When you sacrifice 1 year of your life to the SNE grind and pokerstars be like

If stars would keep the SNE rakeback for 2016 but would ban a lot of 3rd party sw including significant limitations to the HUD content plus limited number of tables to 4, would it make a difference for the SNE community? I'd like to know.

So the program would continue as advertised but an average grinder would have probably bigger losses vs. cutting the rakeback as he would be nowhere near the volume in 2015.

Get real. Seems like amayas spin has worked on some ppl. Raising rake to get rid of evil "database users and semi-automatic decision makers" is surely the way to go, yep. Are you even familiar with how the games work, ffs?

now, u know that pokerstars-employee's read this thread..and maybe also david himself^^
remember what I ve written few days ago ^^

on 28th of january^^

@starsemployees "greetings" to christopher ^^

LOL @ Negreanu again. Puppet.

I wonder how the David Baazov bid to purchase and thus privatize Amaya will influence poker long term...

http://www.pokernews.com/news/2016/0...over-23975.htm

Could be good, assuming he focuses on long term growth and is ready to listen to all levels of knowledge (AKA players that understand the market).

The key to reducing the mass tabling rakeback grinders is to just eliminate HUDs in entirety, scan for huds in background, permaban anyone using a HUD and put it in the EULA. Raising the rake will not help recreational players and it is baffling that they seem to think it will.

Also it's sad to see DN has become a corporate puppet.

Or simply drastically lower the number of tables each player can play?

The ONLY solution to this is competition. Monopolies gunna monopoly.

But by how much is that going to reduce poker-stars rake income?.
Because every table/hand played is raked income right?

Yea ok but seeing there is no site doing it better and/or having no better software, Rakeback and lower rake to name a few not say enough how ps is doing compared to other sites even after all the changes Amaya has introduced?.

So is that not indicating that it is very expensive or that it is not possible or financially responsible for starting a site that is going compete with ps its prices, software, service and so forth?

Because why are there playing so much more people on ps then on any other site? is it mainly the software? is it because their prices are better/lower? is it because there are!! playing so many people there? you tell me.

I think that if there comes/is a site that is cheaper[less rake and so forth] with good software people will play there but there seems to be no such site so even now after the changes/cuts/ price increases and what not ps is still by far where the most people play so I guess there is still no site that has better conditions than ps overall.

But I also think that if ps stays in the hands of an investment company like Amaya they will eventually bring it down because a poker site is not comparable to any other money game like sports betting, casino games, slots and so forth because it is simply very much less a game of chance then those kinds of games but requires much more skill to be profitable otherwise the biggest poker sites would be in the hands of the big betting and/or casino sites, at least, I think so and I think the running of a poker site is so much different than any of their other assets/investments works in way of investing or making it more profitable that they do more harm than good in the long run and that it requires a private owner[s] to stay successful and it requires a totally different strategy than all their other assets and/or investment they normally work with so I think that David Baazov plans to buy ps is possibly the best thing that can happen right now for the players but he time as always will tell.

the reason the biggest poker sites are (were) private is solely based on the UIGEA - ask Party Poker about it. Not because if some rather weird explanation you are giving.

I stopped reading here as per usually your posts are beyond ******ed. Why I ever took you off ignore I'll never know

When was he not a corporate puppet?

Pre sponsorship days possibly.

It is pretty far-fetched to imagine that one single company could successfully manage such massively different businesses as poker and sports betting.

Please do so again because I must say I must return the favor because I must say I think 99% of your posts/reactions are narcissistic ignorant arrogant dumb bs at least the ones I read.

Ok and I must say I don't or almost ever played online so most my info comes from forums like this and hsdb and my posts are often more a question/inquisitive than a statement and more assumptions then opinion.

So I make mistakes like this and are too lazy to do some research fair enough.

I really don't know where I got the idea that Amaya is an all financial investment company instead of: Amaya is a leading provider of technology-based solutions, products and services in the global gaming and interactive entertainment industries.

My dumb mistake so the sarcasm is well deserved LOL.

I'm actually amazed how often this is suggested by people who should know better. How do you expect stars to scan for the HUD you're using on a separate computer?

This. The sheer number of high post count members who currently play professionally and are all for total HUD bans should speak a lot louder than it apparently does. Those people aren't worried at all about getting rid of them, why is that? It's not because they know how to play "real poker" sans HUD, they have other tricks up their sleeves if they're serious players making the case to ban. Banning HUDS will have almost no effect on fish's experience but will give rule skirters a huge edge over other regs who follow the T&C. It would also make the game virtually impossible to learn in its current form for newer aspiring regs.

People like to equate pointing that out to arguing that no rules can or should be enforced, but its totally different for many reasons. The biggest reason is that HUDs are an entrenched part of the game, the online game has evolved around them for years and banning them would be a kind of prohibition. All of this is repetition but its still worth pointing out how bad banning HUDs will ultimately be for rule following regs and how little it will accomplish otherwise.

Well then the sites should have to stop giving out the hand history's to stop that I suppose, then taping it and put it in manually will be the only way to feed the hud software and that is something almost nobody will do.

Its a weak argument to say since you cant stop it you shouldn't try. One of the weaker form the pro hud side. Does this go for bots or another programs people run that break T&C?

The bolded part above is nonsense - there are a few ways of gathering the data in real time to supply absolutely up-to-date inputs to drive a real time HUD without hand histories. This is already done in quite a few legitimate 3rd party poker programs [not just for HUDs, but also Table Ninja-type programs & no doubt others I don't use such as seating scripts which read poker table lobbies]

One way is to 'scrape' [or read] the screen directly at regular intervals [taking an electronic screen snap shot] & then using OCR techniques to read the table & the table chat. This is enough data to drive a HUD

Another way is to view the screen using a video camera & screen grabber s/ware to take regular external screenshots that way - the rest of the procedure is as above but on a 2nd PC away from the poker client s/ware

A 3rd way is to query the data before it is processed to form the variables cards/chips/chat & use that piped over to a second PC where you can recreate the table[s] & the HUDs

The above are very rough outlines of how it can be done [I'm not a techie!] & only the 1st method is detectable by the poker client [and even then there's ways to hide screen scraping activity & perhaps HUD activity too for all I know]

I shudder to think of just how many bots would still be active taking millions out of the poker economy if we didn't have hand histories.

Ok so I guess that it has not much use then to try to ban the hud because then only a small group is able/willing to do what you suggest they can do then and they be in an advantage then I guess and that would not be fair I suppose.

Is an option to allow players to change their screen name every 2 months or so help like the micro gaming network allows?
or is is that also to the advantage of the bots?

I just think that it will benefit the game if the players know as little as possible about each other[at least at first] I think that players then can play different styles without their opponent knows right away who he is.
And as you noticed I am not at all familiar with huds or any available ways to register other players info on how he plays.

But I just want to make the game/the players a little less predictable as much and long as possible that's all, because I use in live poker multiple ways[well variations really] of playing and even most regular players I meet know pretty much all of them they don't know wich I am going to use for my next move so they always have some guessing to do and that even tho the changes are small but it can make the difference between winning or losing a hand and that makes me love playing the games of poker for 30 years already.

You know 10 min to learn a lifetime to master idea. LOL