Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Internet Poker Discussions of Internet poker venues, including RB & bonuses.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-17-2015, 11:19 AM   #1051
Richas
veteran
 
Richas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the learning curve
Posts: 3,440
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by punter11235 View Post
But that's what current "static HUDs" are. You get player specific stats. The cherry-picking you describe is realtively minor detail. You could just display all of it all the time (or hide in easily accessible pop-ups) and color code the interesting (read: leaks) ones.
It will be the same for all the players, the color coding will be the same for all the players. Yet, it will be functionally the same as "advanced badges" described above.



But there is color-coding which have the same functionality. You can also change the fonts (making them small/unreadable for chosen parts of distribution).
Are you going to require that every stat is displayed in the same font, color and layout?

If you do then I have another work around: I will multiply my stats by 0 for values I consider normal. It will then display 0s everywhere but in places which are leaks.
This is just one well defined mathematical operation (multiplication by 0 for say 0-0.2 and 0.8-1.0) are you going to ban that operation while there are thousands, maybe millions way more complicated operations when deriving simple VPIP stat?

Do you see any sensible way to make VPIP legal but: {0 if 0-0.2 or 0.8-1.0, VPIP otherwise} not? I can assure you both use the same databaes searches and math operations.

Encoding push-fold chart using stats and color coding (or even stats alone) is trivial exercise as well. I can for example display 169 numbers which are always the same for every player and color code them (different coloring for every stat of course). Are you going to ban me displaying 169 zeros in different colors but allow "bet when missed cbet IP in single raised pot" ones which are completely standard in HUDs of today?

This tailoring to specific opponents is the exact reason HUDs exist in the first place. Their role is to bring attention to leaks. The only difference between NC and your default HM HUD is that one of them suck less at its job. There isn't any principal difference between them you can based rules on.

This is not a political problem. It's a technical problem. You are advocating for a distinction which is nonsense from math/programming point of view. You won't be able to write the rules to be at least somewhat consistent and achieve what you want unless you go into every single stat and say if it's ok but there are millions of them possible and in use already.
It is not minor, it is a huge restriction on the HUD, no drill down, no ability to access additional details just the static image on the HUD. No heat maps, spark charts just what can be presented on the screen by the static HUD.

You are right that it would allow someone to innovate, to develop stats of relevance to them but there would be a physical constraint on the amount of stats that could effectively be displayed as all would be displayed for all opponents. I could live with colour coding of those specific stats - the point is to limit the caability not end the usefulness of HUDs or legitimate data review.

If you can cope with 50 stats on every opponent, go for it but they would be static and shown for all opponents. In practice you would need to select the key stats you value rather than have hundreds and hundreds being worked in the background by the software and only displayed when relevant to that opponent.

The point is to impose reasonable limits upon HUD capability not to stop the best HUD users/customisers using them better than some opponents. It is a gradualist change to the ecosystem, a limitation on the current s/w rather than an extreme ban - it would allow multi tabling regs to adapt to the new rules and continue playing but also limit the transition to the CyBot world.

Feel free to innovate in the new rule structure - fixed displays that are the same for all opponents. No doubt some will make powerful HUDs from within those rules - good luck to you, meanwhile we have a system where Stars can check the data and display thanks to all approved HUDs signing up to that.

The absolutist ban all position is absurd, the absolutist let the S/W guys carry on running riot is not just absurd but fatal to the industry - that means finding a sensible set of rules in the grey middle ground.
Richas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 11:20 AM   #1052
DarkMattersMan
adept
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 961
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

What about an option that allows people who dont want to be abused by software to be displayed as anonymous?
DarkMattersMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 11:22 AM   #1053
TheDefiniteArticle
Indecisive
 
