Make the online game resemble B&M poker as much as possible.

I guess worthless may be the wrong choice of words, but HUDs usefulness are limited to the session you are playing. So if you are playing heads up with the same opponent for 10 hours, obviously it would help. But it's only good for the current session. And it's even less Useful on full ring or six max.

HUDs are banned in Bovada and I don't think they work unless they are shady.

Bovada has captured a niche market and is doing very well there.

many possibilities here:

- HUDs are banned by ToS or gaming rules
- HUD usability is limited by use of anonymous tables
- HUD ban is actively enforced. it is hard to get a HUD to work on the site. effective detection mechanisms for HUD use are in place.

Ducy:

The interesting (and fascinating) thing about all this is what marketing strategy, (i.e. what "business model" if you prefer), licensed operators will ultimately decide to pursue? Will they decide it makes better business sense to bend over backwards to please grinders since these high volume players tend to generate greater rake, or will they decide to modify the terms & conditions in order to make their site more attractive to the "millions" of potential new recreational players they seem to be convinced exist? (I seriously doubt if any of the operators are going to do anything about reforming the rake structure.)

In the brick & mortar world, operators have had plenty of experience dealing with this issue. For the most part, casinos have adopted the "Disney World" (or the "Wal Mart") corporate mass market strategy. Rather than coming on like a Neiman-Marcus or a Tiffany's specialty retailer, catering only to high end (well heeled) clientele, B&M's have "run the numbers" and figured out that it makes better business sense to make average wage earners feel welcome. Another way of saying this is that they want families (as in both the husband and wife as well as their grown children) to patronize their properties. (Oh sure, they still welcome the occasional whale in their joints - they even have special "High Limit" rooms set up for these folks - but most of their operation is geared toward serving the vast middle class.) Walk onto the floor of any crowded casino and you immediately realize that most of these folks are not millionaires. Most of them are what some people might call working stiffs. So people like Mr. Loveman have figured out that you maximize revenue and profits by appealing to the vast middle class rather than concentrating on the richest one percent.

So when it comes to marketing "legal and regulated" online poker to this potential market of "millions" of new players, do you appeal to the vast middle (by adopting terms and conditions that are more favorable to recs), or do you decide that Poker Stars has it about right so we're better off adopting terms & conditions that are more agreeable to the high volume grinders. (In other words, we allow the use of HUDs, mass multi-tabling, and we pretty much ignore cheating and collusion.)

When Gary Loveman and his B&M counterparts gaze over at Zynga and see 40 million folks on that site playing for play money, they must drool at the prospect of converting even a tiny fraction of that crowd to real money poker. I imagine some of those folks will give legal "real money" internet poker a try. Excuse me for being cynical, but unless the terms & conditions are modified to exclude (or greatly restrict) the use of HUDs and multi-tabling - since Zynga folks probably hate waiting for a multi-tabler to time out - either the operator modifies the T&C to be more favorable to these recreational players ... or they can forget [ever] attracting "millions" of new players to their site. (I'm not saying Poker Stars has a flawed business model, far from it, but has there ever been a time when a million [or more] real money players were logged on and playing on their site?)

If one takes Mr. Loveman at his word, (i.e. that he's actually serious about attracting - and keeping - "millions" of new players depositing and playing on his site), I believe there will have to be restrictions on HUDs and multi-tabling - at a minimum. I don't believe Caesar's will be able to attract (and keep) millions of new players if they adopt the Poker Stars business model. This is my subjective (and admittedly biased) judgment, but I don't think the Zynga crowd will be comfortable with an online poker experience where they know (or come to believe) that they are being bumhunted. I have a feeling Mr. Loveman and his advisors will figure that out.

I think you summed it up

A businessman once told me his philosophy, "Sell to the masses and you eat with the classes. Sell to the classes and you eat with the masses."

And I think we are back to the model the OP, you, and others suggested. An online experience that will be as close to a B&M one as possible. And elimination of all the bumhunting, software and cheating tools that were widely accepted and utilized. I find the behavior of the REGs ITT interesting. At first they flamed, then bullied, then made poor analogies, then tried to derail the thread, and now have finally disappeared as their arguments have collapsed by the weight of their own absurdity.

I broadly agree with 1-4, disagree with 5 and 6.

The real problem with the games for rec players is that the skill differential is much larger now between average/good players and new/poor players. This means poor players will lose money quickly and have a low chance of winning anything in the short-medium term. This is why the game is no longer appealing.

Anything that would go towards fixing this, will inevitably reduce the regular players win rates, so of course OP is not going to get a balanced viewpoint on these changes here.

A better implemented version of something like PKR might be the way to go. I could envisage something similar to Microsoft's Kinect system being able to replicate player movements and gestures on screen. I believe that system is so sensitive that it can even detect a person's pulse through visual information, which could be really fun in game. This would certainly get me playing again.

