min, since the 20bb "game" got solved. That's the case now with hyper HUSNGs, it's blatantly clear an optimal solution was found and players are not really playing any poker, just pressing buttons with charts next to the table. That is not poker, so nuke the damn thing. And this way you also punish the freaking cartels that for so long ganged up on anyone who was not a member - how is that fair poker anymore? How is that not collusion?

MAN that was a long post, definitely my longest ever. So I'll end it swiftly - if you really want to live up to your "We are poker" tag line, then keep the spirit of poker alive and let us always be forced to make those freaking educated guesses.

How about a simple per session hud like holdem iindicator? This way you can use it for basic info which is needed while multitabling, vpip. pfr, 3 bet, pretty much just the basics.Give one to every person that opens an account, this would 100% make it a level playing field.

Quote

06-16-2015 , 08:50 PM

#1003

bereziNLX3

adept

Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,120

the easiest solution is to just ban all 3rd party software. in what way will banning all 3rd party programs have a negative effect for poker as a whole? can someone even argue this? in what way would banning all 3rd party software prevent stars from catching the mother****ing bot ring operating on their site as we speak? it seems rather obvious that this is the best solution for everyone who cares about the longevity of this game (recs and regs).

Quote

06-16-2015 , 08:52 PM

#1004

golfbum983

old hand

Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 1,943

Quote:

Originally Posted by alternative 3

And what point exactly in the proposal suggests to ban HM2 and PT4? The topic is should people be allowed to use software that are making decisions for them or giving away too much information. Not about software that thousands and thousands of players are using since years. Its about the new **** that costs like a fortune and not every micro player is using. (ever checked what A) NC Premium which you need for B) Badges cost you?)

ok but your reasoning that since you paid for it and thousands of other people did too means you should leave it even if its not for the best interest of the future of online poker is pretty ****ty reasoning

Quote

06-16-2015 , 09:02 PM

#1005

alternative 3

centurion

Join Date: Aug 2014 Posts: 168

Quote:

Originally Posted by golfbum983

Its not only that. As I said a HUD is giving you an advantage over fishes of course, but it doesnt make decisions for you. It also doesnt give a way too much information. Thousands of player have one and are actually losing players. And I would rather see the whole development of those programs in recent years as an improvement to the game.

I remember a scene from the Bet, Raise, Fold documentary where this came up. The one guy said sth like "The players from 2005 were to bad compared to todays." It was a different game, today we know more. We can analyze OUR game after we have played. Was my raise really the best option? What odds would I have had on the turn if I would have just called? Same with ICM. Some software like IZMizer estimates what would have been the optimal push or fold. But you have to adjust villains range to know what would have been correct.

Many of you are treating these programs now as something that was created by the devil. I think it has improved the average skill a lot, which ofc isnt a benefit for every one. But we have also all learned a lot more about poker and its complexity. I am completely against making it "too easy", thats why I am against fancy gimmicks that give away too much during the game. But after the game I should be allowed to do what ever the f... I want. And during the game it doesnt hurt to know whos the Nit at the table and whos the fish with VPIP/PFR. Hell let PokerStars show it to anyone, so even fishes have those information. Because if I play live, I also pay attention to whos not playing any cards at all and whos playing many. But can I do that for 8 tables e.g.? Of course not.

Chill out, I'm sure PokerStars will find a fair solution

Quote

06-16-2015 , 09:16 PM

#1006

golfbum983

old hand

Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 1,943

so would you be ok with a built in hud in the stars software so all players have the same software?

i think maybe this is the best solution for now.....but it will show the bad players what they are doing wrong.....but it cant be worse then the situation is currently

Quote

06-16-2015 , 09:17 PM

#1007

KDash

enthusiast

Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 49

First, thanks to devera for trying to save this thread (even if your post looks a little bit like a santa list) from the troll army who feels the need to flood in 30 messages a day to express their feelings (and try to disguise them in knowledge) on things they don’t know.

So, I am only going to answer to devera on the point I know, because I use it on a daily basis (if only everybody could do the same in this thread, how many pages would this thread have? 10 instead of 66?). So I am going to answer about HUDs, and scattergraphs/heatmaps (well you didn’t say anything about heatmaps really). I don’t use the rest (badges, timing action/caddy clock, push charts, pokerstove etc..)

Quote:

Originally Posted by devera

“are these sort of graphs killing the spirit of the game? YES. How could they not, when you can see with a single click (or 2) that all my biggish river bets are value hands and all my smallish bets are bluffs? What educated guess are you making in that spot, when you're thinking whether to call me or not with your bluff catcher?”