TheDefiniteArticle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 14,089
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkMattersMan View Post
What about an option that allows people who dont want to be abused by software to be displayed as anonymous?
I'd be happy with this if ticking such an option made everyone else anonymous to them too.
TheDefiniteArticle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 11:23 AM   #1054
roddy
adept
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: manchester uk
Posts: 980
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by FR-Nit View Post
So by banning the very tool which helped to discover the bot-ring you expect to improve things? Sounds like a very good idea
I may be wrong here, but from the little I've read I thought the reason bots were able to get so good was from 3rd party software? if not I would also be down with stars adding some kind of spyware to the client so they can see exactly what players are up to when they open up the client.
roddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 11:39 AM   #1055
Piers
veteran
 
Piers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,465
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by roddy View Post
I may be wrong here, but from the little I've read I thought the reason bots were able to get so good was from 3rd party software? if not I would also be down with stars adding some kind of spyware to the client so they can see exactly what players are up to when they open up the client.
Is Poker Stars objective here to stop bots, or to restrict genuine users from using tools that other users don't like. It makes a huge difference.

Most of the stuff seemed targeted at humans not bots.
Piers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 11:45 AM   #1056
devera
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 92
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by krazykarter View Post
@devera: While I agree with most of your posts, I still disagree with your point about HUDs, especially the way you frame your argument. To me it seems that the only reason you want to keep HUDs is that without them you won't be able to play 12+ tables at a time.

Your first post talked about the original spirit of poker. Since when does that include playing so many tables that you can't follow the action without the aide of a computer doing it for you?
What I meant by "spirit of poker" was to always keep up guessing to some degree, since it's a game of change with incomplete information. And I also explained why I think HUDs are a must for online poker. It's simply a different breed, but we could (and should) keep its essence. The fact that HUDs help people play more tables than what would be considered reasonable and stall the game is another issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richas View Post
The absolutist ban all position is absurd, the absolutist let the S/W guys carry on running riot is not just absurd but fatal to the industry - that means finding a sensible set of rules in the grey middle ground.
SO. MUCH. THIS. And I have to say it's really ironic how the NC advocates (or addicts), who use the tool and it's freakingly awesome capabilities to spot any unbalance in villains while trying be keep themselves as balanced as possible, are so unbalanced when it comes to evolution of poker software and live assistance, including live leak finders. I thought good players know to (or learn to) look at things without being results oriented and thinking long term. That's why I thought good poker players do..
devera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 11:48 AM   #1057
DarkMattersMan
adept
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 961
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDefiniteArticle View Post
I'd be happy with this if ticking such an option made everyone else anonymous to them too.
Of course. That would only be fair.
DarkMattersMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 11:49 AM   #1058
MrJuliusDhelas
banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 290
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTamBiscuit View Post
Steve
My 2c worth:

(My background: long term winning 100NL Zoom 6-max NLHE reg using HM2+NC)

Your OP:
1. You don't seem to realise how powerful raw HM2/PT4 are as custom stats enable (as far as I understand) everything NC can do. So if you seriously want to ban NC you'd better ban HM2/PT4 too. But serious, don't ban HM2/PT4 or NC as that would be absurd.

2. You don't seem to have any idea of what NC can do as I don't believe it does any more than display basic stats from previous hands (and I have defined and use over 100 NC badges and definitions). It merely displays these stats in a different way than underlying HM2/PT4 and this can make a HUD simpler/cleaner/easier/faster to interpret if you know how to code. But HUDs are very personal things. I love my customised HUDs but others may well hate them.

3. Some people seem to think a joint action like, say an "ISO" badge that indicates a player will call a pre-flop raise and then overfold to a flop bet is too advanced and should be banned. I disagree. IMO it just simplifies my HUD because the two stats are readily in HM2. Secondly, the "ISO" badge is NOT a license to print money by raising and betting because (Duh) the onus is on the player to properly interpret the stat (eg is my sample large enough for this to be reliable?, Is my sample too large and misleading about how player is currently playing? Will this player act this way vsHero?, Is Villain in a table seat/position where he might be trapping? Is this player re-adapting vsHero? Have I picked on this guy too much recently?) Players who mindlessly react to badges will lose money!

4. I think it is a total waste of time to post these questions on 2plus2. I only visited here and posted because of the email from NC. I would never have known of your post otherwise, IMO very few serious regs waste their time on 2plus2. You would be better off posting on the various training/coaching sites or directly emailing selected players with a survey as serious feedback is much more likely. These days, 2plus2 is full of useless, time-wasting trolls.

