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, 06:02 PM   #1126
djle2
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,921
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by KDash View Post
It seems like every time you read a well explained and well argumented post in favor of NC, you think that this post doesn't make any sense. The only problem is that you can never explain why.
You and Gmiko were the only ones I bashed for having a crook of an explanations. Could be one more but thats besides the point/

Seems fitting you would think of Gmikos responses as well explained/argumented. Not going to put in effort to respond to such horrendous explanations because you and him will just rely with the same atrocious blabber.


this thread is about additional software so that article about huds is moot. Huds are staying. I wish PS will get rid of huds too but that aint going to happen.

Last edited by djle2; 06-17-2015 at 06:16 PM.
djle2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 06:10 PM   #1127
devera
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 92
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

There's this thing in psychology that has a direct application to gambling, called random positive reinforcement. Most easily explained with a trivial example - say you have a roulette addict, playing a game you can't mathematically beat (yet people keep trying for hundreds of years). So why do people still play a game that's obviously unbeatable? The devil is in the details, as they say.

The house's edge in a game of roulette is deceptively small, about 3%. And that is exactly the point - since it's so small, all players (which are all losers) do win from time to time, simply because the house has such a "small" edge. Variance kicks in and "helps" the gambling addict and that is random positive reinforcement. So he will come again and again and again, for years, regardless of the fact that he knows he is down a lot. So what if he's down like crazy? He won enough times that he still thinks he can turn the tables at some point. At a game that is mathematically unbeatable. And all that because of that measly 3%. No, let me rephrase - all of that precisely because of that measly 3%.

Now apply this to poker, dear s/w freaks. Having live leak finders while playing is like you're increasing that 3% house edge the roulette has to a 10% or 20% or w/e. Do you think our dear gambler would still come to play if, instead of winning 1 out of 3 nights at that damn red&black wheel, he just wins 1 out of 10? Can you draw the lines now, can you make the parallels yourselves?

And to whoever has itchy fingers and just dies to hit back saying "you don't win faster vs a fish with a HUD or live leak finder etc".. can you please, for the love of God, stop talking out of your asses for 5 god damned seconds? Just stop, please..
devera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 06:22 PM   #1128
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 gmiko View Post
So, first your argument was fish lose too much too fast because we exploit them with our super stats, let's ban HUDs so they don't lose as quickly. Now it's if we ban HUD's they will lose even quicker, but they will deposit more. This must be deliberate trolling.

No one would be against that science fiction scenario.
Do you even get what gambling is? Do you get what variance is?

Again, roulette is totally unbeatable. You can't win at it long term, it is a mug's game. So why is it still played all around the world, by more people than play poker? Why do people come back to roulette again and again? Well the kicker is that even with a house edge that means 97.3% only gets returned to players in about 30% of sessions the player wins!

That is the magic trick that makes roulette players play roulette.

Now in contrast, in today's poker world the rec player who is bum hunted, seat grabbed, faces nothing but regs with software aids and maybe some cheat data does not get a winning session from a decent sized deposit. Not a one. He gets to play small pots, or rather gets to not play pots he has contributed to as the regs out agg him so he bleeds a few blinds at a time and rarely gets to play multi street poker or make any interesting calls or bluffs, he just gets relentlessly chipped at and targetted by the regs.

That's the problem. Lack of variance. Now I know it is counter intuitive to you but reducing the edge the regs have over the rec increases the regs income. The reason is that the rec gets his magic 20%+ of winning sessions due to the magic of varience, or maybe he just gets a bit better a run in a tournament with a few juicy hands and managing an hour or so with an above average stack. He gets som play - some variance, some hope of a win for his money, which means he will deposit again.

Again, please try to listen to what I have proposed, I have NOT proposed banning HUDs, nor annonymous tables. I have proposed restricting the power of HUDs and mandating that any aproved HUD allows the site to check it's display and the data in that display is compliant.

The proposal is evolutionary not revolutionary, it is enforceable and it is likely to have a significant positive impact on the rec player experience - which means more money for Stars and more money for Regs. The cherry being that the recs are happier too.
Richas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 06:40 PM   #1129
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 Richas View Post
Do you even get what gambling is? Do you get what variance is?

Again, roulette is totally unbeatable. You can't win at it long term, it is a mug's game. So why is it still played all around the world, by more people than play poker? Why do people come back to roulette again and again? Well the kicker is that even with a house edge that means 97.3% only gets returned to players in about 30% of sessions the player wins!

That is the magic trick that makes roulette players play roulette.

Now in contrast, in today's poker world the rec player who is bum hunted, seat grabbed, faces nothing but regs with software aids and maybe some cheat data does not get a winning session from a decent sized deposit. Not a one. He gets to play small pots, or rather gets to not play pots he has contributed to as the regs out agg him so he bleeds a few blinds at a time and rarely gets to play multi street poker or make any interesting calls or bluffs, he just gets relentlessly chipped at and targetted by the regs.

