1. Hey guys. I personally don't use one of these poker tracking software's, i tried once and found it to distracting with the numerous numbers (that i didn't understand) all over the tables...
    Anyway, i just wanted to get some feedback as to whether you feel they are giving non users an unfair advantage compared to the players that do use them?
    For full time players who are not using them, is this going to be a major factor and disadvantage to us if we continue to play without them?
    Do we too, have to start using them in order to be on the same playing field?
    Are there any players out there that DONT believe in this software?

    Thanks for any input on this subject.
     
    Add murkmanz to Rail
  2. I think its dependent on the stakes u play, I'm a micro stakes player and the nits/super nits (and the play-every-hand players) that you find on most of my tables are so exploitable when you can see their stats clearly, and its just too hard to observe the way they're playing on more than 5 tables.

    Yes its gives me an advantage, but I wouldnt consider unfair, cos pokerstars says so yaaay!

    I know Moorman and HITTHEPANDA don't play with HUDs so I dont think full time players need em

    But I do believe every1 should use them but you shouldn't get obsessed with having perfect stats/image urself thats where the problems start.
    Add Marrs_aka_CB to Rail
  3. I am a one table micro player and I don't use them, I like to study how the other players play and learn from that. Also like to chat as poker is part of my fun/social time.
    Add vicvegas007 to Rail
  4. of course there are very successful full time pro players that don't use HUDs


    with that being said, using one is clearly going to give you more information than someone not using one...what you do with that information is up to the player though...some people HUDs help them out a TON nad prolly help them make a lot of money, while others it probably hurts their game and overwhelms thema nd makes them play worse

    it's only helpful in the right hands..


    and no (cause that's always where this conversation leads), i'm not for banning huds or anything liek that, that's really dumb and i would never support something like that
    Edited By: Gags30 Feb 25th, 2012 at 04:29 PM
     2
    1
    Add Gags30 to Rail
  5. i dont think its in the spirit of the game. but if its legal so be it.
    Add champstone to Rail
  6.  
    Originally Posted by champstone View Post

    i dont think its in the spirit of the game. but if its legal so be it.

    This is precisely how i feel. When i first started to play, a big part of the excitement for me was trying to read your opponents as best you can and battling big fields, switching tables remaining relatively anonymous, but when i learned that the vast majority of my openents have my basic moves documented automically and visably i lost a lot of love for the game. But like its been stated above, it is LEGAL....
     
    Thread StarterAdd murkmanz to Rail
  7.  
    Originally Posted by champstone View Post

    i dont think its in the spirit of the game. but if its legal so be it.

    This
    Edited By: vicvegas007 Feb 25th, 2012 at 05:16 PM
    Add vicvegas007 to Rail
  8.  
    Originally Posted by murkmanz View Post

    This is precisely how i feel. When i first started to play, a big part of the excitement for me was trying to read your opponents as best you can and battling big fields, switching tables remaining relatively anonymous, but when i learned that the vast majority of my openents have my basic moves documented automically and visably i lost a lot of love for the game. But like its been stated above, it is LEGAL....


    it seems like most people that are against huds don't really understand how they work...

    and how can you not think that huds should be part of a game where playing 10-20 tables at a time is considered 'normal' for a lot of people...
     2
    1
    Add Gags30 to Rail
  9.  
    Originally Posted by Gags30 View Post

    of course there are very successful full time pro players that don't use HUDs



    and no (cause that's always where this conversation leads), i'm not for banning huds or anything liek that, that's really dumb and i would never support something like that


    Any supporting evidence on why the banning of HUDS would be "dumb"? I am not saying I am for or against it but I think the side against HUDS have a better arguement than those supporting the use of HUDS
     
    Add chrisp200 to Rail
  10. If i were playing 1/2 tables I'd be able to gain a lot more information on my opponents myself than any hud ever could. But seeing as I play between 10-18 tables most of the time I couldn't play without one and considering for many mtt revs volume is key to yearly profit they are definately a Gd thing imo.

    It would be a big fail and loss of business for big sites to ban them and I don't see it ever happening. I'd be playing 10-20 mtt's a day instead of 50 and so would a lot of others, stars def know this.

