Amateur Poker Association & Tour
Poker Forum => General Discussion => Topic started by: Chipaccrual on October 07, 2013, 14:15:49 PM
-
Reasonably hot topic at the moment.
I"ve never used any of the poker software on the market, but often read posts from guys on here who are clearly using software to provide then either statistics on their own play or to track the play of others.
Although I analyse numbers, statistics and trends for a living, I couldn"t tell you what any of the poker terminology coming out of these software packages means, let alone gain any useful information towards my game.
So here"s a few questions for those in the know (or not) :-
What software do you use ?
How much of a benefit do you think it gives you ?
Why did you choose to use software ?
What are the costs, and do you feel it offers you value for money ?
How are you using the software ? Stats during play, or analysis afterwards.
Does it make your poker play more serious, and less fun ?
Hope this will be an interesting discussion for players of all levels.
-
So here"s a few questions for those in the know (or not) :-
What software do you use ? Still on HM1, contemplating upgrade to HM2 but not sure I need the additional complexity
How much of a benefit do you think it gives you ? Invaluable if you multi-table
Why did you choose to use software ? To keep up with the opposition
What are the costs, and do you feel it offers you value for money ? HM2 is $99, HM support is excellent, if you multi-table, particularly cash games, it will pay for itself very quickly even at micros by highlighting profitable spots.
How are you using the software ? Stats during play, or analysis afterwards. Both
Does it make your poker play more serious, and less fun ? What has fun got to do with it?
Hope this will be an interesting discussion for players of all levels.
-
All should be band, end off thread ::)
-
All should be band, end off thread ::)
Now come on, you can"t just burst into the room, shout that out, and slam the door behind you. ;D
Do you really think that ? If so, why ?
Clearly there are plenty of social players using software, based on the comments on other threads on the forum. Is it unfair, if it is available to anyone that wants to buy them ?
-
What software do you use ? Poker Tracker 4
How much of a benefit do you think it gives you ? Gives a lot of info about oppos and to investigate own leaks.
Why did you choose to use software ? Beacause I would be playinga at a disdavantage otherwise.
What are the costs, and do you feel it offers you value for money ? One of payment on purchase of $$99. Yes.
How are you using the software ? Use hud for use during play, and stats to investiaget own weakness afterwards .
Does it make your poker play more serious, and less fun ? Perhaps.
Hope this will be an interesting discussion for players of all levels.
-
Don"t play enough to bother with this kind of software. I can see why people who play volume use them though.
-
I use Tournament Indicator and Omaha Indicator
Why use TI?
Because they are very cheap
HUD is clear and repositionable
How do I use them?
Mainly for the PFR and VPIP stats, and only so that I can identify who I can steal from with 3bets. I will look at cbet% and fold%ages, it doesnt give me stats by seat position tho.
I never look at my own stats :-\
Is it value for money, probably not.
I use Omaha Indicator for my O8 cash games and its useful as it gives odds vs pot odds etc, handy in a split game. Again VPIR% is useful to spot the fish quicker.
-
When you say identify who I can steal from with 3bets, is it a case of if a stat is above a certain level, then it"s an automatic 3bet for you with any two cards ?
(Without giving away your entire poker strategy, obviously) ;D
-
And a couple of general questions to add to that
Does it not make your game quite robotic ?
How do you find playing live when you don"t have all this information ?
-
Does it not make your game quite robotic ?
No, quite the opposite, playing with a hud takes practice, like everything else and initially there is potential to be somewhat robotic. As you become more accustomed to using the hud and learn what to look for, the sky"s the limit as far as discovering exploitable tendencies.
How do you find playing live when you don"t have all this information ?
I actually think it helps live play, the hud highlights exploitable tendencies and you begin to notice these same tendencies when you have to take the stabilisers off and play live.
-
I use PT4, Find it better than HEM which I have also tried.
