That is true. I was a break even online pro few years ago. Than I took a long break about 4 years and come back start playing poker last year. I have a day job and I am playing just for fun but with no chance to win in longrun anymore. . I use HUD but it doesn't matter. I lost my entire pokermindset and can't win in cashgame online anymore. I will quit cashgame that is for sure. That is my losing graph, PL25 to PLO100 (PLO) and NL100 (Holdem):
https://imgur.com/a/UGIEs

Rec players being willing to take a shot at - ev games they perceive to be 'straight' is much different from being willing to buy into a game they perceive is 'crooked' or a cheat.

I'd be considered a rec player. I wouldn't dream of making an online deposit. I used to spend many hours playing cash on Party and Stars.

Past doomed. Dead.

If any rec player within a reasonable drive of legal live poker games is still playing online, I don't know why they're doing it. Laziness maybe. Otherwise why bother?

Convenience, at home entertainment ?

What do you get 30-40 hands an hour playing live? Russian roulette sounds more exciting then that nonsense.

In my local club we also get a nice playing environment, friendly dealers/floor staff, great food, free drinks, players who like to chat about anything and everything, all kinds of sports entertainment on a multitude of TVs, the occasional whale happily dumping money for his entertainment, a bad-beat jackpot currently over $1M, high-hand promotions 4 days a week, several exciting poker festivals each year and, the cherry on the cake, young attractive waitresses in sexy outfits flirting with the players for tips.

What's not to like for the average rec versus dumbly clicking buttons on your couch?

Lmao, I'd be ecstatic if I got 40 hands in an hour playing live. I averaged 15-20.

So over 60 minutes I get to be involved in an average of 4-5 hands. So much fun. Definitely worth the 45 minute wait to get a table and the cramped conditions and the terrible smells and the..... I could go on. I'm not even sure how poker existed before online

Not to mention that people don't really need a hud to beat the fish/recs. They are mostly used to battle the regs/semi-regs. They are worried about something that isn't needed much to beat them, they are going to get beat anyway just by purposely playing the game wrong and never trying to improve. Why someone/anyone would do that with something that involves money will always be beyond me. I don't see how there can be anything fun/recreational about sitting somewhere and slowly (or quickly) losing all of your money tbh.

I think most true fish realized this years ago and either quit or improved enough to at least enjoy the game. Obviously there's still recs/fish playing, but even they think somewhat about the game now

Also agree with your point about HUDS. They are used to get small edges on regs and make it easier to multi table. Exploiting a fish is harder and can't be done relying on HUD stats (at least imo).

I think most people are fine giving up HUDS if it meant super soft games, but I think that a HUD ban would have a marginal impact on game quality, if any.

online poker aint dead. I just played a 0.25 45 man and won it. beating 44 other players.
damn im good at poker.

I used to play a lot a while ago, since then have played live occasionally, online not so much. Used to be quite decent at deep stacked live games and PLO, I guess I still am since I can win at the low stakes if I put my mind to it. But is it fun?

Not really. The only thing remotely playable (from a rec point of view) is PLO Zoom, because then you do not have to wait several minutes after folding pre to get a new hand since 4 out of 5 opponents are not only playing 29 tables but also want to feel GTO by referencing some preflop "GTO" chart. How anyone can get enjoyment from playing NLT cash is beyond me, I tried some Zoom but it is horrible.

Of course, as a rec who likes to gamble it up, MTT:s and Spin´n´Go:s are quite fun. And as I said, PLO Zoom is playable as well, at least if you are somewhat decent at it. At least PLO10-PLO100 is quite exploitable (have not played higher), but then again, if you were starting out today I think that it would be quite un-enjoyable since the percentage of people getting it in really bad is smaller.

And by "fun" I mean something along the lines of "if I have no weekend plans and want something to do in the evenings and I deposit a hundred or two, I can get some gambling fun out of it". And maybe even withdraw some profits.

Playing every day for a living would be a horrible curse.

Oh, and what makes also the microlimits unenjoyable (which used to be a total punt-degenfest) is of course the global income disparity. For example, the average wage in Russia is something like 600 EUR. Baltics/Poland - 1000 EUR. I guess that South America also is somewhere along those lines. And for someone who maybe has no clear career options, sitting at home and 12-tabling NLT10 for 10 USD/hr is probably a better prospect than busting your ass at a dead-end job while making less money and taking considerable amounts of **** from your boss etc. Especially if living in the countryside where wages are even lower.

