|
Originally Posted by OngBonga
While you're right that large samples will give us important data that can be used to make more accurate plays, it doesn't take long to get a basic overview of villains' pre flop ranges and tendancies. If someone is 45/8 after just 20 hands, we know he's not very good and is calling way too much pre flop.
Yes, and if you need a HUD to provide you with that information, then you aren't paying enough attention to your opponents' habits.
I'm not saying HUDs are bad, I'm saying that the sentence, "If you don't use a HUD you're at a huge disadvantage." is definitely false.
You may (emphasis) be at a minor disadvantage against a small set of players in a small set of circumstances, but on the whole, 99% of what they are using a HUD to figure out is plain as day to be observed w/o a HUD.
If 99% of what people use a HUD for is a waste of their energy (which I posit it is, if that isn't an under-estimate), because they can figure all of that out in less time w/o using any HUD at all, then the actual competitive advantage of using a HUD is minimal.
Originally Posted by OngBonga
We need large samples against solid players, but even with a small sample a HUD is very useful for profiling fish, and fish are our primary target at micros.
Again... if you need a HUD to identify player characteristics in the first 1,000 hands against someone, then my primary advice to you would be to ditch the HUD and start watching the action.
HUDs can be wildly useful, but they just aren't for the obvious stuff which dictates almost all of the decisions at the micro-stakes.
|