The main benefit is being able to identify profitable spots more easily. This is accomplished by both looking at the stats real time. The main stats I use are the normal ones VPIP, PFR and 3-bet. These offer a true reflection of players tendencies with a relatively small sample size. It is worth saying that the stats do not replace player notes but complement them. You can also use them to review hands after the event and find spots where you could have improved your session. This, like posting on a strategy forum, will help you make the right decisions more naturally in game. You can also examine other regs and make notes on them to gain another in game advantage on them.
The benefit is that I am likely to have a pretty decent in game edge against other regs in the game as I have stats (which are fine tuned and not just the standard ones) and at my level the amount of work I do probably beats most of the opposition. It is easy to identify good spots to steal the blinds, 3-bet light, cbet profitable. You still need to be making notes on bet sizing and that kind of thing though in game. It also lets you see if you are playing too loose or tight and see other leaks almost before they happen. Last month I identified, in cash games, I was in too many pots in EP so tightened my ranges in certain positions to counter this. Without Poker Tracker I could not have seen this so easily.
Why did I choose to use it? Why wouldn"t I? Seems like a no brainer.
I recently upgraded PT3 to PT4 and it cost $99, has already paid for itself playing just $10nl.
How am I using the software - See above
Does it make poker more serious and less fun? No - it adds to the game and gives it an extra dimension and helps me make the right decisions. I play for the satisfaction of playing well and gaining extra understanding of the game, not for the money so no it does not make it less fun, the opposite is true if anything although satisfaction would be a better word than fun. When you 4-bet the BB from the button with 97os and know it"s profitable to do it, then you get the spots right time and time again, this gives satisfaction as it feels you have elevated your game to a new level of understanding imo.
When you say identify who I can steal from with 3bets, is it a case of if a stat is above a certain level, then it"s an automatic 3bet for you with any two cards ?
(Without giving away your entire poker strategy, obviously) ;D
With 3-bets then I would say those situations do obviously exist but people will eventually pick up on this so doing it every round of the table is not going to work that well. You have to look at your own 3-bet stat and your opponents PFR stats and Fold to 3-bet stat. I have seen Brendan make the excellent point on these forums that positional stats are far more accurate than overall stats in this type of spot. There are good spots on some tables where you can steal the blinds literally every round though. You would use the Fold to Steal stats for this.
Just as an example though if you have a player who over a good sample size is opening like 60% of buttons when it folds to him (You use the Att to Steal stat to identify this) and folding to 80% of 3-bets (make sure you get the right stat for this one) then 3-betting ATC will be profitable until he adjusts to you. These spots are more common than you might think.
And a couple of general questions to add to that
Does it not make your game quite robotic ?
How do you find playing live when you don"t have all this information ?
No, not at all it helps. Basically as you are using the stats you are learning new plays and learning to identify the types of player you can make these plays against. It will work very well in a live game and will make your live game better (and yours is already pretty damn good Leigh).
Sorry for the long post, hope it makes sense.
-
I use Omaha Indicator for my O8 cash games and its useful as it gives odds vs pot odds etc, handy in a split game. Again VPIR% is useful to spot the fish quicker.
See the point don"t entirely agree what % would you say indicates a fish? I have more thoughts on this (which could be entirely wrong btw) but am interested in the answer to this first.
-
-
Is this a spying mission Leigh? in support of Rob Yong"s recent absurd observations and stance around the current status of online poker.
-
I think it is absurd to call Rob"s observations absurd ;)
I think everyone is jumping on the HUDs/Tracking element of Robs post when in actual fact there is a much bigger picture.
I have used PT3 and enjoyed using it, particularly for analysing my own game. It helped my game and helped me make money. I also however support Rob"s views and have equally enjoyed playing the DTD club cash games that have banned tracking software.
There is no right/wrong answer on whether someone should use software. Everyone plays for different reasons and software will appeal to some (Brendan/Steve) and not to others (Wayne). It isn"t cheating but it is important to recognise that many people percieve it as cheating and here in lies one of the problems.
-
I think it"s absurd to consider it absurd to call Rob"s suggestions absurd.