5. IMO the posters in this thread wanting NC banned are simply too lazy to work on their game. I am confident I will crush them with or without a HUD because I will outwork anyone until I do. This is not a brag as IMO I have very little natural talent for poker but my work ethic is second to none and in my experience work ethic destroys the "natural" but lazy player long term, especially if you at PS change the game conditions by for example banning HUDs. Just as regular game players complain about not being winners at Zoom. Or pre-Black Friday winners that are now losers. The real reason is they are lazy and are not willing to constantly outwork their opponents as game conditions constantly change. Constant change is part of poker! Adapt or lose!

6. Why are you not acting to kill the cartels in HU? I love HU but PS seems blissfully ignorant of sharkstrator's unfair advantage to its licensees. These types of tools effectively share knowledge of who is a reg to avoid and maximise seating against recreational players, information unavailable from the player's own play and therefore a clear violation of T&Cs and yet due to PS ignorance they thrive.

7. Why are you not acting to destroy seating scripts in reg games and force auto-seating on everyone? I occasionally play regular games but I am sick of 10+ waiting lists that destroy enjoyment of the game for all. I play Zoom because there is no delay. For a hardworking reg, IMO Zoom has just as much info as regular games to enable exploitation of opponents. It's just that lazy players waste the Zoom info. IMO lazy reg game players should be forced into a Zoom environment or a random seating fixed regular game (ie stay at the same table after folding but you NEVER get to choose what table you sit at or where you sit. Learn to adapt you lazy regs!).

8. I don't play PLO but I am aware of the current PLO bot scandal. Your obviously ignorant OP adds to my fear that PS has no current staff familiar with top level play at NLHE and no ability to detect and prevent bots from exploiting the PS NLHE games.

Good points

The cartel or the scripts are probably 10 times worse than some software programs used

IMO

Stars should do some market research with theyr own clients although i understand posting here might get some ideas

I also imagine stars dont want to ask hundreds of recreational players theyr opinion by email because some might get frightened and think

Hey now thats why i lose so much i better stop playn in this site !

The truth is this

Recs will always lose just as we if we play against a chess pro we will always lose in the long runŽ

Good regs win cause they work more have better strats are more disciplined , and not because of softw
(at least in 95% of cases)


Its shoking that Stars allows , scrips , cartels and now its worried with some software that in pratice is less harmfull than the first 2


I would like to ask Stars what do u really want ?

Seems u dont want to die from a stab in the heart but you are fine with a shot in your head

All players are free of using the allowed software (although i can only peak of HM2 wich is the only i use )

So it should be better to do a specific analysis + evaluation of each software
if not this is a big mess


About this thread i see too much off topic and inaccurate remarks
its possible 4 or 5 players to manipulate a thread with some friends

ONLY MARKET RESEARCH WITH YOUR OWN CLIENTS WILL HAVE BETTER RESULTS OF WHAT THE PLAYER POOL THINKS

(although theres a sensible point i wrote above )
MrJuliusDhelas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 12:02 PM   #1059
roddy
adept
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: manchester uk
Posts: 980
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piers View Post
Is Poker Stars objective here to stop bots, or to restrict genuine users from using tools that other users don't like. It makes a huge difference.

Most of the stuff seemed targeted at humans not bots.
I do use a hud, but if banning all 3rd party software does help in preventing bots (which by the way I was laughed at earlier I'm not sure it does now) and help the games, then I'm for a total ban. if they don't affect bots at all and the games don't carry on dying a quick death i'm cool with them staying.
roddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 12:11 PM   #1060
sixfour
should be called sevenfour
 
sixfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Tungsten Analysis
Posts: 69,015
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by krazykarter View Post
@devera: While I agree with most of your posts, I still disagree with your point about HUDs, especially the way you frame your argument. To me it seems that the only reason you want to keep HUDs is that without them you won't be able to play 12+ tables at a time.

