one guy said that huds were bad for fish another said they bad for regs to so then lektor sarcasticly says well then regs will be happy to get rid of huds then her har har

Huds are bad for ****ty regs who have no clue about pokermaths! Fish lose either way. Deal with it Nits!

any chance of old UB software getting bought? -.-

i use a hud and im pro huds at the tables but that they dont affect funplayers loserates is of course completely wrong

Multitabling and using a hud goes hand in hand, you just fire up 10 or 20 cashgame tables with a hud and play abc poker for like 30 mins until you hav enough hands to clearly identify the big fish on each table (if there is not at least 1 nice Fish you leave the table) than you try to get involved in a lot of hands with them and take their money as fast as possible

especially at smaller stakes where there are still fish to find this is the standard method, how can this not be bad for rec players ?

anyway point that i wanted to make is without beeing able to multitable huds would be useless.

What about making results public (i know, i know bare with me..) for leaderboards and obtaining badges for for certain plays etc just like in the good ol pokertableratings days but integrated into the client?

I think PTR made poker a lot more fun + bots will be easier to detect that way. If someones SN gets outed and people get uncomfortable with it you could maybe change your username every year.

Just think that having rankings in every possible variant would make it feel more like world of warcraft but in poker, maybe throw also in leveling up for players (maybe based on collecting badges not on WR, so the recs wont feel like theyre playing against a lvl 100 while they themselves never passing lvl 5).

Just an idea, but I think It would make poker a lot more fun.

OH, AND PLEAAAAAAASE deep ante regular tables at all limits and min buyin at 100bb tables 100 bigs (ok, 70-80 would also be fine).

Edit: Maybe you could also get a badge for playing above certain VPIP/PFR for a certain period of time. Whatever, I think there are ways poker can be A LOT, LOT, LOT more fun than it is now, without having to make up new formats/variants.

and with a table cap of 5 you won´t be needing a hud for any of this. boom.

This post wins this thread, imo.

LOL. I think the only guys that should be qualified to talk about this is regs. Are you a reg?

It's easier to play 12 tbls when u have simple stats like pfr vpip etc. The fish is other story because fish are instantly tagged with a color - i dont need a hud to know who the fish is. I know all the regs on the sites, they multitable,etc... most of the time I dont even need the guy to play a hand to know that he is a fish due to being only playing 1 table.

HUDS exist for 10 years, its you losers and reg fish that have the mentality of creating excuses on your mind because you lose at poker. You'll continue to lose and youll lose forever if you don't work on your game.

Other funny thing is that ---> lets limit tables. I guarantee it will be worse for recs, I can't understand how a reg-fish that plays 4 tables takes less from a fish than a reg-fish that plays 12 tables.

I'd love to have an explanation of the arguments i brought up here.

Cliffs + other thoughts:
- Huds exist for 10 years, and are the ultimate poker problem now? lol
- Reg fish playing 4 tables vs reg-fish playing 12 tables. Which one will play better?
- STOP creating excuses because you can't beat the games. Accept the fact that you don't work hard enough or you don't know how to work hard enough (this is a good advice btw). The huds/multitablers shouldn't be an excuse for your failure. If you have this mentality you're a loser.
- Look at WCG. Guy plays 10knl/5knl without giving a **** about huds. He doesn't even use one lol. Now, think about it.. it is a guy who has reached the highest stakes online. If he was complaining like 99% of nvg and crying bc of this and that he would be where you guys are.
- Having a winner mentality is crucial

thanks

wait a minute.
you can play abc poker and win vs other regs? In 2016?
what siteis this and stakes?
I'd play here all day if i can win by playing abc poker vs 20 tabling players, i dont even need fish to do so. Let it be all regs... make a site where there are no recs and all my oponents are 20 tabling and i'm in

Well I'm a winning player on a no-HUD site, so that's kind of a mix of yes and no.

I wasn't talking about it from a position of authority anyway. I just pointed out that if HUDs are only useful against other regs then the regs could all save money if they no longer needed to have them and ought to support HUD bans - this isn't the observed behaviour so either
a) the regs are irrational in wanting to keep HUDs or
b) the assertion that HUDs are only useful against other regs is not true.

I didn't state my position but maybe as a "real" reg you can maybe help me by telling me which of a) or b) is right. There is no "I" or "me" or "my experience" in any of that so my personal status is irrelevant.

In a pool where "fish" occupy 12 seats. If there are 6 regs single tabling then each table is 4 fish and 2 regs.
If the regs 2-table then the average is 3 fish and 3 regs per table.
If the regs 4-table then the average is 2 fish and 4 regs per table
If the regs 10-table then the average is 1 fish and 5 regs per table.

So the answer is not that they lose less money to individual regs but that they get to also sit with people of their own standard.

I struggle in understanding your arguments.
Starting from the first thing you say.

1) If either reg is comfortable with their own hud, why are they irrational to keep the huds? I really can't understand.

2) The stuff you posted about the reg to fish ration depending on the table is hillarious.
a) If a site is known to have 2 fish at each table, it won't last very long because it's a matter of time before more regs join. That's an illusion in 2016 unless you're playing in bovada.

b) Let's assume that there's actually 2 fish at the table. You don't take into account winrates. A reg playing 4 tables is much more dangerous than a reg playing 12 tables. Their hourly can be smaller (that's why they play more tables), but they're much more dangerous to a fish.


Final: I understand why you defend the no-huds policy. It's because you're playing in a no-hud site. Sorry to break it to you, but you only win because it's bovada. In any real-site, real poker site you would be losing with or withoud huds.

I dont think I have ever said this to someone on 2+2, and if I had, it was probably to you, but


You sir, speak as if you are an idiot.

You sir, speak as if you are an amaya employee.
Now seriously, I'm being a bit harsh sometimes but its the truth.. there are lot of ppl here that say "x" and "y" and "z" but they don't play on the games, they don't study hard, they don't win. They don't know what takes to win. They say stuff that are complete excuses like blaming huds, solvers or multi tabling nits.

I think that ppl that play a lot, that are good players are more qualified to say what' good and what's bad for the game. All other people, its just their mind making excuses of the years of denial and thinking "why can t i win in this game?".

Poker is not football or basket, where the inherent athleticism of someone can make a diference. Poker is a computer game, everyone can be successfull. You can be:

group 1) complaining all the time and wanting to **** the regs as hard as they can because you've been bullied at the tables (or real life :P ) and you hate REGS. -> this is for you PTlou, as you were defending amaya so much

group 2) acknowledge there are winners, there are guys better than you. much better. now, what do i have to do to be as good or even better? i'm not gonna say what, no one will say that. If you want to succeed you'll have to go on your own and find out. I work more on my poker game that on my thesis lol i've wrote more working and adjusting my game than on that master thesis, like much more. It would've been much easier to me to sit in at 2p2 and cry all the time thinking 'how can i win at poker?'.

ps: im not saying im the best player in the entire world. Im just saying that im more qualified to talk about what is important or not on the games because im more experienced and a winner on the games.
I respect all types of players,ppl,personalities.. but some guys here constantly wanting the worse to regs, and crying on how they can't win anymore is tilting me.
gl everyone and peace

We all misread from time to time. I suggest you give that post another read because, from what I can tell, it does not suggest that at all.

Nice try, Potripper!

So much discussion about HUDs in this thread......and the answer has already been given by Phil Galfond:

http://www.runitonce.com/chatter/a-poker-site-should/
To put it simple: HUDs will be allowed. HUD-bans only affect commercial products, but it won't stop a competent coder or someone being able to pay the former for his services from using a HUD. Believing a "HUD-free"-site guarantees you to play only against HUD-less opponents is quite naive.

Just look at Bovada. Still easy to get a HUD using a card catcher.

tbh I think that putting any type of rankings in cash games is bad as it will even more kill games... not many bad players will want to play vs someone who made a lot of money and is obv professional poker player. Also they shouldn't show people how much they have lost as imagine fun player seeing that he is down 1k-2k-10k or whatever it will make them feel bad and possibly quit playing poker and search for other type of entertainment.. on the other hand when they don't know how much total they lost gamblers tend to think "I am boss as I won 1k last night" (not that it matters that I lost 15k this year (this way of thinking you often hear from degenerates). And also they cant really do that because of privacy reasons, taxes and stuff like that... it can hurt more then help and could open to wide number of problems. Maybe they could make it possible for you to decide if you want to be part of leader board with possible prizes but to show your results or other type of achievement which doesn't have to be directly related to money won... but it turns out to be just a regular rake race... I guess this way you can choose to stay under radar if that makes sense for you.

What I think they should do is promote fun games and challenges.. maybe even making new type of tables where different variants of popular games will change randomly (like on nl tables you play standard nl then every 30mins or more it changes to 72 game, pineapple or some other). Maybe try to mimic hearthstone and other popular games with skins, buying other crap to show of at the table and on the other hand lower down rake and earn some money on micro transactions if possible or do something to earn this awesome hat that you can show of on your table... Or maybe spend your points in our store which works out great for RIO... and make some type of beginner scool to spend money on like chess sites do.

So many ideas to make this site awesome and fun...

gosh, can't believe how ignorant/arrogant someone can be ... honestly idk where to start, b/c your text is a mixture of ignorance and narcissism.

the main thing, you don't get or just ignore, is the fact, that HUDs improve someone's winrate and the ability to multi table, which improves the hourly rate. the other really important thing, which you either happily ignore or just don't get, is that comparing the industry nowadays and ten years ago (pre BF) is plain stupid. so yeah, HUDs are around for a long time, i know that, but did you notice, the industry has changed a bit?

it's also really hilarious, that you claim others should stop looking for excuse, but at the same time ppl like you are very 'vocal' about any change, that reduces your winrate, as if you have some sort of god-given right to make a living.

besides that, you're 'train of thoughts' doesn't make it over the finish line ... 1st you argue, that HUDs are necessary for Reg on Reg action, but then you argue that you don't need them, b/c polk is one of the best winners. both is correct (to some point), but the conclusion is, that SOME ppl just need HUDs to survive. they also need the ability to grind more than 6 tables, b/c they don't play high enough to make a living.

so bottom line is, that taking away HUDs and the ability to grind more than 4 or 6 tables, won't make bad players winners, but it will force out some 'winners', which means the cash outs will be reduced. i wrote 'winners' b/c interestingly enough, a lot of ppl think this is something static, while truth is, it's something very dynamic. a online uber fish might crush his home game, or some solid online reg would be unable to grind for a living, if he had to do it live or if they take away his rakeback.

btw rakeback and other goodies ... ignoring this industry wide trend, is imo very unprofessional and shows a lack of understanding, how the economy works. i don't give a d***, if you believe me or not, or if you you even understand the whole thing, BUT you either adapt ("work hard enough") or you will be another one who bites the dust. so why argue about something, which will happen sooner or later?

idk why this simple thread is so heavily derailed anyway ... Phil pretty much said, that he won't come up with something like we had six years ago, so i wouldn't be surprise (especially given the fact that the poker room has the RIO branding), if there's no traditional rake back. And i'm pretty sure, that his talk about 'fair environment' means that the use of 3rd party software is either forbidden or very strict regulated. (not to mention that even you could use HUDs and play 24 tables or more, there won't be enough action for most of the wannabe pros).



tl;dr: some regs want to be poker-pros and say, everyone who don't agree with them, should stop whining and looking for excuse. at the same time those regs whine, that they might take away HUDs and the ability to play more than 4 tables. these reg know, they coulnd't make a living any more, so they make up excuses, that taking away HUDs mass multi tabling is bad and won't change anything

You sir are totally missing the point of the conversation, which is basically the one and only argument in this conversation.

You can't effectively ban HUDs. Any regular with half a brain doesn't support banning HUDs, in an environment where screenname changes aren't allowed. Not because they rely their game so much on HUD or anything like that, but they don't want to play in a HUDless environment, where every other reg has hired a programmer to make them a hud for a few lousy hundos or k's. If HUDs are banned, and screenname changes are not permitted, people will just make HUDs, simple as that, basically nothing you can do to prevent this 100%, it's not rocket science to make a software that does this.

If you employ a UNIBET pseudoanon, or Bovada's fullyanon model, HUDs become less of a advantage when you don't ever get a big sample. And then it isn't that big of a problem. But playing anon games or pseudoanon games is kind of a boring compared to playing against bunch of regs you know and have borderline unhealthy haterelationships.


On the edge vs who with hud.

- Vs "casinofish" you don't gain almost anything with a hud, they bust too quickly to get any of a sample, and even if you would, those doesn't affect decisions too much as you rarely have close decisions vs these players.

- Vs nitfish/fishreg, a rec player that has some idea how to play poker and plays relatively often. These guys just get absolutely ****ed when people have sample against them, due to having so many fundamental leaks in their frequencies.

- Vs badreg, a reg who clearly has leaks in his stats. These guys also get hardexploited by good regs.

- Vs goodregs, a HUD helps, but you need a huge sample on most spots to take advantage of, frequency errors marginal etc, preflop solid etc.


So basically, 60+vpip fish and goodregs aren't too much affected by huds, people in the middle get ****ed.



I'm a midstake NL cashreg and use a very detailed selfmade HUD.




I disagree on HUD's helping multitable in some sense. On hudless environment decisions are very often whatever - > go with population exploits/gto, when compared to HUD games, you need to pay much more attention to the spots, as there are more information and thus value available.

it seems that you read other post than mine. Where do I whine? LOL. I'm trying to give advice to people that are struggling and you say that I whine? Where?

My hud is simple, I just say that i use it to multitable and for reg vs reg action.

this post is fulled with so many nonsens is actually funny:
you say "you either adapt or work hard enought" when I've said that i've work and write about poker much more than i put on my master thesis.
You just make no sense sorry.
I was just trying to help guys like you, that the reason you don't win is not huds. They've been around for more than 10 years...

And you still can't listen. You'll never learn sorry. I don't care about rakeback, i dont even know how much rakeback i've. But ofcourse it is nice to have rakeback - so why are you reg-fish saying that it's nice to shrink the players "benefits"? Because we already win enough? That's just jealousy sorry. All i see is a bunch of jealous guys that blame:

- huds
- multitable
- solvers

instead of blaming:

- not having winner mentality
- not working hard enough
- not knowing how to work

The real problem of industry is:

- Segregation
- Bad policies/incompetence of poker sites

some user also said one thing that is correct. Banning huds can't be enforced. My hud is preety simple, i'm not a HUD player. I've studied A TON. All i'm saying is that im tilted of this reg-fish and fish that like to talk and talk and make excuses about why they lose.

I was trying to help bunch of ppl like nerdfly and ptlou. this will be my last post in this thread, i've lost hope on trying to share my thoughts to ppl that wont understand.

Also this that you say,

"it's also really hilarious, that you claim others should stop looking for excuse, but at the same time ppl like you are very 'vocal' about any change, that reduces your winrate, as if you have some sort of god-given right to make a living"---> yeah, you say to your boss. MAN, REDUCE MY SALARY PLEASE. I FEEL BAD TO EARN SO MUCH. REDUCE MY SALARY BOSS. What do you think? That we as players should say to poker sites to take more from us? even more? like, rake paid is not enough already?

ps: sorry if i come out as arrogant. I'm not in real life. im just tilted with all the excuses excuses excuses. I respect all players that i play, personalities etc but ppl need to stop crying and put actual work.
If ppl spent 1/5 of the time writing and crying about how to win at poker in 2016 on 2p2 on actual off table poker work. they would prob be winning

It's Unibet actually which is open to Russians and pretty much everyone except Americans - but yeah I admit I wouldn't be able to beat 500z on stars so I'm not a proper reg. Like I said when you asked if I was a reg - a bit of yes and a bit of no.

As for number of fish per table - obviously it's also stake dependent.

This seems like the worst of all worlds. Neither those who want to use huds, nor those who want everyone playing without computer assistance are happy.

Also having a simple hud in place won't prevent more sophisticated ones from coming along - to do that you need anonymity or another solution that no one has come up with yet.

Games on sites with lower table caps have always been better. It's not even debatable. People mass multi tabling drastically distort the shark:fish ratio.

People play 20 tables bc they make more that way than playing 4 tables.Make more money=fish are losing more, never get to play with other fish and games become way tighter and boring.

If you could clone the good players live and let them play 20 tables each in casinos games would go to absolute ****. online is no different.

A "ban" of software without anonymity is a waste of time - Stars don't do it because it is unenforceable.

Limiting the number of tables annoys regs without helping recs. As a rec player, the more tables the regs are playing at once, the better my chances. I would love to know that they are playing unassisted as well, but I know that is not going to happen anytime soon.