That's the problem. Lack of variance. Now I know it is counter intuitive to you but reducing the edge the regs have over the rec increases the regs income. The reason is that the rec gets his magic 20%+ of winning sessions due to the magic of varience, or maybe he just gets a bit better a run in a tournament with a few juicy hands and managing an hour or so with an above average stack. He gets som play - some variance, some hope of a win for his money, which means he will deposit again.

Again, please try to listen to what I have proposed, I have NOT proposed banning HUDs, nor annonymous tables. I have proposed restricting the power of HUDs and mandating that any aproved HUD allows the site to check it's display and the data in that display is compliant.

The proposal is evolutionary not revolutionary, it is enforceable and it is likely to have a significant positive impact on the rec player experience - which means more money for Stars and more money for Regs. The cherry being that the recs are happier too.
Figure it out with your friend above who is still claiming the opposite.

So you are basically claiming that if fish lost more money, because of higher variance (because of larger pots) they might more often lose or win more and because of that they would deposit more?

But on the other hand, you are also claiming fish would lose less if there were no HUDs and that variance would be smaller.

(When I say YOU I don't mean you personally but group you guys together because it's just pointless to reply to everyone individually, especially when some of you might be the same person)

Don't make assumptions on what I understand and what I know. Even if I had no clue about poker and gambling I could tell you both posts above have flawed logic, contradict themselves and are not based on evidence but on false or weak assumptions, are looking at things black and white and are full of blank statements.

Last time. Prove no HUD means better games. I am intentionally not saying prove no Notecaddy means better games because NC is so irrelevant and with little or no impact on the games that it's absurd to make it the central part of the discussion.

If you can't produce, just don't write anything. Your personal subjective opinion based on no real data but only on your basic knowledge of psychology (like that is the only factor) is not enough to even be a starter to the discussion.

And if controlling software (in this nicely imagined fictional world - because that's what it is until proof is presented) would make the games super soft again and make fish lose more but deposit more because they have more fun, don't you think a professional poker player like myself, if he believed that, wouldn't be louder about banning software than you? I am being accused of being selfish and thinking about my bottom line and being told I would get better games and my winrate would get higher at the same time. Contradictions and logic are not compatible.

Last edited by gmiko; 06-17-2015 at 06:51 PM.
gmiko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 06:43 PM   #1130
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 gmiko View Post
I started playing online poker as a profession the day I turned 18.
There we have it. You are not a gambler, never have been, you have no real experience of being a recreational gambler of any sort at least certainly not poker.

Your experience and mine are completely different. Now can you accept that I might just have a better on what being a rec is, a better idea of the rec experience and the impact of your software tools have on the experience of rec players?

I get that you like your tools, that your perspective is narrowly focussed on what the HUD and add ons give you but just for a moment try to look beyond your HUD and your software and look at the bigger picture and the impact upon recs of adding ever more powerful software onto a game where the rec was losing already?
Richas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 06:54 PM   #1131
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

stems from the (wrong) mantra that you max your profits if you max EV in every spot ? what they did not tell him is that the most +EV move is to get a profitable game going in the first place. #oldschool
mme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 07:00 PM   #1132
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 Richas View Post
There we have it. You are not a gambler, never have been, you have no real experience of being a recreational gambler of any sort at least certainly not poker.

Your experience and mine are completely different. Now can you accept that I might just have a better on what being a rec is, a better idea of the rec experience and the impact of your software tools have on the experience of rec players?

I get that you like your tools, that your perspective is narrowly focussed on what the HUD and add ons give you but just for a moment try to look beyond your HUD and your software and look at the bigger picture and the impact upon recs of adding ever more powerful software onto a game where the rec was losing already?
Wow this is so annoying. It is not about my perspective. It is not about yours. It's about consequences for the game, for the Pokerstars profits, for the winrates.

Rec will always lose. The only study that is referenced in this 1000 post thread says that they lose more in games without a HUD. How do you comment on that?

What the f is all that talk about hypotethical new super powerful software? With current TOS, without violating the rules, what could it do that you are so scared of? And if something so scary and powerful is made, it's going to be banned anyway.. WHEN IT IS MADE.
gmiko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 07:04 PM   #1133
TopPair2Pair
veteran
 
TopPair2Pair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 3,341
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richas View Post
Your experience and mine are completely different. Now can you accept that I might just have a better on what being a rec is, a better idea of the rec experience and the impact of your software tools have on the experience of rec players?
Everyone's experiences playing poker online or live are different. To bubble wrap the issue into gambler versus professional is very lazy imo.

Just because you can relate to a rec/gambler; this doesn't mean that a significant population of say 1,000 gamblers would not enjoy the experience of using 3rd party software functionality built within the poker stars client.

You guys are soo far off the topic of the first post its incredible.