I think that is a horrible argument for wanting to keep HUDs. Play less tables if you struggle to play so many. Mass tabling HUD using grinders are not enjoyable for the recreational player. We don't want to have to wait for your timebank so you can look at some stats before folding your trash hands preflop, every, single, time. These are the players that slow the game down and are no fun to play with.

Your first post talked about the original spirit of poker. Since when does that include playing so many tables that you can't follow the action without the aide of a computer doing it for you?
this is a great post

Quote:
Originally Posted by ben78 View Post
Somebody still argues for anonymous tables after the bot scandal? When you see that PS couldn't detect bots and needed players to do their job, no thanks.
if you're not confident in stars' ability to detect bots and other cheaters then there's a simple solution - don't play on stars. don't hold back progress just because you fear you won't be able to police a game yourself.
sixfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 12:22 PM   #1061
Alexdb
grinder
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 618
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Wouldn't an iOS app-only player pool really help in creating an environment in which people who wanted to play without HUDs/mass multitabling/additional software could just get on with it.

Somewhat equivalent to a Pokerstars OS, but that recs can understand.

Or am I underestimating the difficulty of getting custom software to interact with an app on iOS - I thought it was pretty well locked down/.
Alexdb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 12:27 PM   #1062
Piers
veteran
 
Piers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,465
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by roddy View Post
I do use a hud, but if banning all 3rd party software does help in preventing bots (which by the way I was laughed at earlier I'm not sure it does now) and help the games, then I'm for a total ban. if they don't affect bots at all and the games don't carry on dying a quick death i'm cool with them staying.
Trouble is banning 3rd party software aimed at helping humans play wont effect bots. Individuals using bots will be more computer aware than most other players, and will not have a problem with trivial work arounds like using multiple computers. And likely will have their own software to do the work of apps like note caddy. A Bot does not need to see a badge they can just manipulate the raw stats, only a human needs the visual clue.

Of course if you think using badges is bad and want to ban stuff like Note Cadddy to encourage a certain client base; That's fine, just don't make out you are doing it because of Bots.

As to banning Poker Stove – lol - I still cant get over it.

Last edited by Piers; 06-17-2015 at 12:36 PM.
Piers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 12:41 PM   #1063
MrsPrinzess
stranger
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 7
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Lets say Pokerstars would ban NC or some other 3rd Party Software. And i would make my grind on differnt sites(like Ipoker Party ect) where those Programms are allowed.
And i would have Stars open too and they detect that iam use a prohibet programm
it would be so sick if theywould ban players.
MrsPrinzess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 12:43 PM   #1064
punter11235
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: solving poker
Posts: 8,177
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
No heat maps, spark charts just what can be presented on the screen by the static HUD.
So no varying fonts or pop-ups either? You keep using "static", can you define what you mean by that? No fuzzy feel based description though. Try to give a rule which can be followed.
All the stats are already displayed for specific opponents, their very goal is to highlight leaks. This is just a display trick: badges, colors, different fonts. It's all the same. The mechanism is:

(display opponent specific stats) -> (if something out of order) -> (make it more visible)

Displaying 2000 numbers with 0.1mm font and only using 5mm one for numbers in chosen range is one way to do it. Is it static or dynamic?

Quote:
hundreds and hundreds being worked in the background
They don't need to be calculated in the background. They are calculated when you are not playing along with VPIP, PFR and Amount won in $ stats.

Quote:
Feel free to innovate in the new rule structure - fixed displays that are the same for all opponents. No doubt some will make powerful HUDs from within those rules - good luck to you, meanwhile we have a system where Stars can check the data and display thanks to all approved HUDs signing up to that.
If you allow for varying font size depending on numeric value of the stat I don't need to innovate anything.