1) You are deliberately taking an extreme example in which the decision is a no brainer, trying to push your point that the scatter graph are a no skill feature. The same example can be made with HUDs (which according to you are in the spirit of the game) when you open with AJ and face a 3B from a guy who has a 3B % of 1% and plays 14/7 over a sample of 2K hands. What educated guess are you making in that spot, when you are thinking whether to call the 3B, to 4B bluff, or to fold with your AJ?
2) Your game needs to evolve as time goes by. It’s basic Darwinism, natural selection. If you don’t evolve you disappear. But that is what I think most of the anti-HUD / anti-NC activists on this thread are afraid of: being forced to either evolve or disappear, because their laziness dooms them to be left behind.
Using a specific sizing for value and a specific sizing for bluff is a leak. A leak makes you exploitable. The scatter graph just helps you to find out about this leak, but the fact that the scatter graph can help players finding out about these kind of leaks, doesn’t mean that there is nothing you can do against someone using scatter graphs. A simple way to counter them is to balance your river bet sizes (bet big with value and bluff, bet small with value and bluff). An even easier way is to counter them is to always use the same river size, so that your opponent can’t figure what this size means (unless you are even more unbalanced and only bet the river for value and never as a bluff). Once your bet sizes are balanced, what can the scatter graph do against this? Nothing anymore. Are the scatter graph killing the spirit of the game, or is NC bringing the game to the next level by forcing the players to work on their game and try to play balanced/unexploitable? To me the answer is pretty clear. And the scatter graph are just another tool which gives an edge to the player who work the most on their game and who can figure out the kind of things I just stated. The one being lazy or not smart enough are being left behind, and to me this sounds exactly like what a competitive game should be.
3) And I already know what you (or some others) are going to answer to that: “without NC there is no way you could know that my river bet sizing are unbalanced”.
Yes, that’s true if you are playing in wide fields (NL200 mostly, NL100 maybe but even at NL100 I think the field is already too wide in order to use NC properly because you won’t have a big enough sample on most players), because on those wide fields there are too many players for you to be able to study them individually off of the table and remember them. This is also the reason why some players at 500NL and above are winning without using a HUD. Because at these limits, the field being much thinner, it is possible to study the player pool offline and remember who does what and use it back at the poker table. On cardrunners, some years ago, a guy winning at NL100 and above without a HUD made this point (the name of the guy was 123barrel I think and he only made one video so it is easy to go ahead and find it), that this was possible only because he was playing on a small platform, on which the field was very slim, even at NL100. Which is obviously not the case for pokerstars.
But: “without NC there is no way you could know that my river bet sizing are unbalanced”. Isn’t this actually the same argument that you used in order to justify the need for the HUDs? “Playing hud-less online poker at multiple tables leaves you almost completely in the dark about your 40+ simultaneous opponents while playing 500+ hands per hour.”

Quote:

Originally Posted by devera

“What educated guess are you making when you see that almost all my turn checks (after flop cbet) are pure air hands (no A high, no pair, no draw) that can't stand a stab on the river? »

No need of any scatter graph/heatmaps to figure this out. Basic HUD stats are more than enough.

Quote:

Originally Posted by devera

“Saying "I can do it off the table with no software assistance (besides HM/PT), so it should be allowed" it's like saying to your examiner "I didn't learn for the exam, back home, with the provided books, a pencil and a piece of paper, but I could have done it, theoretically, so let me cheat by opening the book now, during the exam".”

This is an obviously unfair point since scatter graph are in fact allowed and therefore everybody has the right to open their book during the exam. Which in your example actually only transforms the nature of the exam, from a pure memory contest, to a memory + speed and skill of data usage contest.

Quote:

Originally Posted by devera

“I mean, really, people have gotten so freaking lazy”

You are the one being lazy if you don’t want to go through the pain of figuring out how to use and counter scatter graphs with little tricks such as the one I described above.

Quote:

Originally Posted by devera

“and keep saying "I could do this and that using my db while offline and still get the same info", but no one ever does it anymore and just keeps adding software and tables, one after another. Cybot much? If you "could" do it but never actually done it, guess what? It means you can't really do it and you're just talking like a drug addict in denial. So stop using "I could do it" as an argument, it's getting pathetic.”

How exactly does this argument apply for scatter graphs but not for HUDs?

Quote:

Originally Posted by devera

easy one: it has to be done on NC's end.

Is this that easy really? Pokerstars is not the only platform. So that would mean that NC would have to go with 2 versions of their softwares, as well as the users. So what do you do if one user forgets to switch version from one platform to another? You ban him? Well, this is probably the fastest way to kill PS’ player pool.

Quote:

Originally Posted by devera

As for other future software that could appear down the road and offer similar functionality (but in some "stealth" mode, so it wouldn't be detected) - I'm pretty certain HM/PT developers can think of some ways to monitor what apps are accessing your live db (or any other db you have, for that matter), since any such app has to connect to the db for it to work. This info can (and should) then passed on to PS software and said cheater would be kicked out the lobby faster than saying "1,2,3 badge!". I'm just talking out of my ass now, I'm just saying I'm confident there are ways to enforce it.

Well that would turn HM/PT into PS’s police. I am not sure that this is their job and they are willing to do it. And I am not sure that PS should entrust a 3rd party with the integrity of their games.

Quote

06-16-2015 , 09:21 PM

#1008

ihatewonderbras

journeyman

Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 226

In my opinion -

pre-blalala-introduction who am I

Spoiler:

If we compare the game "Poker" with the "stockexchange-market"-progress, we will find similarities.
First, players played the game, it was all about brain, speed, human adaption, learning, skill improvings
then later.. when the market wanted more and more winning-charts and reports
they launched helping hands, tools, which support us to play our game faster, with more commitment/effort/input to generate more and more revenue/winnings/success.

the stock-exchange-market passed through a crisis, one of the biggest in its history.