And all this noise that your creating, murders any voice that the poker community does have.
TopPair2Pair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 07:09 PM   #1134
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 mme View Post
stems from the (wrong) mantra that you max your profits if you max EV in every spot ? what they did not tell him is that the most +EV move is to get a profitable game going in the first place. #oldschool
I thought that is what we all want. For games to stay profitable / become even more profitable.

Some of the steps to make that happen are quite obvious:
lobby for regulation of poker and merging of the entire world in a one player pool, get poker back in USA, introduce China and Japan to online poker
remove Zoom
remove games with super small edges
remove Spin and goes and similar bs games
introduce a social environment to the game, make it fun for recreational players
better promos and advertising (dont promote zoom for gods sake)
steer casino and sports betting players to poker games (AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND!!!)
deal with bots and give back not only what they won in the games, give back the rake that was paid because that is stolen money as well
.....500 other things
then maybe deal with scripts and data mining but carefuly without sacrificing the quality of software
.....500 other things
now that you have dealt with other bigger obvious problems, you had time to do some studies and experiment with some things, present the findings and let's talk about restricting HUDs (if there is something to talk about at all)
gmiko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 07:17 PM   #1135
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 gmiko View Post
Last time. Prove no HUD means better games. I am intentionally not saying prove no Notecaddy means better games because NC is so irrelevant and with little or no impact on the games that it's absurd to make it the central part of the discussion.
The MPN report
http://www.thempn.eu/blog/world-without-huds/
uses anon tables as a proxy not just for No HUDs (in reality they can have HUDs showing just that session's data) but it is also clearly a proxy for removing all additional software add ons (and data cheating). it is only a proxy for no hud or no software aids but it'll do

The report shows that the games have more action, that losing players have a higher proportion of winning sessions. That's what happens - that is what we want.

Now Stars will have a much better data source for proving the way that the evolution of the game - including software aids - has changed over time. Some of that will be non software, better coaching, new styles yada yada but however the change is made up software improvements is a significant part of it.

All they need to do is look at losing/depositing players and work out how often they have a winning session. My prediction is that over the past 5 years they will find that the proportion of winning sessions has declined significantly. That is a simple bit of number crunching - hey all you database crunchers may be able to do it just from PTR.

Stars can run that research quite easily.

Now step two of the research - check player retention against that key figure of winning session percentage. Here is what a basic understanding of gambling and gamblers (not professionals) tells me - the churn of players will rise significantly as the proportion of winning sessions falls. It shouldn't be linear, it should be that once a certain point is reached, call it the "no hope horizon", player retention should drop off a cliff (deposits made, number of sessions played, quitting alltogether, the whole lot of figures for participation by players should go south as the no hope horizon kicks in).

Now in contrast you will not see the same effect based upon amount lost/deposited - it is not the amount that the player is depositing that leads them to quit playing, it is the lack of varience, the lack of winning session(s) that kills the player, loses Stars money and so also loses you money.

Stars can crunch the numbers, strewth they probably have them anyway, it is not like player retention and acquisition isn't a pretty big deal at Amaya towers.

I don't expect them to come back and say owt about them I mean saying that depositing players win less often now than in the past is scarcely news and hardly good PR - nor do I expect them to confirm that players with low proportions of winning sessions quit, I mean it is scarcely new, scarcely shocking - for me the interesting bit is working out for poker just where the "no hope horizon" is and where the rate drops off a cliff for those players - that's the interesting figure in gambling research terms, it is also the interesting figure in terms of player retention actions by Stars, but hey I think they probably know that already.

Now assuming all this is true, none of it is earth shattering stuff, none of it surprising, it is all basic stuff ....then Stars need to look at how close many players are to the No Hope Horizon, the more that are close to it the more urgent restrictions on software or more measures to add a bit of varience to the games is.
Richas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 07:44 PM   #1136
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 Richas View Post
The MPN report
http://www.thempn.eu/blog/world-without-huds/
uses anon tables as a proxy not just for No HUDs (in reality they can have HUDs showing just that session's data) but it is also clearly a proxy for removing all additional software add ons (and data cheating). it is only a proxy for no hud or no software aids but it'll do

The report shows that the games have more action, that losing players have a higher proportion of winning sessions. That's what happens - that is what we want.

Now Stars will have a much better data source for proving the way that the evolution of the game - including software aids - has changed over time. Some of that will be non software, better coaching, new styles yada yada but however the change is made up software improvements is a significant part of it.

All they need to do is look at losing/depositing players and work out how often they have a winning session. My prediction is that over the past 5 years they will find that the proportion of winning sessions has declined significantly. That is a simple bit of number crunching - hey all you database crunchers may be able to do it just from PTR.

Stars can run that research quite easily.

Now step two of the research - check player retention against that key figure of winning session percentage. Here is what a basic understanding of gambling and gamblers (not professionals) tells me - the churn of players will rise significantly as the proportion of winning sessions falls. It shouldn't be linear, it should be that once a certain point is reached, call it the "no hope horizon", player retention should drop off a cliff (deposits made, number of sessions played, quitting alltogether, the whole lot of figures for participation by players should go south as the no hope horizon kicks in).