Quote:
The absolutist ban all position is absurd, the absolutist let the S/W guys carry on running riot is not just absurd but fatal to the industry - that means finding a sensible set of rules in the grey middle ground.
Really?
punter11235 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 01:05 PM   #1065
ben78
newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 25
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by sixfour View Post
this is a great post



if you're not confident in stars' ability to detect bots and other cheaters then there's a simple solution - don't play on stars. don't hold back progress just because you fear you won't be able to police a game yourself.
Other networks are worse, bot infested; PS is probably the site with the least bots/cheaters in % because they actually do something about it. But I want players to be able to detect bots as well and with anonymous tables and/or without stats it's impossible.
ben78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 01:16 PM   #1066
Richas
veteran
 
Richas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the learning curve
Posts: 3,440
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by punter11235 View Post
So no varying fonts or pop-ups either? You keep using "static", can you define what you mean by that? No fuzzy feel based description though. Try to give a rule which can be followed.
All the stats are already displayed for specific opponents, their very goal is to highlight leaks. This is just a display trick: badges, colors, different fonts. It's all the same. The mechanism is:
Under my proposal.

No popups - if it cant fit on the HUD you don't get a quick link to it, you don't get a popup only for some players/scenarios

I'd be ok with ant colour coding or font changes, anything to ease readability within the strict restriction that you get the same stats for all players, not stats selected by the s/w - the colour/font would have to be a function of the core stat displayed.

Now I accept thatthis might get messy, it might be that the rules have to include a minimum and maximum font size too but that is detail - no 1 pixel stats with only the relevant in a readable size.
Richas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 01:16 PM   #1067
cneuy3
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,592
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by ben78 View Post
Other networks are worse, bot infested; PS is probably the site with the least bots/cheaters in % because they actually do something about it. But I want players to be able to detect bots as well and with anonymous tables and/or without stats it's impossible.
Maybe they could allow a selected team of "player" representatives to occasionally look over and analyze the data, keeping the names connected with the data anonymous. After all the data is still connected to the players within their own network. In the end though it's as sixfour pointed out and players need to put more belief in the network that they are playing on's ability to properly police their own games or choose not to play on that network.

PokerStars has the resources to hire the right people for this job and with all the data(not just some of it) they should be able to police it much better on average than the player pool.
cneuy3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 01:23 PM   #1068
mme
old hand
 
mme's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: true anti-CFR-HUDs
Posts: 1,668
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

shill fighting like its april 14, 2011. +1 to punter. defender of the static

gl all
mme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 01:26 PM   #1069
FR-Nit
adept
 
FR-Nit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 981
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richas View Post
It is some evidence but well short of full disclosure never mind proof. Certainly helps the case for NC now let's wait for the one making the allegation to return to the fray.
Any "news" on this one? Still waiting.....
FR-Nit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 01:28 PM   #1070
djle2
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,921
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerStars Steve View Post


Before implementing any new rules, we would like to hear from you, the players, as to what you think about the proposed changes. We will give you a period of 10 days for you to discuss and share opinions before we make a final decision.

For complete clarity, this does not mean that we will aim exclusively to make the decision that we think will be most popular in this forum. We are far more likely to be swayed by quality reasoning than by number of players sharing an opinion. If you wish to impact the decision, I encourage you to share not only your preferred outcome but also your reasoning.

If changes end up being made, there is likely to be a grace period for existing programs to be modified in order to comply with the new rules.

*

Edit/MH:
For the one who asked. Its been 6 days so far plus however long they need to figure it out before making an announcement
djle2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 01:33 PM   #1071
Richas
veteran
 
Richas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the learning curve
Posts: 3,440
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by FR-Nit View Post
Any "news" on this one? Still waiting.....
For what?

There are two options. The makers of NoteCaddy type software either

1)Had direct commercial relationships with data miners
or
2) Have a business supplying tools to dataminers that only benefits indirectly from such cheating.

Persoanlly I believe 1) was the case once upon a time and 2) was always true and is part of the current business.

Does that make it clearer for you?
Richas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 01:37 PM   #1072
iamblackornot
centurion
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 142
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

anonymous tables will make bots unpunished, impossible to detect. gto doesn't need stats much. and it's again all about regulars, cause recr. players would still lose loads of money regardless of soft, bots, anonymous tables and etc. all these talks about ecology are useless, cause u can't compensate fish losses enough without disbalancing conditions of the game. 100% rakeback wont help recs since their low volume and high loserate. mb starts should focus on banning bots and seating scripts
iamblackornot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 01:38 PM   #1073
FR-Nit
adept
 
FR-Nit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 981
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richas View Post
For what?