I don"t use tracking software though I have in the past mainly for limit cash and I recall it helped me plug a massive hole in my game which was the sh1tload of money I was losing in the sb.
I stopped using it mainly for logistical reasons more than anything as I used multiple pc"s to play but the database was only on one of them. Maybe networking the db is supported now but it wasn"t in the early days of PT.
These days I don"t play enough volume to warrant it and when I do play I tend to play MTT"s and even then I single table. Like Leigh I analyse numbers, statistics and trends for a living so it"s strange that I"m not interested in going back down the HUD route but TBH I prefer live games anyway. You can tell the online geeks a mile off and many are clearly lost without their comfort blanket of numbers floating above peoples heads :)
I think that all the analysis takes the fun out of the game if fun is what you are after, but if your sole reason is to make money then it"s stupid not to if you play online relatively frequently or multi-table.
-
Is this a spying mission Leigh? in support of Rob Yong"s recent absurd observations and stance around the current status of online poker.
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
-
Is this a spying mission Leigh? in support of Rob Yong"s recent absurd observations and stance around the current status of online poker.
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
Leigh
You have precisely the same reasons as I do playing poker. I have no interest in playing nosebleed stakes, so the odd loss from a leak I can live with. I shall assume that you"re pretty comfortable with your own game, eg how aggressive/passive/tight/loose you are?
-
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 ?
Not at all, but you are looking at an extreme end of the user spectrum with that example.
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 numbers collected by the software range from utterly useless in some hands to printing money in others. There is a considerable skill in correctly interpreting the data and profitably manipulating opponents based on that data.
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.
I suspect that is a combination of "the regs" taking a defensive position and being very careful how they respond to "The great poker benefactors" observations.
-
I think it is absurd to call Rob"s observations absurd ;)
I think everyone is jumping on the HUDs/Tracking element of Robs post when in actual fact there is a much bigger picture.
I have used PT3 and enjoyed using it, particularly for analysing my own game. It helped my game and helped me make money. I also however support Rob"s views and have equally enjoyed playing the DTD club cash games that have banned tracking software.
There is no right/wrong answer on whether someone should use software. Everyone plays for different reasons and software will appeal to some (Brendan/Steve) and not to others (Wayne). It isn"t cheating but it is important to recognise that many people percieve it as cheating and here in lies one of the problems.
Allow me to elaborate...
As I see it, when you cut through the rhetoric the message is about continuing to attract fish/net contributors into the player pool and holding onto those currently in that pool by taking their monies slowly, thus, they are less likely to notice they are losing and more likely to remain a contributor.
So yes, there is a bigger picture but that is dependent on ones position in the game. Maybe your big picture is to learn quickly that you will always lose and get out before the number is significant or maybe it"s about getting/keeping bums on virtual seats so as the numbers are very significant.
I use tracking software, I have a decent understanding of how to use that software, yet I remain a micro stakes player? :-[
HM or PT will not make you a winningest player. >:(
-
Is this a spying mission Leigh? in support of Rob Yong"s recent absurd observations and stance around the current status of online poker.
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
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
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.
-
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.
Damn
-
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.
Damn
It"s nn, not mn.
-
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.
Damn
It"s nn, not mn.
My bad ;D
-
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.
I don"t think it would be the end of DTD, but it does feel like Rob wants out of the game. I don"t believe he genuinely expects his online cash games will be a long term success.
-
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.
I don"t think it would be the end of DTD, but it does feel like Rob wants out of the game. I don"t believe he genuinely expects his online cash games will be a long term success.
I agree (I was just taking it to the extreme *lol*), although if Rob sold DTD it would change a lot I think and probably not be anywhere near as good for the recreational player like ourselves.
I have played the game on occasion to show support to them but have to be honest and say I don"t like playing online without the HUD. Just my preference. Thinking about it in the cold light of day it probably gives me very few advantages I could not figure out for myself when playing a single table. I just see them more quickly.
It gives more advantages when playing a few tables of course.
-
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.