Lol 600 a month for russia!



Ukraine are the ones making bank playing poker.

This is so true. I'm a serious rec player (If that isn't an oxymoron), and I play poker for fun and profit, with fun being the primary motivation as I don't need the money; that's just a way of keeping score to see who won "the game" that day. If I show up at my local casino and get seated at a table where half the guys have headphones on and the other half are sunglass-wearing mutes, I'll get up and leave. And not just that table, but the entire casino if there's no other open seats. Conversely, if everyone's talking and appearing to have a goid time, then I will too, even if I'm losing my money to better players.



Well, I spent yesterday afternoon and evening socializing at a $2/$5NL table while watching NCAA basketball tournament games all day on the numerous tv's, and playing the occasional hand of poker. By the time I left at 11pm, I had watched parts or all of 6 games while winning exactly $2,006 on the day even though we only got in about 20-25 hands an hour. (They hand shuffle in this room.) That was exciting enough for me. I have no interest in 24, 12, or even 6-tabling online. I like the social aspects of poker, and I believe you'll find that is true for many rec players.

+100, although I don't win $2,000, ever.....

if you're talking about a table of quiet people on tablets getting max value from their netflix subsciptions then you're 100 pct right- russian roulette sounds way better. at least if the bullet goes off you never have to play in these types of poker games again.

however if you're talking about a fun live table then it makes total sense why someone would go to the casino to let loose and spew some chips live vs online.

I agree.

I'll play live about 3 times a month in Las Vegas, but pick my casino, poker room or table based upon entertainment value.

I am willing to risk getting stacked at 1-2 or 1-3 if the experience is entertaining enough....... meaning there is some player interaction.

When I operated online poker, that element was emphasized, but later abandoned in a chase for multi-table based liquidity.

I can see a market segment for an online format where, essentially, a player regularly must prove humanity and be limited to a single table to play at bot-free tables ..... what I do not know is whether that market would be profitable to offer.

Once again demonstrating that irony is a dangerous trope.

Well, it is highly unusual for me, too, which is why I had to get in the not-so-veiled brag, lol. I'm usually very happy with half, or even a quarter, of that amount.

Watching regs defend HUDs is the most tilting thing ever. If you had half a brain between the lot of you you would bend over backwards to do anything the rec player demands. Instead u can’t let go of your unfair advantage/stolen HHs/notecaddy bull****

In your final paragraph above, are you proposing touch id or iris scanning before/after hands?

Regs and HUDS are the only thing helping in the fight against collusion and bots on pretty much every network except Stars. HUDS aren't even that useful against recs. You can't build enough of a sample on recs for most stats to be useful.

Most regs, myself included, use a HUD to battle other regs and record our HH into a database to review (mostly the latter). Some regs help us all out by using their HUD/database to expose bots and cheaters. We should be thankful for that

"The 600 series had rubber skin. We spotted them easy, but these are new. They look human - sweat, bad breath, everything. Very hard to spot. I had to wait till he moved on you before I could zero him....

One possible future. From your point of view - I don't know tech stuff."

"I'm just an unfrozen caveman lawyer. I fell on some ice and later got thawed out by some of your scientists. Your world frightens and confuses me! Sometimes the honking and whining on NVG make me want to get out of my BMW.. and run off into the hills, or wherever.. Sometimes when I get a hero called on my online poker machine, I wonder: "Did little demons get inside and hack something ?" I don't know!

My primitive mind can't grasp these concepts. But there is one thing I do know - when technology can captcha my ass every time I log onto financial sites, then there is tech out there to check/recheck for bots"

The issue may be how far would any given technology implementation and friction skew the player pool and affect liqudiity ?

The argument against huds and its influence on how regulars can make it easier to win to me is clear. It allows for perfect recall and information. It would be like taking a test I school where some people just have their brains and their own personal notes while others have access to books, notes, and the internet. This doesn't create an environment where non users are on an equal opportunity to win. Yes I understand that in reality anyone can use a hud, but let's be serious it's regs who do.

This is why Bovada has it right about anonymous players. Yes it has its flaws about catching cheating and bots. But it is way ahead of huds and creating a friendlier environment for amateurs.

Honestly it sounds like the best place for entertainment is Stars. They sure as **** are making it harder for a reg.