There are two options. The makers of NoteCaddy type software either

1)Had direct commercial relationships with data miners
or
2) Have a business supplying tools to dataminers that only benefits indirectly from such cheating.

Persoanlly I believe 1) was the case once upon a time and 2) was always true and is part of the current business.

Does that make it clearer for you?
Are you not capable of understanding your own post?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richas View Post
..... now let's wait for the one making the allegation to return to the fray.
FR-Nit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 01:39 PM   #1074
gmiko
centurion
 
gmiko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 100
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by devera View Post
  • Simple badges - Say a badge that only takes into consideration a single stat, like exploitable to turn cbets. Yes, you could color code the exact same stat to turn red when that threshold is hit and it would turn red just in the way the badge would activate itself or not, depending on villain. Logically, they're the same. Structurally, they're not, since that stat will ALWAYS be there in your hud, contributing to the clutter (be it green, red, brown w/e), while the badge will come and go. And if you think this is a minor difference, try envisioning a complex 40-50 stats HUD, each of which has some color coding. But, for argument's sake, let's say this is a minor difference to you (although it is one thing to try to spot your villain's leaks while eating up 50 colored numbers and it's a totally different one having the leaks pop up and showing you the way). But w/e, let's say they're completely the same. Now how about:
  • Complex badges - these comprise the VAST majority of them, as you can custom build them to insanity. They combine multiple different stats, board texture, action taken, position and whoever the fk knows what. And there, you know in an instant you can stab on the BTN the rivered flush vs your UTG villain after he cbet flop and checked turn, because a shiny lilttle square is telling you he folds at an exploitative frequency when opening in UTG, cbeting flop and then checking all the way, if the river completes a flop flush draw. How in the name of all the fks in the world is that similar to a HUD stat? Please, enlighten me. Yes, you maybe could reach the same conclusion by analyzing 3-4-5 stats of his and so on. Well, DO THAT, ok? Play some freaking poker, don't sh.it your pants with excitement because "look, another situation covered by my smart badges came up, yay!"



So let's not outlaw stealing cars off the street, since there will always be the ones that find ways to do it anyway, "even if not in as convenient form". Not comparing badges to stealing cars (hmmm), just pointing out your (lack of) logic.
As for your last remark... no, my dear fellow poker player, let us all get all the help at the table we could ever invent and turn ourselves into freaking GTO approxa-cybots and then wonder 5 years down the road what the fk happened to our beloved online poker and why did it turn into a freak show in a ghost town.
I hate myself for responding to you again, but I can't resist because you are lying to people and you need to stop that. There are a few others speaking mistruths and making up stuff but you seem to be the loudest one. It's futile speaking to you, and it is probably irrelevant for the decision of Pokerstars itself because they for sure have some smart people working on this who actually understand how NC works and they will ignore your false concerns, but it's not fair to people coming here who don't use NC and might believe you.

You talk so much and try hard to sound intelligent (and on occasion make me believe you are for a second) but it's really a bunch of gibberish because, while it sounds smart at first, it's all based on false assumptions and complete ignorance. Are you a right wing politican? Your motives for spreading lies even though you have no idea what you are talking about are unclear.

From you posts I can only assume you never even used Notecaddy, yet you present yourself as an expert on it's functions.

You focus so much on badges, without realizing badges are probably the least useful function of the program. Badges are meh, every single person I know who uses NC doesn't like them and doesn't even use them. They really aren't that useful to most people. They give no new or different information compared to the HUD numbers, they only make the information visually pleasing while taking up a lot of space in the HUD, big trade off. They are probably the most useful to people who have slow computers and have to wait 5 seconds for popups to open so they use a much less detailed badge instead.

If someone had badges as the ones you are giving in your examples, he would have a HUD filled with 500 badges and would not even be able to find the badge he needs. For that matter, he wouldn't even be able to see his cards.