    I really don't think they give an unfair advantage at all, if anything it stops me from getting better reads on my opponents and makes me a lil lazy

     
    Originally Posted by chrisp200 View Post

    Any supporting evidence on why the banning of HUDS would be "dumb"? I am not saying I am for or against it but I think the side against HUDS have a better arguement than those supporting the use of HUDS


    Peoples volume would be cut in half if not more daily and would be a fairly significant loss of rake for the sites. Imagine all the cash game players going from 12-24 tables to 4 many would probably quit.
     1
    Add mcandrews3rd to Rail
  11.  
    Originally Posted by Gags30 View Post

    it seems like most people that are against huds don't really understand how they work...

    and how can you not think that huds should be part of a game where playing 10-20 tables at a time is considered 'normal' for a lot of people...

    i dont see the logic there in the 10-20 table if a guy 100 tables should he have a 1 card reveal.this is same as the chicken an the egg i think there would be less 20 tabling without huds grinding away for supernova while profiting 73 cents aday in cash games. to me there nothing more than prop players.
    Add champstone to Rail
  12.  
    Originally Posted by champstone View Post

    i dont see the logic there in the 10-20 table if a guy 100 tables should he have a 1 card reveal.this is same as the chicken an the egg i think there would be less 20 tabling without huds grinding away for supernova while profiting 73 cents aday in cash games. to me there nothing more than prop players.


    LOL what....huds aren't some form of cheating that is only available to those who 20 table. come on

    it's like saying that you should ban the kid in little league who's parents buy him the new good baseball glove...it's within the rules of the game, so why should he not be able to use it?
     2
    1
    Add Gags30 to Rail
  13. i wouldnt have my kid on every team .but if you think players who play 4 million hands and have .073 per 100 big blinds are good for poker im not sure i see no diff than bots . i v seen bots with lower bot ratings.i know what a hud is .i just think there not good for or in the spirit of the game. i never said ban them.
    Edited By: champstone Feb 25th, 2012 at 06:14 PM
    Add champstone to Rail
  14.  
    Originally Posted by Gags30 View Post


    it's like saying that you should ban the kid in little league who's parents buy him the new good baseball glove...it's within the rules of the game, so why should he not be able to use it?

    Hmm. Seems like it's one thing to say HUDs are permitted in the rules and therefore shouldn't be considered cheating and another thing to object to them being permitted in the rules in the first place. I'm not sure which debate is going on here (probably both).

    Personally I don't have much a of problem with the idea of HUDs, though I dont use one myself. But I think there's a reasonable case to be made that HUDless poker provides a different experience that emphasizes different skill sets, one which a lot folks might find more appealing.
     
    Add boneralert to Rail
  15.  
    Originally Posted by champstone View Post

    i wouldnt have my kid on every team .but if you think players who play 4 million hands and have .073 per 100 big blinds are good for poker im not sure i see no diff than bots . i v seen bots with lower bot ratings.i know what a hud is .i just think there not good for or in the spirit of the game. i never said ban them.


    Of course there good for poker any player that plays is good for poker. Especially for the guys who play at 1-2/100bb who are making their profit from the so called bots. We need money rolling in and out of sites an if huds increase that then I say their good
     1
    Add mcandrews3rd to Rail
  16. HUDs are awesome. it's just fun to create a HUD for like a whole day and realize that it's crap while playing and deleting it again lol.
     1
    Add RedIceRap to Rail
  17. so, if a website explains that a flush beats trips, it should clearly be banned too right ? its clearly giving an "unfair advantage" against people that doesn't know it.
     
    Add LiquidSw0rd to Rail
  18.  
    Originally Posted by LiquidSw0rd View Post

    so, if a website explains that a flush beats trips, it should clearly be banned too right ? its clearly giving an "unfair advantage" against people that doesn't know it.


    Hopefully people that play poker already know that a flush beats trips, bad example.

    No one said anything about banning HUDs, some people like to use them others don't. But it would be nice to see a site without them just to see what the games would be like.
    Add vicvegas007 to Rail
  19. woah Liquid Sword went philosophical on us, but I agree with everyone arguing that it's important for sites to have players using HUDs to be putting in mega-volume as if they're bots. Yes these players make cash room games (and even sometimes SNGs) genuinely depressing to play, but these are the players that help sites maintain large prizepools and no one wants the prizepools dropping f that.
    Add Marrs_aka_CB to Rail
  20. Ive used one for about 2 years, and honestly, I completely ignore the numbers in quite a few diff situations. Sure, I've got 5,000 hands on this guy, but how many were from rebuy mtts, early/mid/late game? The number definitely help just as far as showing how aggressive someone is in late position or how often they fold to 3/4 bets, but really, it cost $100 3 years ago, and thats right about what its worth. No ones going to win a mtt using only HUD numbers
     
    Add Donnie2005.2 to Rail
  21.  
    Originally Posted by vicvegas007 View Post

    No one said anything about banning HUDs

    and so what ?? some people think so.

