|
arkitekton
|
09-24-2006, 09:31 PM
Post subject: Speaking of Heads Up Displays--(playing without)
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: canada
Posts: 269
|
|
Re the previous thread:
Am I one of the few (or only) players on this forum that plays without a Heads Up Display? The most I play is 4 tables at a time... I did try the PokerAce HUD but it seemed like the trial version didn't do real time stats (and they weren't clear about whether the registered version would do so)--it only accessed my PokerTracker database, so even though I've played a lot of poker at Party and Empire, even at those sites PokerAce only gave me stats on at most a couple of players at a given table--not terribly useful.
PokerTracker has been a huge help--am I missing out on another great piece of software by not using a HUD?
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
Nehmer
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Decatur, IL
Posts: 666
|
|
I haven't been using a HUD of any kind lately either. I used to use Gametime+, but I always found the extra clutter on the screen distracting and I know most of the other good players at my level fairly well now and have notes on them anyway. So the only thing the HUD would be good for is finding out who the complete fish are faster, but that doesn't take long anyway.
|
|
|
|
Damian
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Manchester UK
Posts: 24
|
|
I do use one, In fact I think mine is Gametime+. And there's pro's and cons to be honest.
I find them very usefull, for a snapshot of how a player plays without looking through reams of info on Poker Tracker - and therefore not paying attention to the table. If I multi-table - there is no way I wouldnt use one. It'd be the only way to keep track of the players.
One disadvantage I've found, is that using a HUD has adversely affected my reads. When I started playing, before I even had PokerTracker - I would sit and study the table, the betting patterns etc, and within a few hands I could put my opponents on a hand fairly quickly in some cases. When I started using Poker Tracket along with a HUD, I became too reliant on stats, and examining those during play, and missing a lot of reads that I would have had previously.
Now I still use a HUD, but try not to rely on it too much. The numbers are there if I need clarification - but I concentrate on the play rather than the stats.
|
|
|
|
hachkc
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 18
|
|
I use pokerace btw
A couple of benefits:
1. Quick profile of player when you sit at the table without having to wait a few hands. Its impossible to manually track all the online players unless you are playing the games that don't attract of ton of different players like 5/10 PLO8 or something. Also, a 100 or so hands on a player is always going to be more accurate than the 1st 10 or so you see them play.
2. MT'ing - Invaluable as you can't watch the action across all the tables to discover betting patterns, style, etc. Makes it easier to play ABC poker with this information readily available.
3. Table Selection, you can show table averages for VP$IP, PFR, Aggression, BB/100 which is a much more accurate view of the table than simply going avg pot size, # player per flop, etc. Obviously, you need to sit at the table for this to come up. There may be other software to do this btw. I'd much rather sit at a table with a lot of players that have a negative instead of positive BB/100 regardless of the number of players seeing the flop.
One issue though is it can become a crutch if you simply rely on it especially at higher limits where players can be better/trickier. But some information is always better than no information. At its worst, you can still use it in those tricky situations where you are not sure of your read and just need some additional backup to make a decision 1 way or another.
|
|
|
|
midas06
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: NZ
Posts: 2,196
|
|
I only use a HUD for table selection purposes
|
|
|