And the other example you give of a complex badge that involves 5 other stats - do you realize a stat definition can do the same thing, only showing the stat as a number instead of a picture? I know a child can comprehend this and realize they are writing garbage for days now, and I'm sure you are intelligent enough to realize it. I don't care about your motives, be it laziness, pure spite, jealousy of young people, you being 70 years old and not being able to process a lot of information at the same time, or whatever, just don't spread false information and make up stuff.

It is not important if you deem HUDs or NC fair, or if you think that is what online poker should be or shouldn't. It's not you who determines what something is. It's beside the point that you are wrong. In a game where you play vs maybe a thousand different players in one week without even being able to see them, arguing that the essence of such a game is reading a person is beyond ridicilous. The evolution of online poker itself tells you what it is and who should win at it - the player who learns GTO and theory, figures out his player pool tendencies (to battle unknowns effectively) and learns to use and interpret stats correctly and uses that information to exploit the known opponent without making himself very exploitable as well. It's not an easy thing to do. Remove all that layers you need to be skilled at to excel at this game and it becomes flat and boring. HUD and NC are the closest thing to a live experience playing one table and reading the player that you can get. I don't want to autopilot playing 24 tables while playing my best GTO strategy, not because it wouldn't make me money - but because it would be boring as hell. Same as playing 1 table and focusing on my opponents. Sure, it's fun live. Online? Hell no. But what I think and what you think about that is irrelevant.

It doesn't matter at all. What matters to Pokerstars is - will Pokerstars profit? What matters to us who make a living playing this game is the same - will we profit? And we can't profit if Pokerstars dies. If you want to write something smart, type an argument why would banning NC or banning HUDs lead to better games and increase Pokerstars profits long term? Stop typing your personal opinions of what online poker should be and what you deem as fair. No one cares about that, especially them.

Things that everyone agrees are unfair are already banned. Bots, collusion, card sharing etc. It's clear how games and online poker would suffer if that was allowed.

For the tenth time, if you write a good argument about why something should be forbidden even though it was fair game for 10 years (and that argument has to be flawless and based on strong undeniable facts and preferably backed up by a strong study) - and reason for the ban being that it would lead to more money for both Pokerstars and the players, I will agree with you in a flash.

As a professional poker player, it's not in my best interest to be able to use a HUD or NC regardless of the consequences, it's in my best interest for games to thrive. If your arguments were strong and had logic, I would be on your team. I hope to play this game 30 years from now. I don't want it to die. And if your proposals were good for poker, I would agree with them.

What does an anti vaccine lunatic do when you present them with arguments on why his views are idiotic and dangerous? He tells you that you are a selfish, greedy bastard, that you are a part of a conspiracy and that you want to kill your child, and his, that you support the new world order and want to make money regardless of consequences - while it's the opposite, you just want what is best for everyone - to be immunized and safe. Similar thing happening here. GIVE ARGUMENTS.

If you want to change something, you need to have a reason, backed up by strong arguments. You don't, you don't even pretend to try to make some up, but you sure do know how to make stuff up about the programs you don't like. You are shameless.

But no, let's cry and whine how those damn NC users have an unfair advantage because they are willing to do the hard work and learn how to recognize and exploit leaks. If NC is so powerful, and you are so damn smart, why the f are you not a poker millionaire? Cause your heart is made of chocolate and you don't want to exploit poor unknowing people? Hell no, that's not it. If you could, you would.

And no, conspiracy theorists, I am not a NC shill, I didn't even get the email. It's just a shame people are bashing on the program that brought online poker to a new level.

You are welcome to use it against me.

Last edited by gmiko; 06-17-2015 at 01:50 PM.
gmiko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 01:45 PM   #1075
Richas
veteran
 
Richas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the learning curve
Posts: 3,440
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by FR-Nit View Post
Are you not capable of understanding your own post?
Oh right, despite quoting me you were not really asking me anything at all. FYI it turns out that in a mere 22 hours he has not returned to the fray, but you knew that already.

I suggest buying the attention span extension pack for your existing Patience 2.0 package.
Richas is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive