Poker Forum > General Discussion
Let's Talk HUD's
Joker161:
--- Quote from: Chipaccrual on October 08, 2013, 19:56:43 PM ---
--- Quote from: TheSnapper on October 08, 2013, 17:45:20 PM ---
Is this a spying mission Leigh? in support of Rob Yong"s recent absurd observations and stance around the current status of online poker.
--- End quote ---
More of a selfish motive actually Brendan.
I"ve been playing poker since 2004, and have just done a quick bit of totting up and am pretty comfortable with stating that I am at least a break even player online, and for the small volume of live events I have played (even excluding Wembley), I am at least a break even player live (excluding the costs of travel, but I"m a social player, so am happy that I have plenty of adventures to speak of).
The reason I make the statement above is to put into context what I am about to state below.
I have already stated that I have never used poker software. I have read a number of poker books over the years, but certainly wouldn"t claim to be up on the latest poker strategies. I have never once made a written note about a player online. If I"m playing, I am normally multitabling, and would struggle to remember if I"ve played a hand against a player in a previous session, let alone remember how he/she may have played a situation in the past. I have never reviewed hand histories, albeit I will post any interesting hands on the forum for debate.
I"d like to think that my sample size online is enough to smooth out the variance, but perhaps my live stats are from too small a sample.
The thought of spending as much time reviewing and analysing my play as I do playing is simply an impossible situation, in fact, the thought of spending any serious amount of time reviewing and analysing my play is always going to take a back seat, as I"d prefer to play if I"ve got spare time.
I can"t be the only one who has similar thoughts to this, can I ?
I"m not saying poker software is cheating, or even unfair, but curious to know if it really can give that much of an edge, or is it more of a myth.
The discussion on this subject from another forum, which was kicked off by Rob"s blog, had most of the reg"s that used HUD"s suggesting that they offered little benefit, which goes against what a lot of the guys have posted on here.
Would love to know other peoples thoughts on the subject, no one"s going to get shot down for having a view, and I think it is a really interesting subject to openly discuss.
PS - Ignore any stats I may have posted above, I am still the fish at the table, and any poker I play is very much added value for the rest of the field. ;D
--- End quote ---
Thanks, Leigh, for giving a perfect description of my poker life! I also started in 2004 (or was it 2005) and am about break-even. I am intrigued by all this poker software, but given that I"ve only had the time to play once in the last six weeks, I clearly don"t do the volume. Like Andy, I prefer live when I do get the chance to play. Anyone for the Rendezvous £200 Saturday 26th October (half-term, obviously)?
I might give this software lark a go when I"m old(er) and retired.
Swinebag:
Have used HM1 in the past but play blind at present.
I play tourneys and simply do not rate the quality of stats that the HUD provides
This is due to a generally inadequate sample producing stats that can distort a players true tendencies. I"m pretty sure there is no stack size fluctuations taken into account when compiling the stats. e.g. a LAG who is good will still grind a 15-20BB stack. His stats could have him as a nit. What do you do when he 3 bet shoves from the BB to your button raise?
I find that I can tag players pretty quickly just by observation (limpers, bet sizes etc)
Of course when multi tabling this becomes much more tricky, so it becomes a balance between stats you don"t trust and being readless
I do find it laughable when people post HHs and say that a player is, for example 25/20/4 over 30 hands, as if this should ever influence any decision we make. Of course there will be players who are 80/0/0 over 30 hands but I wouldn"t need a HUD to tell me they are a fish.
In short, using a HUD is not cheating IMO. The real evil is data mining in cash games. This gives players a licence to rinse the opposition and this is so wrong.
MintTrav:
I know I should use one, but I can"t bring myself to do it. I just feel that I would be cheating. I know that this argument has been lost and I don"t mind if other people want to use them but I get by okay without them. I don"t play to maximise my returns anyway, so I can"t see me using them soon. I find the idea of playing on sites that ban them attractive, so I may follow up on that.
It seems that most of the big poker names don"t use them either, though they aren"t multi-table grinding, so it doesn"t matter so much. But then neither are most of us. Those who are will probably see a benefit, though I saw an article by Jennifer Tilley last year where she said that she and Laak tried them and gave up cos their games got worse, which I suspect is not uncommon either.
AAroddersAA:
--- Quote from: Swinebag22 on October 08, 2013, 23:45:18 PM ---
Have used HM1 in the past but play blind at present.
I play tourneys and simply do not rate the quality of stats that the HUD provides
This is due to a generally inadequate sample producing stats that can distort a players true tendencies. I"m pretty sure there is no stack size fluctuations taken into account when compiling the stats. e.g. a LAG who is good will still grind a 15-20BB stack. His stats could have him as a nit. What do you do when he 3 bet shoves from the BB to your button raise?
I find that I can tag players pretty quickly just by observation (limpers, bet sizes etc)
Of course when multi tabling this becomes much more tricky, so it becomes a balance between stats you don"t trust and being readless
I do find it laughable when people post HHs and say that a player is, for example 25/20/4 over 30 hands, as if this should ever influence any decision we make. Of course there will be players who are 80/0/0 over 30 hands but I wouldn"t need a HUD to tell me they are a fish.
In short, using a HUD is not cheating IMO. The real evil is data mining in cash games. This gives players a licence to rinse the opposition and this is so wrong.
--- End quote ---
I would have some (although not total) faith in VP$IP and PFR stats after 30 hands they become accurate very quickly, I would put significant faith in them if I had 30 hands from one given position (ie The button). My stats normally become typical within 50 hands. If we have no other info then we should be taking them into account when making decision after only 30 hands. fwiw 30 hands is about the smallest sample I would consider somewhat useful.
Out of interest what are peoples thoughts on Rob Yong saying he would consider selling DTD if his online club cash games are not a success. I think that Rob Yong is the best thing to ever happen to UK poker and DTD is everything everybody says it is to the point where if I had to choose between DTD and tracking software going away for good I would have to think about it for a couple of second before saying bye bye to DTD.
duke3016:
--- Quote from: Swinebag22 on October 08, 2013, 23:45:18 PM ---
Of course there will be players who are 80/0/0 over 30 hands but I wouldn"t need a HUD to tell me they are a fish.
--- End quote ---
Damn
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version