Now in contrast you will not see the same effect based upon amount lost/deposited - it is not the amount that the player is depositing that leads them to quit playing, it is the lack of varience, the lack of winning session(s) that kills the player, loses Stars money and so also loses you money.

Stars can crunch the numbers, strewth they probably have them anyway, it is not like player retention and acquisition isn't a pretty big deal at Amaya towers.

I don't expect them to come back and say owt about them I mean saying that depositing players win less often now than in the past is scarcely news and hardly good PR - nor do I expect them to confirm that players with low proportions of winning sessions quit, I mean it is scarcely new, scarcely shocking - for me the interesting bit is working out for poker just where the "no hope horizon" is and where the rate drops off a cliff for those players - that's the interesting figure in gambling research terms, it is also the interesting figure in terms of player retention actions by Stars, but hey I think they probably know that already.

Now assuming all this is true, none of it is earth shattering stuff, none of it surprising, it is all basic stuff ....then Stars need to look at how close many players are to the No Hope Horizon, the more that are close to it the more urgent restrictions on software or more measures to add a bit of varience to the games is.
Now this post makes more sense. If your assumptions are correct, and can be proven, and there would be no other disastrous effect on the games then maybe total HUD ban might be a way to go long term (after they have dealt with more important stuff that I mentioned). But there are thousands of other factors that you can't predict and it certainly is not as simple as high variance = better games and higher winrates. They should experiment with stuff like that on FT which is a failure anyway.

So just to be clear, you are for banning of ALL HUDs and HUD related software?

Do you think anonymous tables would be good?

Anonymous tables with basic HUD like Bovada?

Normal regular tables with no HUD at all > anonymous tables?
gmiko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 07:55 PM   #1137
KptBomba
grinder
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 474
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by gmiko View Post
Figure it out with your friend above who is still claiming the opposite.

So you are basically claiming that if fish lost more money, because of higher variance (because of larger pots) they might more often lose or win more and because of that they would deposit more?

But on the other hand, you are also claiming fish would lose less if there were no HUDs and that variance would be smaller.

(When I say YOU I don't mean you personally but group you guys together because it's just pointless to reply to everyone individually, especially when some of you might be the same person)

Don't make assumptions on what I understand and what I know. Even if I had no clue about poker and gambling I could tell you both posts above have flawed logic, contradict themselves and are not based on evidence but on false or weak assumptions, are looking at things black and white and are full of blank statements.

Last time. Prove no HUD means better games. I am intentionally not saying prove no Notecaddy means better games because NC is so irrelevant and with little or no impact on the games that it's absurd to make it the central part of the discussion.

If you can't produce, just don't write anything. Your personal subjective opinion based on no real data but only on your basic knowledge of psychology (like that is the only factor) is not enough to even be a starter to the discussion.

And if controlling software (in this nicely imagined fictional world - because that's what it is until proof is presented) would make the games super soft again and make fish lose more but deposit more because they have more fun, don't you think a professional poker player like myself, if he believed that, wouldn't be louder about banning software than you? I am being accused of being selfish and thinking about my bottom line and being told I would get better games and my winrate would get higher at the same time. Contradictions and logic are not compatible.
This is quite funny because you try to be smart but thats actually very easy to prove.
People pay ridiculous money to play on bovada/bodog where the games are anonymous which makes HUDs a lot less efficient.
Unibet with no table selection and where you can change your screen name all the time.
And lastly Microgaming which is even more interesting because they offer both anonymous tables and normal tables and the anonymous tables are a lot softer on average.
They now introduce random screen name changes to become more like Unibet.

So yes the games where there are no HUDs/HUDs are less efficient are softer BY FAR.
KptBomba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 08:01 PM   #1138
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 gmiko View Post
So just to be clear, you are for banning of ALL HUDs and HUD related?

Do you think anonymous tables would be good?

Anonymous tables with basic HUD like Bovada?

Normal regular tables with no HUD at all > anonymous tables?
Jees, No I don't want to ban all HUDs, that would be far too destructive of the current business model for both site and regs. I want HUDs restricted as outlined before, plus I want the site able to check the data being used and that the HUD display complies (totally static, same stats for all players, HUD user able to choose any stat he likes).

I am happy for sites to offer no HUD choices or to offer annonymous tables but the PLO Bot ring scandal/collusion concerns would mean I would not opt for annonymous tables myself.

I have played on HUDless sites and sites restricted in terms of multitabling and they are fine but as we all know Stars is where it is at and as I now mostly play mixed game formats, Stars is pretty much the only option with liquidity.

It seems my literary allusion re the No Hope Horizon was either missed or ignored so here it is, with apologies to Douglas Adams.

http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Shoe_Event_Horizon
Richas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 08:09 PM   #1139
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 KptBomba View Post
This is quite funny because you try to be smart but thats actually very easy to prove.
People pay ridiculous money to play on bovada/bodog where the games are anonymous which makes HUDs a lot less efficient.
Unibet with no table selection and where you can change your screen name all the time.
And lastly Microgaming which is even more interesting because they offer both anonymous tables and normal tables and the anonymous tables are a lot softer on average.
They now introduce random screen name changes to become more like Unibet.

So yes the games where there are no HUDs/HUDs are less efficient are softer BY FAR.
That is very narrow minded and simplistic way of looking at things. To continue in the black and white theme, why aren't Microgaming, Bovada, Bodog and Unibet taking over the market from Pokerstars? To give one more subjective, irrelevant view of the games - I tried microgaming at the end of last year and those were the worst, most reg infested games I have ever seen in my life. NL20 on MGN was like NL100 on Stars, there was like one fish per 4 tables, sometimes 1 per 8 (and considering the total number of tables is like 12, thats pretty amazing).
gmiko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 08:15 PM   #1140
iamblackornot
centurion
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 142
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

1. poker is not a casino game like a roulette, it's a skill-based game
2. all talks about 3% casino edge are inappropriate. "house" in poker is a room, not regulars. and room in poker has significant "edge". without rake there would be a lot of winning players. the perfect scheme for a room - everyone playing allin shootouts. no edge, everything is "fair", max rake EV.
3. sometimes it looks like it's what the 'gamblers' want. i had some experience playing offline with some amateurs and a night would always end up with a flip tournament, which seemed to bring more fun for them than a regular sng. that's the reason, why i don't want stars to listen to 'gamblers' because they tend to make roulette out of everything cuz more 'fun'. im 100% sure that if stars would implement a slot machine-like poker, where u play with ai, this kind of poker would be a bingo for recs. interesting thing - they would easily lose thousands in casino games knowing it's minus ev game, and at the same time they would make a soap opera of complains because they lost 50 dollars in several days.
4. room 1st priority is profit, that's why while claiming to improve poker ecology they introduce and promote stuff like zoom, spin'n'goes that dry out sng and cash pools, reducing edge, killing "the spirit thing" (table dynamics) and slightly turning poker into a semi-casino. seems like they want to take maximum money out poker as quickly as they can and leave a dead corpse.
5. i would sum up, that these adjustments recs wish for would only make regulars and pro poker lives tougher. since they want to ban nc, poker calculators but don't give a damn about bots, seating scripts, their real intentions become obvious
iamblackornot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 08:16 PM   #1141
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 Richas View Post
Jees, No I don't want to ban all HUDs, that would be far too destructive of the current business model for both site and regs. I want HUDs restricted as outlined before, plus I want the site able to check the data being used and that the HUD display complies (totally static, same stats for all players, HUD user able to choose any stat he likes).

I am happy for sites to offer no HUD choices or to offer annonymous tables but the PLO Bot ring scandal/collusion concerns would mean I would not opt for annonymous tables myself.

I have played on HUDless sites and sites restricted in terms of multitabling and they are fine but as we all know Stars is where it is at and as I now mostly play mixed game formats, Stars is pretty much the only option with liquidity.

It seems my literary allusion re the No Hope Horizon was either missed or ignored so here it is, with apologies to Douglas Adams.

http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Shoe_Event_Horizon
Well there is a reason why I asked you that question again. If you are not against HUDs completely but just about restricting them, then all your potentionally valid points and arguments that I actually respected are irrelevant.

Because just constricting HUDs while being impractical and super hard to control and impossible to figure out where the line should be - WOULD HAVE NO IMPACT ON THE GAMES. If you think restricting some features of the HUD would have a big impact on the games you are dreaming. The only thing it would do is piss people off.

Last edited by gmiko; 06-17-2015 at 08:27 PM.
gmiko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 08:37 PM   #1142
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 gmiko View Post
Well there is a reason why I asked you that question again. If you are not against HUDs completely but just about restricting them, then all you valid points and semi arguments that I actually respected are irrelevant.

Because just constricting HUDs while being impractical and super hard to control and impossible to figure out where the line should be - WOULD HAVE NO IMPACT ON THE GAMES. If you think restricting some features of the HUD would have a big impact on the games you are dreaming. The only thing it would do is piss people off.
I think you underestimate the impact of the restrictions but maybe you are right. Maybe my proposal is too cautious, maybe it has been developed to fit in with Stars current need, to redefine the restrictions on third party software in a way that caps it's capabilities but without upsetting the status quo too much.