We call that "the black monday/der schwarze Montag"

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwarzer_Montag
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Monday

After that, they prohibited highfrequencytrades ... and its still not allowed.

And if we go back to Poker, if you have the knowledge and the skill to adapt these facts
on the game Poker, you know, we are at the same Point on a comparable timeline now.

the question is... R we such money-horny-individuals
- poker-provider, which is a max-profit-orientated company, stock-exchange-listed (in future ?nasdaq? too, Ive heard)
- players, which are comparable with the company.

both types are acting more or less like grasshoppers.. like the dudes in the 80s. $$$-signs in the eyes..
theres only one thing which counts.. profit.

another example is. the aral-sea.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aralse...e:Aral_sea.gif

another example is .. the Extinction of the canadian cod

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_fi...n_Newfoundland

some older players may be still know the video-clips from mad fishers who shout at the minister "Liar, Extinction, a fish , ****ing joke??" The scenes of the fisheries-ministry stormed
--
the point is.. you have to bring the game to a more manual one.

less software/helping-tools, more mistakes, misclicks, more profit,
increasing prestige of the sne-status, more moneymaker-stories, more new players,

players, who r mt-players with software are able to play 10-12 tables at the same time, I am able to do this, and I am able to do this with a win/hr easily.

and if some multitabler-players r mad and leave the room, yeah let them leave the room, they can go to ipoker and play vs. other bumhunters, nits and bots, to rake the money for rakeback.
and this is the scenario for pokerstars too, if u dont change the rules harder.

---
So Bring the game little bit back to the roots to the human vs. human not forward to the cyborg vs. bot and in the end bot vs. bot, then this would be our black monday.
---

you have to handle your players like human beings, not like cashcows.. they should a a normal-high life-standard.. to play whenever they would like to play...

less software = more mistakes = more weak players will win a pot and tell that their friends who would like to play too and so on and so on... its a chain-reaction.. this is a positive one.

actual its a negative-one. so, u have to duty to change it.

THINK LONGTERM - thats what all POKERPLAYERS learnt in the beginning of their "careers". THINK LONGTERM
with a SHORTTERMIN-Profit-orientation and all will be good.

Sincerely

Maybe you can take this and discuss it.

Last edited by ihatewonderbras; 06-16-2015 at 09:45 PM.

Quote

06-16-2015 , 10:24 PM

#1009

djle2

old hand

Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 1,921

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDash

If only you followed your own suggestion. Your response was full of dribble. Straw grasping at best.

Quote

06-16-2015 , 10:53 PM

#1010

fish_but_lucky

journeyman

Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 281

Quote:

Originally Posted by bereziNLX3

Let's say they decide to ban all 3rd party software, how would they detect players using them?

Making a rule that people can break without getting caught makes no sense, and even if you stupid enough to get caught using them, the only thing that you risk is the $ on your account (wich is nothing if you redraw/transfer often enough and keep the minimum on the site).

the additional edge you could have by breaking the rules compare to the low probability of getting caught and the small risk if getting caught will make everybody break the rules soon or later

Quote

06-16-2015 , 10:55 PM

#1011

TrustySam

journeygirl

Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 3,198

Sorry this is so long, and not nearly as interesting as devera's post

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrustySam

Was trying to imagine what changing Note Caddy might mean in terms of win-rates ...

Current Situation - Approx. Winrates for Zoom

Average Regular Winrate: 2bb/100
Average Recreational Winrate: -5bb/100
PokerStars Rake: 6bb/100

(maybe more like 1bb/100, -10bb/100, and 8bb/100?)

If Certain Software is Banned (eg. Parts of NoteCaddy) - Possible Scenarios, with Possible Approximate Winrates for Zoom

Possible Scenario 1 - No Change
Average Regular Winrate: 2bb/100
Average Recreational Winrate: -5bb/100
PokerStars Rake: 6bb/100
Possible Scenario 2 - Small Change
Average Regular Winrate: 1bb/100
Average Recreational Winrate: -4.5bb/100 (zero sum game, twice as many losing players)
PokerStars Rake: 6bb/100
Possible Scenario 3 - Big Change ... possibly no more winning players?
Average Regular Winrate: 0bb/100
Average Recreational Winrate: -4bb/100
PokerStars Rake: 6bb/100
Possible Scenario 4 - Really Big Change
Average Regular Winrate: -10bb/100
Average Recreational Winrate: 1bb/100
PokerStars Rake: 6bb/100

Maybe someone tinkering around with numbers could find a way that more people wind up winning if there's a big change to the system ... but it seems like maybe banning software might at this point be too little too late? Unless it's coupled with rake cuts maybe?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MeleaB

Too simplistic, and scenario 4 makes no sense of course.

There will be a bunch of winning regs that don't optimally use HUDs (and the like) and can comfortably multi-table without any third-party software whose win rates will increase, as mediocre, less-skilled, regs who rely heavily on software help will see a decrease.