I don"t think it would be the end of DTD, but it does feel like Rob wants out of the game. I don"t believe he genuinely expects his online cash games will be a long term success.
this is completely and utterly wrong. Could not be more wrong
He definitely thinks they will be a success, are off to a really good start and has significant support from within the industry. You would be genuinely surprised
Try them, really a very good experience for the recreational player (and very good games)
-
Is this a spying mission Leigh? in support of Rob Yong"s recent absurd observations and stance around the current status of online poker.
Defintely not absurd. Even leaving aside the issue of HUDs for a moment a lot of his ideas around the recreational player experience (chat box abuse putting off players, anonymity putting off players, bots/cheating scandals etc) are extremely popular
-
Leigh
You have precisely the same reasons as I do playing poker. I have no interest in playing nosebleed stakes, so the odd loss from a leak I can live with. I shall assume that you"re pretty comfortable with your own game, eg how aggressive/passive/tight/loose you are?
I"m okay with my game, although I"m not sure how much "game" I actually have. I make mistakes, but try to learn from them. I made a mistake in a satellite the other night, posted it up on here, and very quickly got confirmation that I played it incorrectly.
I made a mistake with my exit hand at Wembley. Should have lost the hand, but shouldn"t have gone bust.
I don"t regret either of those examples, but will learn from them. Poker software wouldn"t have helped me in either of those situations, at least I don"t think it would.
Interestingly, chatting to an APATer about this thread, I suggested that I might ask if poker software could help me win flips, or stop me running Kings into Aces (a bit tongue in cheek), but the suggestion was that it could help with that element of your play, and they have experiences that would prove that.
Anyone else got experiences of poker software helping their overall game, and not just the more statistical elements that have been discussed ?
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.
Sounds like we"ve a similar poker past, apart from the fact you"ve done Vegas. That"s still on my list. :D
-
Is this a spying mission Leigh? in support of Rob Yong"s recent absurd observations and stance around the current status of online poker.
Defintely not absurd. Even leaving aside the issue of HUDs for a moment a lot of his ideas around the recreational player experience (chat box abuse putting off players, anonymity putting off players, bots/cheating scandals etc) are extremely popular
Firstly, this agenda has its roots here (http://www.philgalfond.com/lets-make-some-changes/) in Phil Galfond"s blog. Phil Galfond imho is the most honest, humble and informed voice in the entire poker world but even so, he is not impartial and as he freely admits in that blog, some changes that are good for him, will hurt others. That is a core problem for all of us who participate in this debate and especially so for the Cardroom owners.
DTD online choose to offer their product on the ipoker network, hardly the model for customer care. Until recently they chose to close winning accounts as a solution to their inter-skin rake wars problem. That is a statement with substance which for me far outweighs any rhetoric or grand aspirational platitudes Mr Yong cares to offer.
As far as security issues, this is not a topic that needs discussing, allocate a budget and go after those who break the rules. Not doing so is akin to poor hygiene in a food business, do not allow your customers to fall ill because you haven"t been sufficiently diligent.
-
Is this a spying mission Leigh? in support of Rob Yong"s recent absurd observations and stance around the current status of online poker.
Defintely not absurd. Even leaving aside the issue of HUDs for a moment a lot of his ideas around the recreational player experience (chat box abuse putting off players, anonymity putting off players, bots/cheating scandals etc) are extremely popular
Firstly, this agenda has its roots here (http://www.philgalfond.com/lets-make-some-changes/) in Phil Galfond"s blog. Phil Galfond imho is the most honest, humble and informed voice in the entire poker world but even so, he is not impartial and as he freely admits in that blog, some changes that are good for him, will hurt others. That is a core problem for all of us who participate in this debate and especially so for the Cardroom owners.
DTD online choose to offer their product on the ipoker network, hardly the model for customer care. Until recently they chose to close winning accounts as a solution to their inter-skin rake wars problem. That is a statement with substance which for me far outweighs any rhetoric or grand aspirational platitudes Mr Yong cares to offer.