So it appears there is somewhat of a consensus. The online sites should implement rules:

1 through 4.

5- You can play players of equal or better skills level than your self. But you can't drop down and play worse players. The REGs made a great point that you want to improve at poker and shouldnt be coddled, so playing worse players does not make sense. You want to improve and get better. Play equal or better players.

6- This is a bad idea. Anonymous tables or a fool proof way of banning HUDs and preventing the collection of HHs seems a better approach. We don't need a bunch of crazy stalkers or identity thieves going after people.

7- The Rake (and Rent) is too damn high!

8- More Freerolls, promotions, and prizes.

9- Make it similiar to a B&M experience.

How are whales and REGs comparable? Those are not the same things at all. You're also comparing pit games with poker. In my experience the poker rooms are the exact opposite of the rest of the casino. They are not easily understandable or welcoming to new comers. The first time I played in a brick and mortar casino they acted like I was being a pest asking the hostess how/where I convert money to chips, what the different stakes were that were being offered, how I get seated, etc. When I got to the table the dealer barked at me when I asked if I have to wait for the big blind or if I post a blind. I had to try to watch other players to get any feel for what standard practice was for placing bets etc. The whole thing was clearly catering to their regular grinders and I was an annoyance. To the credit of the other players they were at least trying to help out and chat and keep the game fun. Obviously they knew that there goal was to keep me around as long as they could. The casino didn't seem to care one bit.

Are you joking about PokerStars ignoring cheating and collusion? They have had mini-scandals from time to time, but when cheating is identified they handle it pretty well from what I can tell. As far as I can tell Bovada is the wild west. You'll be lucky if their support responds if you are suspicious of being cheated.

I also don't see how you're making the leap from Zynga to HUDs needing to be banned. What makes you think the players at Zynga care about HUDs? Heck there probably are HUDs that work with Zynga poker right now. The only real difference between Zynga and Pokerstars from a RECs perspective is likely the multi-tabling. Well of course play money vs real money, but from a user experience point of view just the multi-tabling.

Is there any shred of evidence supporting the theory that HUDs are driving away RECs?

not perfect, but i still add #10:

there has to be an inter site agreement or a law or whatevs that states: no site should ever influence the (monetary) outcome of any hand in any ways. not to its own benefit, not to the benefit of any player or group of players or any 3rd party whatsoever.

it's a game guys. not some hippie free market thingy!

Good one.

I'd allow sites to offer both kinds of poker experience. Where the game is very close to B&M poker regulators would require it be called a "Pure Poker" room or table. Otherwise, it would be labeled "Online Poker." Sites would also be required to say that Online rooms allow HUDs, multi-tabling, data mining and all the other stuff that is used. That way uninformed RECs -- and especially newcomers -- would get educated quickly.

Then let the market decide what people prefer to play.

I agree. But the REGs are so transparent and phony they don't actually want this. Once the RECs are aware (and I think more are aware than in the past) of HUDs, dataminig, and software they are not going to play in the "Online Poker" room. They will flock to your "Pure Poker" room. The REGs are never going to go to the"Online Poker" room and play each other for small edges. No money in that.

They will want to go where the RECs are. But they also don't want to play straight up poker without all the toys. Their whole game is based on exploiting weaker players. They want a huge influx of new, uneducated, RECs who they can take advantage of. And they don't want RECs to know about HUDs, dataminig, and software. And they dont want the sites making this info known to them either. They want a repeat of 2004-2008 where they can make their money and get the heck out of Dodge.

The other day some time after midnight GMT there was over 1500 people playing a !$ rush poker donkament on FTP. At the same time there was 60 or so people playing NL5 rush. The regular Micro stakes ring games were pretty sparse too. My point is most of the talk centers around cash games and rake in cash games. But i think there's more rec traffic in MTTS. Maybe we should find out more about what recreational players want...asking them is a good start. Poker sites should be sending short questionnaires to players with low volume asking them what they like and don't like and what they want and don't want. Much more useful than us lot trying to surmise what they want.

I know for sure that more serious players can try and be more friendly at the tables. Last night a guy joined my table and said 'Hi everyone' - no one answered. So i typed in 'gl mate'. He replied 'ty gl 2 u.' Then he typed in 'WOW' when two players got all in pre with QQ v AK...now that's the kind of player we want isn't it. I know we can't be nannies, but a little niceness spread thinly goes a long long way IMO.

How about the RECs ITT who have been stating repeatedly that this (HUDs and other software) is why they and their friends have left online poker? And that they will come back if you get rid of these things? I know it isn't a real poll or scientific, but you should start to listen. I am sure Gary Lovemen, Steve Wynn, Bovada, Party Poker and other companies are doing these types of marketing surveys.