I would guess that recreational players would see little change (small increase) and that the most obvious changes will be the shift of profit from the lesser skilled regs to the ones with more natural flair. Again, just a guess, but I doubt Stars would see too much difference in their profit, but it would increase the longevity of the game.

Guess my list was meant to kind of list out all the different ideas that people have mentioned - so #4 was meant to be this idea, put in the form of winrates (the first quote)?

Quote:

Originally Posted by onlinepokerwiz

Quote:

Banning HUDs will allow poker strengths to prevail more than players ability to dissect a HUD to prevail. Players who aren't familiar or computer savvy enough to maximize their HUD are at a distinct disadvantage before the cards are even dealt.

Personally i do believe HUDs are an unfair advantages for those who are able to extract the most value out of it vs someone that even having one cant read beyond a VPIP/PFR/3bet stat HUD but i also believe those that do extract the most out of a HUD will still be able to exploit those who even using a HUD dont know how to get as much value out of it, winning poker players will ALWAYS be winners regardless of the use of a HUD or not vs those who just cant keep themselves ahead of the curve.

According to a study made by Microgaming on which they compare regulare cash game tables (Where HUDs are allowed) vs Anonymous table (Where the use of a HUD its unpractical and stupid) and after 175 million hands they came up with these conclusions...
(Source: http://www.thempn.eu/blog/world-without-huds/)

Guess there's always a chance banning software could actually wind up making things worse for people with negative win-rates, just like how things have turned out at the anonymous tables in that study quoted above ^^^

Possible Scenario 5 - Small Change ... in the opposite direction

Average Regular Winrate: 3bb/100
Average Recreational Winrate: -7bb/100
PokerStars Rake: 6bb/100

Also yeah, there could maybe be shifts in win-rate within each of those categories, with some peoples' win-rates improving (higher positive, from negative to positive, less negative), and some peoples' win-rates decreasing (lower but still positive, from positive to negative, even more negative than before)?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Husker

I think, and I could be wrong, but based on my own experience it will make no difference to the rate recs lose at if NC is banned. Although fish come in a few different varieties it is fairly easy to work out how to exploit them and you really only need a few hud stats for this. NC is used against other regs you are battling with on a regular basis who will usually have a reasonably decent game who's leaks aren't as obvious.

Also, I've not really seen it discussed so far but how are we defining who is a recreational player and who is a regular?

Was just using 'regular' as a substitute for someone with a positive win-rate, and 'recreational' as a substitute for someone with a negative win-rate, and that's all

Guess in looking at the potential effects on win-rate, with #4 being so unlikely, it was seeming like ... while there's value in trying to make a game as fair as possible, as a practical matter changing the software policy might actually not wind up having that huge an effect on win-rates? Not as huge as lowering rake would I guess - and it'd be nice if there could be more winners in poker than there currently are ... but guess lower rake is probably off the table as a realistic option

* * * * *

Quote:

Originally Posted by LektorAJ

The point not reflected in the above is that if recreational players go bust slower they play more hands from the same deposit - and crucially have a better time doing so and are more likely to redeposit.

Guess in the past, most of the liquidity has come from new players, who don't stick around for very long?

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrustySam

... there's those player retention numbers from Party Poker that are floating around the internet, which seem to show that about 80% of new players, tend to wind up quitting poker after about a year (for them, for those years). And hasn't the number of winning players in poker generally been estimated to be about 20%?

So it sort of seems like maybe the money might start to matter after a while, or the fun might start to wear thin for most people that aren't winning, if not winning is the reason most people stopped playing - at least for Party during those times, but maybe the PS numbers are different? Although the market is contracting, so that seems to suggest that maybe it's been sort of the same for PS?

http://www.quora.com/What-are-the-cu...ne-Poker-Rooms

Quote:

Player Acquisition & Churn

Between 2008 and 2011, they had an average of 184,000 new real money players per quarter - and an average of 814,000 unique active real money players.

From that, you can already roughly say: they need to 'replace' about 20-25% of their real money player population every quarter.

Like, the old numbers seem to suggest that most people don't find it that fun to keep depositing for the experience of continually losing? Like guess new players might tend to want to feel like a game is fair ... but the majority seem to also want to tend to feel like they have a chance to win?

Wish the games were softer for all of us, but guess it's tough trying to find ways to make that happen

Last edited by TrustySam; 06-16-2015 at 11:03 PM.

Quote

06-16-2015 , 10:58 PM

#1012

MrJuliusDhelas

banned

Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 290

People forget the most important point is this

Everything that cant be done with the client opened can be done with the client off
run a second PC with a system to consult notes and strats on the player and done
Basically its the same thing with a bit more work to do

I feel some players will mainly professionals will gain even more edge why ?

Now any1 can use them live , after the ban only the professionals will have the TIME
to study the database make the notes , make a strategie against each player (im talking nl200 + here where the amount of players is smaller for example or even nl100)

Quote

06-16-2015 , 11:15 PM

#1013

devera

enthusiast

Join Date: Jun 2015 Posts: 92

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDash

So, I am only going to answer to devera on the point I know, because I use it on a daily basis (if only everybody could do the same in this thread, how many pages would this thread have? 10 instead of 66?). So I am going to answer about HUDs, and scattergraphs/heatmaps (well you didn’t say anything about heatmaps really). I don’t use the rest (badges, timing action/caddy clock, push charts, pokerstove etc..)

I appreciate your effort of putting in such a lengthy reply, but I'll try to reply back a bit shorter. But first of all, I hope you realize I was not talking (whining) about MY biggish value bets never being called and MY smallish bluff bets always being called etc, I was just impersonating.

Quick one, in the beginning - what do you think is a more frequent leak in any pool of players, regardless of the stake: a 3bet of 1% or a clearly unbalanced river bet size or bluff/value ratio? Do you see where I'm getting at? Yes, the examples I picked were maybe extreme and I'm sure not the best ones, as I was coming up with those as I was typing, but my point was clear - scatter graphs and spike graphs are a way to provide you with instant actionable information. With the stress on actionable. Here's a comparison between simple HUD stats and spike graphs - if I see you have a river bet of 35% and I have TPNK, what do I do? I have to link it mentally with 3-4-5 or more different stats to try to come up with some sort of range you're doing that with and decide whether or not you're wide enough for me to call (read educated guess here). OR I can just click the little spike graph icon and see that you're betting unbalanced towards value hands so I can muck my TPNK in an instant. Yes, maybe if I click the spike graph icon I get a shock seeing you're perfectly balanced across the whole spectrum, but that is not the point, because more often than not this is not the case and the little pretty graph shows me your leak.

Yes, I know I have to be balanced with my river bets (value/bluff, sizing etc), but what do you want exactly? Do you want for everyone to slowly get to an almost perfect equilibrium, where we are all balanced in almost all spots, just because if we're not perfectly balanced there's this little button than could expose us instantly? Do you want us all to get to a state where we are all "champions of balance" and every poor f.ker that's not balanced is sucked dry 500 hands after he deposits? How often do you think a REC/semi-REC/fish will re-deposit, once he sees he actually never has at least a freaking winning night, "like he used to 5 years ago", simply because everyone is exploiting every single leak he has? Because no one is making educated guesses anymore and they all go for sure kills, conveniently displayed while playing. Do you understand that my preference towards classic HUDs stems from the fact that it always keeps us guessing, to some extent, while still giving us some info? Whereas a scatter graph or a spike graph would, most likely, give us the definite answer? Yes, there are extremes, like the rock with 1% 3bet and the supervillain with perfectly balanced river bets (size-wise and value-wise), but these are all extremes, so can we discount them? More often than not his 3bet is gonna be somewhat "balanced" (at least from a pure mathematical value point of view, i.e. >2) and more often than not he's gonna be unbalanced with his betting in a lot of spots. So in these vast majority of cases, with a standard HUD you still have to make and educated guess about what to do (yeah, I know, I'm getting obnoxious with the term, I don't care

), while with your little scatter/spike graph you're gonna ship the pot because you have this cool piece of software.

And before you say something silly like "you're against progress, since having these sort of tools forces you to evolve as a player", let me stop you - no, I'm not against progress, but I AM against mindless unregulated greedy progress, in any field, because it leads to self-annihilation of all. Don't you think the recently discovered bots are progress, both intellectually (AI) and poker-wise? But would you like to play with a couple of bots at the table, for the sake of you playing more and more "balanced", while PS rakes all your stack?

So I'd much rather keep the educated guesses in the game, as much as possible, instead of us all thriving to play bot-like. This gives the non-professionals a chance to actually have some winning sessions, so they would come back 1 month later, because "they won big one night while bluffing and all, and then got soooooo unlucky the next day". There's that great quote that everybody knows and it still applies, even if it's old - you can shear a sheep many times, but only skin it once. With all this madness towards finding every single leak everyone has while playing at the table we're heading right there, where we're skinning the fk out the last poor sheep we have.

As for the techie stuff you quoted - I was just brainstorming out of my ass, I am absolutely positive it can be done. For example have PS monitor your db directly instead of HM doing it, have PS not starting and notifying you if you have the wrong version of NC etc etc etc. Technicalities, as they say.

Man, I gotta cut down on my posts

Peace all, going to sleep!

Last edited by devera; 06-16-2015 at 11:29 PM.

Quote

06-16-2015 , 11:18 PM

#1014

TheTender31

grinder

Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 548

I've read the majority of posts in this thread and have nothing to contribute that hasn't already been said. There have been some fantastic posts and, naturally, a lot of reallyyyyy terrible, selfish, shortsighted ones (looking at you, NC defenders).

I'm simply going to quote and/or link the ones that I feel are most in line w/ my stance on this topic and of which were clearly written by people with the health and longevity of (online) poker in mind. Special shout-out in advance to skier_5, raidalot, ArtyMcFly & Richas.

Note: I have edited most of these to highlights the parts I am in agreement with, the posts in their entirety can be found in the link above each quote. Emphasis is my own.

- Raidalot #1 - Cross-posted from the initial 'Skiercaddy' thread in NVG

Quote:

Originally Posted by raidalot

I think we should distinguish between various categories of automated assistance that have been mentioned itt:

(A) Static information - push/fold charts, strategy information, player notes etc

(B) Randomising software - generation (directly or indirectly) of outcomes according to a desired percentage.

