[smoore]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1) If you ban HUD's only savvy people will have them. Consider this:

A computer connects to the site with the official client. Unbeknownst to the poker site, this "computer" is actually a vmware virtual machine. Pokertracker is running on the host machine. A HUD is running on the host machine.

Result: The same thing we have now for the user but the poker site has no idea that PT is even collecting data, let alone that there is a HUD overlay.

2) Forget setting up multiple computers to multi-account. Again vmware comes to the rescue, this time fully over the cheating "line". 1600x1200 display on host machine. Four vmware virtual machines running simultaneously @ 800x600. These either use a full service proxy or four physical connections in the host machine to avoid dupe IP addresses. Simple.

Result: Same ability we have now, just slightly more complicated for the end user. This is a case of giving greedy people enough rope to hang themselves. If a cheater is prevented from connecting twice from the same IP he/she may think, "How can I get multiple IP's to all display on this monitor?" The way it is now there is a very good chance of catching them. If separate IPs were required then there would be nearly no trace in the network, you'd be down to standard collusion/softplaying detection methods. Give the cheaters enough rope, please.

[/ QUOTE ]

So your arguement is that the sites should knowlingly allow cheating and unfair advantages to some players because they are powerless to stop it anyway?

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't put words in my mouth. I do not condone cheating, nor do I think that the sites should overlook it. I think they should leave it technically trivial so that the lazy, greedy people that are going to do it will do it in a way that makes it easy to detect.

I think HUDs are fine.