I understand as a REG that you may not like these changes. They give you an edge and allow you to make money. They level the field against other REGs and allow you to take money off the RECs. But arguing with the RECs ITT and telling them that HUDs and all the other software is no big deal isnt convincing. Right or wrong RECs want changes and if they aren't made, I do not see them returning to online poker in droves. That is actually bad for you.

And if HUDs, HHs, and software was no big deal, why are the REGs so determined to keep them? Why are they so determined to keep these things? Because they work and they make money for the REG. But trying to keep this stuff on the down low isn't going to work. I think you have a more knowledgable REC or fish than in the past.

It would come down to cost. Also, they may want their "brand" to be identified with a certain set of rules to differentiate themselves from the competition. You had "Play with the Pros" campaign. Someone else mentioned a poker campaign designed around RECs. Instead of going negative, it could be more of a "Play real poker with real people" campaign. With an explanation of how other sites allow HUDs, HHs, tracking software, and other tools. And we dont. Just real poker for real people. Just an idea.

Do you know that the rake in tourneys is very low compared to in cash?

I think that could be a reason. I think recs don't last long in cash games which is why they don't hang there.

However rus toruneys on ft have not been successful at all and are declining. So its not like these are super popular. It seems regular tournaments is where all the action is at these days.

Its also the best value.

So the notion of making online like live what does that mean?

That makes no sense to me. I don't want any game or software to be like the B&M thing. Do you want to wait 3 minutes to play one hand. Dealer mistakes?

I think what people want is a chance to win, a smooth and nice interface and good action. There are many ways you can make this happen online. But make it like live makes no sense to me.

If I think at what makes for the best experience I would think fast poker with a good rake and reward structure.

most of the Reg stop posting gave up because you don't listen to anybody. You're making for 5 accounts on here and stating that every single one of them is backing you when you're all the same f****** person. you just keep throwing things out there calling in fact not even remotely true. Players didn't leave because of HUD they left because they were forced out by doj The same players are going to come back regardless if there's a huds or not. so stop lying to everybody and stop putting others down to make your points the reason why they left this thread is because its ******ed in you all of you and your ten accounts are a waste if time....


and they will never put restrictions on how many tables you could play because that takes away from their hourly rate you're asking them to make decisions that cost money to enforce or cost money. And it won't happen just give it up already. No matter how many accounts or threads you make you're not going to change online poker to your benefit. just learn to adapt or quit playing cause those are going to be your only two options

Havent read all of this thread but looks like good topic.
Just my 2 cents is
HUDs- have got to go. They are CHEATING,try and use a computer device while playing 21 and see what happens.
HHs -are a must!! for cheating reasons and improving your game.
Segregation- well that is the worst thing ive ever heard of.It goes against all poker is about.Better players must feed of weaker players and weaker players must play against stronger players to get better.Even the regs must be a fish to improve.
Multi tabling -would not be much of an issue when #1 HUDs are not aloud..
real name for screen name- no need for personal info expossed to everyone on a poker site.

This idea is impossible right? So why is this always suggested? Its like banning people playing online poker in their pants.

Pretty sure undetectable HUD's can be homemade by any geek and there's always a market for them. Confirmation?

Here's what I am not getting. The title of the thread is:

New Rules to Better Online Poker for REC players

Yet, most of the REGs do 1 of 2 things

1- Disagree with OP's suggestions because they take $ out of their pockets.
2- Claim no changes are needed, it all the DOJ's fault.

What suggestions do you have??? I haven't seen any.

God-forbid I actually get a response here but does anyone have reasoning AGAINST players being auto-seated at tables only visible to players? With some tweaks this would eradicate bumhunting.

Of course this would only work if rake was slashed but with all the extra action on the site this could be short-term profitable for sites as well as the longevity and growth of the game.

Just make it so 1.) using them is illegal (and could face jail time in legal poker markets like on ultimate poker) OR 2.) make it so you snap lose all your funds if you're caught using one.

Granted people will still use them a little bit, but guys with $10K+ on a site will REALLY think twice before using one.

Or the site could just allow screen name changes every 24 hours and allow huds. It'd allow them but at the same time prevent those crazy abstract reads that only huds can give with a big sample size of hands on your opponent.

3rd option is to accept HUDs are now a massive part of the online poker and for sites to offer free HUDs and *simple tuition to all customers. This also may give online poker a better reputation as a skill game and create a bigger market.


* Start off showing them preflop raise, CB and 3B. Allow them to be used on play money tables so new players get used using them for free

Jail time for making your own app that reads your own screen will never be enforceable.

I like the name change idea, however it doesnt address the real problem which is newbie fish getting crushed by multitabling HUD users, and the HUD soul read over many hands is just poker isnt it?