(C) Database info - automatic collection of game data and storage in a database for analysis.

(D) Tracking info - opponent-specific info automatically collected by software and displayed in real time using a HUD. (HEM etc)

(E) In-game advice - dynamic software that monitors the game, recognises particular situations and highlights or hints at suggested actions. (NoteCaddy etc).

(F) Seating scripts - automation of gaining favourable treatment in lobbies.

My thoughts on these categories:

(A) is no real issue imo. If somebody wants to refer to notes they've made previously or play with a book/spreadsheet open then that's fine and there's no realistic way to stop it in any case.

(B) is meh imo. People could use a watch or other tool to randomise.

(C) is fine since players can obtain the same info from the site. If software makes that more convenient to analyse then that's no big deal. However (as ArtyMcFly points out) this facility can be seen as the root of other problems so perhaps, to prevent abuses, this data shouldn't be provided to players.

(D) is where unfairness creeps in. Although in principle everything displayed by a HUD could be looked up manually in (C), that's not a practical option. The automated provision of real-time opponent data on the screen changes the character of the game, modifying the required skill set, and gives users a distinct and unreasonable advantage over other players. In practice HUDs also act as a platform for category (E).

(E) should be classed as straight cheating imo. Of course the boundary line with (D) can be a little blurred. But any step beyond pure collection/display of stats should be considered part of this category. I would include things like:
- automatically highlighting easily exploitable attributes of particular opponents (such as too high ft3b)
- ability to look (in real time) at the opponent's range in similar spots to the current one
- real-time hints, suggestions (NoteCaddy style)
- provision of player stats beyond those acquired in game play

(F) seems unfair to me. I play tourneys not cash so don't care but if I did play cash I think I'd be pretty annoyed that the site allows some players to gain seating advantages over others through use of software. The site should get its act together and produce an equitable way to operate seating (preferably prioritising those prepared to sit and play all-comers).

My view is that (A), (B) and (C) should be permitted and the others banned. If (D) (ie HUDs) are permitted then some players will build on them and stretch the boundaries.

- Raidalot #2

Quote:

Originally Posted by raidalot

Such tools, notably HUDs, are different in nature to the others listed in that they provide:

(a) a major advantage to the player (anyone who disagrees doesn't understand poker)
(b) an advantage which can't be replicated by limited effort
(c) opponent-specific data
(d) large amounts of data (encapsulated)
(e) data which goes well beyond the memory capacity and data-collation skills of humans

Each of these are undesirable aspects imo. In addition, HUDs:

- act as a platform for even greater advantages to those willing and able to tailor them or use add-ons
- facilitate cheating, notably through use of hand histories acquired through sharing/trading and through cheating add-ons
- provide potential assistance/inputs to bots
- are seen as unfair by casual players
- are in fact unfair
- could generate very bad publicity for the game
- help kill the fish too quickly for a healthy eco-system
- generate a software war rather than skill battle
- fundamentally change the nature of the game (I prefer playing something approximating the game called poker rather than the game of gathering and interpreting large volumes of stats and chasing round for the latest add-ons etc)

Allowing this category also makes it impractical to draw a clear line on what exactly is allowed.

Item 4
Agreed to the extent those act solely as convenience devices. Would prefer they were offered as options on the client but meh.

My preference
Add all allowed features into the client and ban all external in-game software. Kill the problem at its root (through eg sn changes, anonymous tables, limiting provision of hh) as enforcement otherwise too problematic. Also ban anything which gives the player seating advantages over others. Announce the decisions now and implement from 1 Jan 2016.

- OMGClayDoll - Agree with everything here, no emphasis needed

Quote:

Originally Posted by OMGClayDol

would personally be up for banning all software during game if it was actually enforceable and I knew that no one else was using any software including HUDs etc. however unfortunately it's probably quite easy to use prohibited software being undetected (especially using it on an unconnected machine).

software like note caddy shouldn't be allowed either, obviously some basic poker knowledge is required to make use of most of the information but telling you stuff like "this guy 3bs these hands over the sample you have: (picture of all hands with colour coding based on frequency)" or "this guy folds to cbet on ace high boards is x" seems too much.
poker should not be about who has more powerful software etc, players should have to figure this stuff out themselves by doing stuff such as watching showdowns and making notes (crazy idea right?)

being able to obtain such an edge by being spoon-fed such specific stats and having to use the most basic logic is unfair, why should someone who plays a bunch of tables and doesn't see showdowns because of it be able to have software that tells them other players ranges and tendencies in every spot, "this guy only 5b all in with KK+" "this guy folds 80% over 38 similar scenarios in this spot"

idk just seems to me if I were a recreational player and had no idea about such software than saw or found out all these pros are using ridiculous software that tells them basically how I play in game without any skill of their own memory/study etc i would be annoyed. I don't need to post a pic to emphasise how detailed such software is these days. a lot of people reading this probably don't even realise how advanced stats can be.