As far as security issues, this is not a topic that needs discussing, allocate a budget and go after those who break the rules. Not doing so is akin to poor hygiene in a food business, do not allow your customers to fall ill because you haven"t been sufficiently diligent.
DTD chose to go to IPoker instead of Boss, which is clearly declining and an inferior product. Unless your are Stars/Tilt or a specialist site such as Sky Poker, its likely that the online landscape will change dramatically in the next five years and that very few networks will be around. IPoker will be one of those.
The MD of APAT, who chose to run an IPoker skin in his other world, probably agrees
Using language like "absurd" which you did is far more ludicrous than anything Rob Yong said. You may disagree with his point of view but to use language like you did was a bit lazy i think. Its his point of view, which he holds strongly. Certainly not absurd. Evne if you think its incorrect.
You are correct that there are big issues afoot. Online poker is in decline, over and above reasons of recession, and initiatives like this can potentially attract new people into the market. Its actually very aligned with what APAT has tried to do snce 2005
The problem with HUDs, specifically is not the issue of whether they give an advantage or not (plenty of people use them just to track results, rather than in game) but that for many recreational players they THINK its not a level playing field. Its an issue of perception that no amount of education can change
They also dislike being told to "die of cancer" when they outdraw a "grinder" to use an extreme example
Issues such as in game etiquette, bots, collusion etc all detract from the growth prospects of the industry and yes all sites spend a lot on these issues. Is IPoker as good at that as Stars? No, clearly not
This is obviously only from one angle, but from someone who makes a living analysing HUD stats for a staking operation its quite interesting i think
http://www.bluffeurope.com/PokerMagazine/Levelling-the-Field_147.aspx
-
DTD chose to go to IPoker instead of Boss, which is clearly declining and an inferior product. Unless your are Stars/Tilt or a specialist site such as Sky Poker, its likely that the online landscape will change dramatically in the next five years and that very few networks will be around. IPoker will be one of those.
The MD of APAT, who chose to run an IPoker skin in his other world, probably agrees
Using language like "absurd" which you did is far more ludicrous than anything Rob Yong said. You may disagree with his point of view but to use language like you did was a bit lazy i think. Its his point of view, which he holds strongly. Certainly not absurd. Evne if you think its incorrect.
You are correct that there are big issues afoot. Online poker is in decline, over and above reasons of recession, and initiatives like this can potentially attract new people into the market. Its actually very aligned with what APAT has tried to do snce 2005
The problem with HUDs, specifically is not the issue of whether they give an advantage or not (plenty of people use them just to track results, rather than in game) but that for many recreational players they THINK its not a level playing field. Its an issue of perception that no amount of education can change
They also dislike being told to "die of cancer" when they outdraw a "grinder" to use an extreme example
Issues such as in game etiquette, bots, collusion etc all detract from the growth prospects of the industry and yes all sites spend a lot on these issues. Is IPoker as good at that as Stars? No, clearly not
This is obviously only from one angle, but from someone who makes a living analysing HUD stats for a staking operation its quite interesting i think
http://www.bluffeurope.com/PokerMagazine/Levelling-the-Field_147.aspx
Most of those issues can be dealt with very quickly but at a cost to the providers, which I suspect is not an insignificant factor. It is absurd imho to pay lip service to issues that are firmly in your control should you wish to address those issues.
You may deem that to be lazy on my part, an opinion you are quite entitled to have and to voice, but then again we could say that about my assertions too.
If stars can do it?
-
I"d like to know the difference between "absurd" and "ludicrous"
-
-
Leigh
You have precisely the same reasons as I do playing poker. I have no interest in playing nosebleed stakes, so the odd loss from a leak I can live with. I shall assume that you"re pretty comfortable with your own game, eg how aggressive/passive/tight/loose you are?
I"m okay with my game, although I"m not sure how much "game" I actually have. I make mistakes, but try to learn from them. I made a mistake in a satellite the other night, posted it up on here, and very quickly got confirmation that I played it incorrectly.
I made a mistake with my exit hand at Wembley. Should have lost the hand, but shouldn"t have gone bust.