My belief is that this proposal would significantly help the current situation with regard to recs on Stars and stall the software arms race. The end of heatmaps in HUD, sparkgraphs, player specific badges/stats etc etc must have an impact if people pay for em/use em but even if this is not true and people are paying for this stuff and it has no impact upon how the game is played the proposal has some other key benefits

1) It gets HUD providers to open up the data used to allow sites to review it - this effectively kills data mining for use in game, a feature that should appeal to all, especially recs.
2)This opening of the s/w up to the site allows the display to be policed
3) It places retrictions on the future development of HUD based/integrated s/w packages - the new design restrictions make the FUTURE s/w harder to develop/implement/use.
Richas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2015, 09:14 PM   #1143
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 Richas View Post
I think you underestimate the impact of the restrictions but maybe you are right. Maybe my proposal is too cautious, maybe it has been developed to fit in with Stars current need, to redefine the restrictions on third party software in a way that caps it's capabilities but without upsetting the status quo too much.

My belief is that this proposal would significantly help the current situation with regard to recs on Stars and stall the software arms race. The end of heatmaps in HUD, sparkgraphs, player specific badges/stats etc etc must have an impact if people pay for em/use em but even if this is not true and people are paying for this stuff and it has no impact upon how the game is played the proposal has some other key benefits

1) It gets HUD providers to open up the data used to allow sites to review it - this effectively kills data mining for use in game, a feature that should appeal to all, especially recs.
2)This opening of the s/w up to the site allows the display to be policed
3) It places retrictions on the future development of HUD based/integrated s/w packages - the new design restrictions make the FUTURE s/w harder to develop/implement/use.
So, even if it has no impact on the games let's ban it/restrict it because hell, why not? While you are competent enough to use a HUD you can't be bothered to go more in depth and learn NC? Or you are a rec and you have no business discussing software that pros use that you don't úse and obviously don't understand - not how it works and not how it impacts the games.

Reason number 3 is the worst - let's restrict software to restrict software so we can restrict software in the futre. What? We get it. You hate software. Probably hate windows too. I don't even understand why you play online.

Even if you didnt write it, it wouldn't be hard to guess you are around or over 50. It's like in politics, old conservative people voting against every kind of progress because they are set in their ways and can't adapt to change. If you really had the best interest of the games at heart, with no personal feelings dictating your thoughts you would not have contradicting beliefs, you would only care and talk about the facts. Which you don't. And if you don't have them, you just make them up to support your ways. And don't be mad, I am not insulting you as a person, you might be a wonderful human being, but posts you wrote here are mostly selfish and ignorant.

I am done with this thread unless there is some new information - like a new study. This is just going in circles and it is pointless and time consuming. I hope the smart people in Pokerstars analyzed the presented arguments and will do the right thing. They certainly have more data and answers to some things we are guessing about and it's a shame they didn't make this an interactive discussion and policed the thread deleting posts with no fact based arguments (and that includes some of mine which were written in frustration as a reaction to people spreading lies - and I sincerely apologise for being forced to read them).

If it is in the best interest of the games, I will support whatever they decide. I just hope we can trust them to do the right thing.

Last edited by gmiko; 06-17-2015 at 09:29 PM.
gmiko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2015, 01:29 AM   #1144
bravadomacho
banned
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 154
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Ban the Major thread in the major forum in nvg, move it to the internet forum. Seems rather pointless to have this thread still open with an active conversation happening in the other one:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28...anges-1538981/


Was this really deleted in NVG? Where some players/customers might actually be made aware of this terrifying situation that will now be overlooked in internet forum? I guess the not so subtle hint was dropped by OP anyways opening the new thread here in the first place, not specifically addressing the bot as of yet.

I disagree mod. I think having this situation/topic open in every single forum your site has to offer is VERY productive to alert any and all customers of this. Especially since I was part of the 1.5 million dollars lost to a ****ing robot.
bravadomacho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2015, 01:35 AM   #1145
Bobo Fett
2+2 Ad Man
 
Bobo Fett's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canada, eh!
Posts: 51,430
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

None of your post makes much sense. The link you've posted doesn't work, but I assume you're trying to link to the NVG thread about software assistance that led to this one? If so, I closed it because we have this one now - that thread hadn't been posted in for the last 2 days, until you decided to throw a couple of off-topic posts in it tonight. Actually, it hadn't had a substantive post since this thread was opened, which makes sense as this is the thread that we know Stars is reading, and where they asked for feedback.

Perhaps you got your threads confused. The thread about PLO bots is still open in NVG, and would be the place to post about botting issues:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29...nners-1538509/
Bobo Fett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2015, 02:06 AM   #1146
TimTamBiscuit
veteran
 
TimTamBiscuit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: cRUSHed!!!!!!
Posts: 2,134
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Husker said earlier something like (too lazy to search thread to find quote):

Quote:
NC is mainly useful vs regs as too small sample on recs. Also, recs tend to have such glaring leaks that you profile them with a few hands using PS color coding and direct Notes.
+1

I'd like to add that NC is of most use in identifying and eliminating my own leaks.

This is because I have the biggest hand sample on myself and because I have defined many GTO indicators that go far beyond out-of-the-box NC for all streets. Many of these extra indicators are of limited practical value vs opponents because I rarely get enough hands to get a big enough sample especially for later streets.

Secondly, as a player gets better/improves and as result gets closer to understanding GTOish play it becomes much easier/quicker to detect non-GTO-ish play in others and to rapidly exploit it. The player becomes much better at exploitative play.

NC has been a huge help for me in analysing my own game but only because I deliberately developed NC definitions and badges to do that in offline analysis.

But having done so, if you ban NC and ban HUDs during PS play I and many others already have the ability to critique our game offline and continue the journey toward more exact GTO play combined with more rapid exploitative play.

Once learned, the GTO-ish skills and rapid exploitation skills (and counter-exploitation skills and exploitation of the numerous reg players overinterpreting HUDs) can be readily applied at the table with or without NC/HUDs. I think lesser players significantly overestimate the utility of HUDs due to poor observation skill. HUDs are simply far less useful once you reach a certain understanding. As player strength increases direct hand observation reveals much more than HUDs with or without showdown.
TimTamBiscuit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2015, 02:25 AM   #1147
worried
banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 527
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richas View Post
For goodness sake, the argument has been put again and again and again.

The poker ecosystem is built on just one key group - losing players. They pay all the bills, they keep you fed, they keep PokerStars employees in work and Amaya shareholders invested. Without the recs/fish the whole thing collapses.

Now, what software aids do is make the experience for recs truly terrible. Not only is variance reduced so they never have a winning session they also never get to play recs as the seatgrabbers and scanning softwae makes sure they are up against Regs all the time. The games play slowly. There is no chat, it is a truly terrible experience.

Now, why would they carry on signing up? Indeed with Twitch and the like making the s/w they are against even clearer to them why would they deposit again for a pretty terrible experience?

Devera explains it quite clearly just above in his point 3).

IF we can get the s/w advantage that the pros have back under some semblance of control then the recs will have a better time. Sometimes they will get a bluff through, maybe once in a decade they will not get ISO raised as soon as they enter a pot in a way that the other regs at the table are not being treated by the other regs he is surrounded with. He will have a chance to see a game where the pattern of play is not obviously and clearly about the rest tag teaming him whilst playing differently against each other (with the table queue stretching to roughly 2016) .

The only futiue for poker is signing up more new, depositing players, there is always going to be churn but when every kid gets to know before his 18th birthday that to start playing he needs $1000 of software plus a decent (illegal) database just to start his poker apprentiship with the same s/w interface as his opponents how many do you think will sign up?

I have banged on about this for about 3 or 4 years. For me it was NoteCaddy Edge that finally tipped me over in to outrage at the way that online poker is no longer even close to a level playing field. NoteCaddy Edge has cost me indigestion, a hobby I liked and the online poker community the cash I would have deposited.

The changes in the game due to s/w increase the churn rate and deter new players, it costs the poker economy enormous sums. The s/w does not just cost what regs pay for it - it costs the future revenues of the industry too.

Meanwhie the poker sites get desprate to add a bit of variance in to the games and so we get Spin N Gos, turns out recs like them but hey ho the s/w guys are already at em, you can buy the hand histories, get the player profiles, no doubt some nice new extra NoteCaddy package is out there now or under development - can't have the poor pros play a short stack three handed tournament, one of the most brain dead formats ever without a little bit of software to help can we? Oh no, their dedication and hard work means they need to have a s/w helper to make sure they have a bit more edge.

Extra advice software not enough to take variance out for the rec? you know the fun bit, the gambling bit, that's OK there will be a cartel along soon to make sure that the recs only get to play regs with their software tools and their cheat data, you see when you can fix the new high variance format via software tools and some seatgrabber like software then you can guarantee that the rec gets to face two regs every time, that'll stuff em - can't let the rec have even just below a one in three chance of winning when instead we can make it so he only binks one in ten, that'll keep the schmuck paying the bills.

Meanwhile when Stars or some other bright spark events some other format where the rec has some variance to make it fun we can repeat the process, six months of regs moaning about bingo games until the s/w and cartels are established, the vaiance is eliminated and the regs get back to just moaning in general that there are no fish any more.

So here is the proposal again -

HUDs should be static, they should show the same stats for all your opponents, no drill downs, no popups, no links to additional data, you get a HUD with any stats on it you want but you don't get stats customised to the player or dynamic in the hand to show either new data based on the cards dealt or new stats for the current street.

That HUD has to let Stars check the data you are using and the display you have configured. The display is checed to make sure it is static and does match the data the HUD says it is using and the site gets to check that the data you are using is consistent with your play history at that site.