- Agree with Richas here about what a HUD would look like IF allowed/enforceable (ideally part of Stars client?)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richas

To limit the power of HUDs players should be able to customise them to show whatever stats they like - but the same stats for each player. No dynamic HUD changes to tailor the ADVICE provided on how to play against that specific player. That's the dynamism that crosses the line IMHO.

- Great post from ArtyMcFly

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArtyMcFly

One reason I support a complete ban is that it's impossible to draw a line in the sand that doesn't favour one vested interest over another. It does not make logical sense to say "CoffeeHUD is fine, but SkierHUD is not" or "HEM is acceptable, but Notecaddy is not", or "They should ban Need4Seat, but allow Sharkystrator". All of these tools are are designed to do the same thing: to provide a computer-aided edge on the field.

Workable rules are those that are clear and simple. As I see it, there are two ways to create a fair and level playing field based on clear rules that don't penalize anyone for straying into a grey area:

1. No software aids are permitted.
or
2. Everything (up to and including GTO approxabots) is permitted.

I support option one. I fear that the players that want to cling to their HUDs and scripts are voting for their own obsolescence. They remind me of the shop assistant I met in Tesco four years ago that excitedly told me "We're getting the new self-scanning checkouts installed next week." She's now unemployed, obviously.

- Skier_5 post calling out CoffeeHUD and Spin&Go HUD specifically (how is this stuff currently allowed?)

- ArtyMcFly#2

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArtyMcFly

How can we have faith in Pokerstars' supposed desire to improve and update the T&Cs when [the list of software in OP of this thread] demonstrates a lack of knowledge of the purpose and functionality of the software mentioned?

If you want to make rules for policing online poker in 2015, it helps to know how poker is being played in 2015.

The contemporary threads about PLO bots give an additional indication that Stars HQ is somewhat out of touch with how the game has changed. It's interesting that one of the tools that Stars proposes limiting the use of (Notecaddy) has been a powerful instrument for comparing the esoteric stats of suspected bots on the network. When players apparently have better analysis technology (or better knowledge of how to use it) than the game integrity team, we have a serious problem. This is what poker is becoming: software vs software; bumhunter vs bumhunter; data analyst vs bot-maker; cartel vs staking stable... and a site that sits back and does nothing except collect the rake.

- Fantastic post by Skier_5, PLEASE READ IN ENTIRETY

Quote

06-16-2015 , 11:38 PM

#1015

worried

banned

Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 527

Quote:

Originally Posted by fish_but_lucky

What about being banned from the site? This a pretty harsh penalty, esp being banned from a site like stars.

Quote

06-17-2015 , 01:39 AM

#1016

MrBigFish

journeyman

Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 209

In my opinion printed charts should be allowed. Study, make your own charts, print and use them is ok. Banning them would be a great controversy because of enforceability. Another different thing is when you have a search engine and a massive amount of charts that covers a massive amount of spots. This is like an AI, is too powerful and should be banned. The problem is the search engine (an analogy would be the internet is too powerful because of the search engines, without them it will lose almost all the power).

Quote

06-17-2015 , 01:59 AM

#1017

PJs Ronin

enthusiast

Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 97

I have a feeling that Pokerstars will take the easy way out and a) cease providing hand histories and b) modify the client window graphics to eliminate scraping.

From their perspective all problems then go away, no?

Quote

06-17-2015 , 04:06 AM

#1018

LukeSilver

adept

Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 918

few things firstly the argument that people find a way of getting round the rules with a second computer etc is a not really an argument.

It may or may not be true I mean I know in theory the tech exists but still having to read one screen and then respond on a second screen, is not practical in real time multi tabling it would be difficult to do.

maybe though it is doable, however thats not an argument to say certain software should be allowed. We can use that same argument to justify fully fledged bots, as far as I understand thats even what some people have been trying to do. It goes further the exact same arguments put forward to justify bots and skiers software can be put forward to justify collusion. I mean if people have variance in there calls so there calling light but fluctuating it a bit working in teams but in such a situation that there is thousands of people on a team and you are rotating the team members for each team daily or weekly etc, it would be hard to detect.

that means those that are cheating and colluding have a clear advantage over those that are not. so we should allow collusion?

it would still be possible to detect this collusion eventually if someone with access to all the hand histories eg stars investigated it fully but in order to investigate something like that they would have to have a reason to suspect it which they might never get. However once we allow collusion it does not matter how good I am if I am not accepted into the right team I will never profit at any level of SNG again.

once we suspect collusion we can ask people to explain certain suspicious hands, if we suspected bots we could ask people to explain certain hands, etc if enough questions revealed they have no idea what poker is essentially yet there raking in large sums we could conclude they have been using bots.

I don't know maybe there is no way to stop it I do think given enough time online poker in its current form will have to die. I just do not think we have to accelerate its death by allowing everything and having a free for all, because some people may already be able to get round it.

I have suggested before that the only long term future of online poker is through land based casinos where people used casino machines where activity can be monitored and prohibited software cannot be added etc. it would be difficult to get a second computer down a casino to scan the screen and then advice etc.

However eventually the rise of technology and expansion of something like google glasses or even chips directly put into people contact lenses with computers in etc all possible at some point.

its unsustainable long term but that does not mean we should let it die quicker.

Quote

06-17-2015 , 04:17 AM

#1019

Malefiicus

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 6,417

The argument that "This doesn't perfectly solve the problem, people could do x instead of y and it would work" is poor. You establish the laws to capture people who break the rules you choose to enforce. You'll never catch everyone who breaks the law, and since that's true, what value is there in enforcing the law? Ultimately, questions like that lead to the obvious answer that while we'd like to make certain things impossible, so long as they're hard to do without a high level of risk, that's a strong enough incentive to keep the majority of people from abusing such things.

So, for all the idiots who somehow think that it's pointless since it's won't catch every single cheat, I can only say, you're dumb. No set of laws in life has a 100% success rate. In the real world, anyone can get past anything, ultimately we establish rules to keep the majority in line. That's what matters.

edit - I should also add that while the people saying "enforcability is an issue", are generally the smarter people in the group, many of them are implying that "If a fix isn't pefect, and there's a way for someone to cheat, then why would you add a rule that's not 100% effective." That implication is stupid.

Last edited by Malefiicus; 06-17-2015 at 04:34 AM.

Quote

06-17-2015 , 05:07 AM

#1020

punter11235

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 8,210

Quote:

no HUDs at all - almost pure guessing, considering the environment you're playing in. Not gonna repeat the argument about online vs live, cause it's there
classic HUDs - sweet spot imho
NC-like badges - almost no guessing (in way way way to many spots, considering the sheer power of custom built badges

Are you serious? Playing without HUDs is pure guessing?
Your posts read like: "I have my HUD and I like it but too lazy to work NC out so let's ban that while keeping what I am comfortable with".

They are by all reasonable means the same. Cleverly enough constructed static HUD is the same as "dynamic" one because the distinction between "static" and "dynamic" is very artificial. You can precompute all the info.
One reasonable distinction is about how/if they are allowed to read the game state. Even then though static clever enough HUD will have everything street-by-street one does if some care is taken for programming it.

Quote:

And what point exactly in the proposal suggests to ban HM2 and PT4?

Nobody argues for banning those, only for banning those during play.

I don't think you can reasonably argue to ban push-charts but keep HUDs. This just can't work because the HUDs can encode this and way more information. Push-fold charts are lower on ladder than HUDs because HUDs can do everything they can do and way more as well.

I think this post:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=620

Is the best thing written about the situation which maybe can help you understand how it looks from programmer/advanced user perspective.

Last edited by punter11235; 06-17-2015 at 05:30 AM.

Quote

06-17-2015 , 05:43 AM

#1021

FR-Nit

adept

Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 989

Quote:

Originally Posted by punter11235

Push-fold charts are lower on ladder than HUDs because HUDs can do everything they can do and way more as well.

I don't think that's true for all games. In a 6max-hyper SNG sophisticated push-fold charts probably are way more powerful than a HUD. In a ring-game with 100bb stacksize a collection of preflop-charts won't have a compareable impact.

Quote

06-17-2015 , 05:47 AM

#1022

devera

enthusiast

Join Date: Jun 2015 Posts: 92

Quote:

Originally Posted by punter11235

Are you serious? Playing without HUDs is pure guessing?
Your posts read like: "I have my HUD and I like it but too lazy to work NC out so let's ban that while keeping what I am comfortable with".

Considering you quote me, you could at least follow the words I actually used. I said almost pure guessing, considering you're playing most likely multiple tables with tens of different simultaneous opponents, should I really repeat my whole argument so you could follow it? If you're playing 2-3 tables with the same group of people (mostly) there's no "almost pure guessing" there, since you can profile your opponents and base your decision on that, not just the board, the cards and the action (see the high stakes players that play with no HUD). But would you able to do that if you're 12 tabling and always playing different villains that change almost by the minute?

As for the bit I bolded out.. Really, this argument is starting to irritate me, as it's the most backwards (or quite idiotic) that's being thrown back and forth. So I watch tens of videos, I put in a LOT of time configuring my HUD, looking at my game etc, but I'm against NC badges and stuff because I'm too lazy to work on it? Especially since it's blatantly clear it would make my whole gaming experience a lot easier? My brain is having a heart attack reading this, so to speak... Let alone the fact that anyone could buy a NC package with ~100 bucks and shave off hundreds of NC work hours and all they have left to do is get accustomed to the particular package they bought (playing a few thousands of hands).

So if you "read my post like that", don't even bother to read it again. It's clear you're overly attached to your live leak finder tool and there's no point in arguing against emotions, by definition.

Last edited by devera; 06-17-2015 at 05:58 AM.

Quote

06-17-2015 , 05:55 AM

#1023

KDash

enthusiast

Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 49

Quote:

Originally Posted by djle2

If only you followed your own suggestion. Your response was full of dribble. Straw grasping at best.

Explain why or say nothing.

Quote

06-17-2015 , 06:25 AM

#1024

Updown

stranger

Join Date: Jun 2015 Posts: 1

I think all players should have a choice. If somebody wants to play vs players without any soft -> welcome to special section in poker room. So everyone will be happy.