     
    Originally Posted by vicvegas007 View Post

    Hopefully people that play poker already know that a flush beats trips, bad example.

    that was just an exemple DUCY

     
    Originally Posted by Marrs_aka_CB View Post

    woah Liquid Sword went philosophical on us

    i understand OP like he wanted to talk about ethic, wich is very close to philosophy yeah. so i did.
     
    Add LiquidSw0rd to Rail
  22. HUDs are also important to cash game players as it can help easily identify people that might be bots or superusers. Many bot rings have been uncovered on Ipoker and other networks because HUDs were allowed. Also, the UB/AP superuser scandals would have not been uncovered if not for some hard evidence from HUDs to start the investigation. It is one of the main reasons I will not give 1 penny to a site like Bovada or Bodog that insists on having anonymous play which just encourages cheaters and will make insider play go more likely uncovered. I don't mind if a site like partypoker offers anonymous tables, I will just not play on those tables.
    Add wackyJaxon to Rail
  23. I can see there are many valid and different arguments here. Just wanted to say another thing, i do think its highly unethical in online poker that there is NO warnings to new players signing up to a site that players will be using software to take advantage of you.
    I started to play in early 2009, and it was only when i went to a casino in late 2010 that someone told me about HUDS.
    in fact i felt quite violated when i really looked into what people were using.
    Anyway, im all for big prizepools and for online poker to grow. And, whats legal is legal.
    Would it be a fair idea to suggest that people who want to use HUDS only be able to view other players stats that also use HUDS? And the rest of the players that do not use a HUD to not have their statistics open to the HUD users?
     
    Thread StarterAdd murkmanz to Rail
  24.  
    Originally Posted by murkmanz View Post

    i do think its highly unethical in online poker that there is NO warnings
    i felt quite violated when i really looked into what people were using.

    Could you imagine if sites warned players that would put off new players so much, it may be unethical but its necessary at least while these softwares cost money to not make rec players be scared to play a game that they enjoy
    Add Marrs_aka_CB to Rail
  25. I play micro stakes and occasionally dabble in larger tourneys but i'm a live player so I could really care less.
    Add yjbrewer to Rail
  26. tbh the doj is more of worry to my br than huds.and i was violated by ftp it felt like anally but not sure .but gl whether you use them or not .
    Add champstone to Rail
  27. The software that is allowed is outlined in the TOS of the site you are supposed to read before you sign up. I know I don't always read on every site I do sign up for, but the sites do disclose it.
    Add wackyJaxon to Rail
  28. HUD's help without a doubt, but you still need a good grounding in the game to use the information.
    Add MotherwellX to Rail
  29.  
    Originally Posted by murkmanz View Post

    I can see there are many valid and different arguments here. Just wanted to say another thing, i do think its highly unethical in online poker that there is NO warnings to new players signing up to a site that players will be using software to take advantage of you.
    I started to play in early 2009, and it was only when i went to a casino in late 2010 that someone told me about HUDS.
    in fact i felt quite violated when i really looked into what people were using.
    Anyway, im all for big prizepools and for online poker to grow. And, whats legal is legal.
    Would it be a fair idea to suggest that people who want to use HUDS only be able to view other players stats that also use HUDS? And the rest of the players that do not use a HUD to not have their statistics open to the HUD users?


    This is all assuming that huds give an unfair advantage. Which I don't think they do, they just tell you information that you can easily figure out for yourself if your watching the table closely enough. The advantage of huds is he ability to play lots of tables at once.
     1
    Add mcandrews3rd to Rail
  30. Well i would assume that if players are paying money to buy a product that basically states take advantage of your oponents at the table QUOTE 'PokerTracker imports the hand histories that poker sites write to your computer. It then parses the hands and stores poker statistics about the hands into a local database so that you can look at every possible angle of both your and your opponents' poker game'

    Now what im saying is to me as a non user i am disadvantaged, because i only have my own hand history's and my own judgement and perception of my opponents.

    It would be impossible to get the same information as a HUD would use by just 'watching the table closely enough' let alone multitabling and constantly being switched tables....

    Anyway, im not in anyway suggesting that it should be illegal, infact im starting to consider trying to use it to see if its something i really will have to use if i want to continue fulltime.
     
    Thread StarterAdd murkmanz to Rail