I don"t regret either of those examples, but will learn from them. Poker software wouldn"t have helped me in either of those situations, at least I don"t think it would.
Interestingly, chatting to an APATer about this thread, I suggested that I might ask if poker software could help me win flips, or stop me running Kings into Aces (a bit tongue in cheek), but the suggestion was that it could help with that element of your play, and they have experiences that would prove that.
Anyone else got experiences of poker software helping their overall game, and not just the more statistical elements that have been discussed ?
Yes, but I have already outlined them.
Poker Software (not purely the HUD) has helped me identify and work on leaks in my own game such as playing too loose from certain positions and pick them up there and then and correct them, wothout the software it would take longer to identify this.
Looking at opponents games has helped me identify "standard spots".. An easy example being the type of spot to steal the blinds in during a cash game and my example from earlier in the thread of when it is profitable to cbet any two cards. It has made me far more aware that these dynamics actually exist and more aware of the type of player I am up against and how to exploit them in a live game.
The software helps you play a lot of spots more correctly and this then become part of your natural game. Not sure how well I have explained this but Yes, Poker Tracker and my HUD have definitely helped me develop my overall game in a number of different ways.
-
-
i really feel like huds can be spoken about until the cows come home but at the end of the day they are here. some players use them, some dont. some try to use but use incorrectly and some base their games souly around it.
variety is the spice of life :)
-
I got "Tournament Indicator" about 5 years ago when I was playing $10 and $20 SnG"s. It helped me get to a +ev game very quickly and I became a successful "grinder" at those levels. However, I got bored with those games and packed them in about 3 years ago.
I now only play tournaments, usually just one or two at a time. I have Tournament Indicator on in the background in these because, particularly in the early stages, it gives me instant information on the other players when I have some cards I want to play. This means I can read or watch "Peaky Blinders" on the iPad, instead of mentally compiling information on the other players :) Lazy, but it works for me.
When I get down to 15 BB"s or so, I give the game my full attention and often switch TI off.
-
What"s the best HUD to set up for SNGs on say Pokerstars? I"ve 600+ games worth of figures I can feed it as a start (though I know that"s hardly any).
Ideally I"d like the database to record my game results *without* me having to manually input them all myself - as I know PokerTracker used to insist you do (kind of defeating the point of it).
-
What"s the best HUD to set up for SNGs on say Pokerstars? I"ve 600+ games worth of figures I can feed it as a start (though I know that"s hardly any).
Ideally I"d like the database to record my game results *without* me having to manually input them all myself - as I know PokerTracker used to insist you do (kind of defeating the point of it).
MTT or STT?
PT does not require you to manually enter tournament results any more.
-
What"s the best HUD to set up for SNGs on say Pokerstars? I"ve 600+ games worth of figures I can feed it as a start (though I know that"s hardly any).
Ideally I"d like the database to record my game results *without* me having to manually input them all myself - as I know PokerTracker used to insist you do (kind of defeating the point of it).
MTT or STT?
PT does not require you to manually enter tournament results any more.
18 man ones. Good to hear that about PT. Was the reason I stopped using it.
-
What"s the best HUD to set up for SNGs on say Pokerstars? I"ve 600+ games worth of figures I can feed it as a start (though I know that"s hardly any).
Ideally I"d like the database to record my game results *without* me having to manually input them all myself - as I know PokerTracker used to insist you do (kind of defeating the point of it).
MTT or STT?
PT does not require you to manually enter tournament results any more.
18 man ones. Good to hear that about PT. Was the reason I stopped using it.
I am not very good at these but for 180 manners I use a pretty basic one
VPIP / PFR / 3-BET / FOLD TO 3-BET
HANDS / CBET FLOP / FOLD TO CBET FLOP
ATTEMPT TO STEAL / FOLD TO STEAL ATTEMPT
That is enough for me to narrow down ranges enough to be confident of my shove/call ranges against most players
-
It can be handy to display no. of big blinds for each player.