This wipes out datamining and it limits the power of the HUD, it makes the playing field a bit closer to even. This means recs have a better time, they have more variance, they get a bluff through, they don't get tag teamed quite as efficiently, it is like the ref actualy stopping the team of regs all being in the ring to pound him at once

This means recs don't get churned quite so quickly, it is easier to recruit new players and crucially using recs DEPOSIT MORE and that eans there is more cash for regs and more cash for Stars...but a bit less for poker s/w developers and dataminers, which again comes back to regs and Stars.

Will that be enough to save online poker? Maybe not, but it is a start.
What an amzing post. nailed it, nailed it as hard as a post could ever possibly nail it. POKERSTARS HERE IS THE ANSWER. now run with it please
Well done richas and well thought out.

Last edited by worried; 06-18-2015 at 02:51 AM.
worried is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2015, 03:07 AM   #1148
Dandan160808
centurion
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 135
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Excellent decision if implemented to ban these programs. Hem2 and poker tracker can be used by us all. So no advantage disadvantage unless you have no idea how to interpret these two pieces of software as for the other list in Italics. Ban them all unless modified within non real time gain modifications.
I don't use any of these baring a trial of hem2 beta version and it clogs the tables up!

So fair play across all games.
Dandan160808 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2015, 03:37 AM   #1149
weaktightreg
centurion
 
weaktightreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 156
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

anyone thought about those regs losing at 1-2bb/100 and get break even from rake and use all the s/w assistance in the world? what happens to them if all s/w is banned?

its still not profitable to play those guys on micros cause you waste money on rake .
weaktightreg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2015, 04:27 AM   #1150
devera
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 92
Re: 3rd Party Software on PokerStars: Proposed Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTamBiscuit View Post
NC has been a huge help for me in analysing my own game but only because I deliberately developed NC definitions and badges to do that in offline analysis.

But having done so, if you ban NC and ban HUDs during PS play I and many others already have the ability to critique our game offline and continue the journey toward more exact GTO play combined with more rapid exploitative play.

Once learned, the GTO-ish skills and rapid exploitation skills (and counter-exploitation skills and exploitation of the numerous reg players overinterpreting HUDs) can be readily applied at the table with or without NC/HUDs.
I totally agree with this. With a catch - that bit that I bolded out above: once learned. Can we be honest for a second? Can we all admit less than 5% of poker players actually WORK on their game offline? And I mean WORK, not simply watching a CR/BF/RIO/we video and call it work. Yes, I totally agree HUD and NC-like live leak finders become less important as people get closer and closer to that real understanding of poker. However, the overwhelming majority of poker players, regs included, don't ever get there and they just linger in that limbo where they're so dependent on their HUD that if you take it away it's like you cut off their hands. And they just want more and more and more of this - badges to exploit instant leaks, graphs to tell them instantly where's the villain's leak in betting vs size or vs hand strength etc etc etc. So yes, for a real poker professional, HUDs and NC badges and alike become less and less important and they're more of a kevlar vest that you need to wear if you know everyone around you has guns - it's not a gun anymore, it's a kevlar vest. But that is the case for that really hard working 5%, even less. For the rest of them, it's the opposite.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iamblackornot View Post
1. poker is not a casino game like a roulette, it's a skill-based game
2. all talks about 3% casino edge are inappropriate. "house" in poker is a room, not regulars. and room in poker has significant "edge". without rake there would be a lot of winning players. the perfect scheme for a room - everyone playing allin shootouts. no edge, everything is "fair", max rake EV.
I am really really amazed of the short sightedness of people here.. I don't know what are you doing playing poker if you can't understand the point about roulette and you refute it by saying "poker is not a casino game, it's a skill based game". Thank you, Sherlock, you really enlightened me.

YOU are the roulette, YOU are the house, do you get that, you s/w addict reg? Is it really that hard to get the analogy? You, the reg with all your knowledge and experience, are like a roulette the poor rec or total fish comes to, in order to play a few spins and have some fun. He has no way of long term winnings vs you, since you have the 3% skill advantage over him that's gonna net you that profit. However, if you add more and more "awesome s/w", more and more live leak finders, more and more tools to expose his every.single.leak, your edge has shot up to 10%. Or even more. Can you follow the logic path of the roulette argument by yourself now?

And really, it's a blatant lie saying a live leak finder doesn't help you that much to clean a rec or a fish. BLATANT LIE. I agree you can profile him after a few hands, get to understand more after a few tens of hands etc. But let's not forget the regs are playing 16-24 tables. So don't come telling you used your awesome observation skills and just that to clean him in 200 hands instead of 500. Cause really, that's total ***** bs and it really stinks up the place. You do not need any kind of s/w assistance (HUD, badges, graphs) to clean a player who never made a cash-out but only deposits, but he now surely loses his deposit way faster in this mutated environment that online poker turned into. All I'm saying is back it up a bit, how can you not understand this is good for everyone? Use whatever tools you want offline, badges, graphs, super GTORBs etc etc etc, just don't bring your bazooka to a "duel of honor".

Last edited by devera; 06-18-2015 at 04:34 AM.
devera 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 08:27 PM.


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