Tracking Software vs. Studying Poker / What do Pro's do?

[theRabbit]

I've used/looked at a number of the popular tracking/monitoring software available. They are, I am sure, useful, but I have found there is a steep learning curve toward mastery.

Hypothetically-

If a winning low stakes poker player's goal was to make say, $50+/hr, would they be better off learning to use the available softwares or using that time to study the game? Also, do any Professional's use extra software?

What is the opnion of forum readers?

(I know this forum may be biased, but that is OK)

[SamIAm]

I bet the vast majority of the $15/$30 players have PokerTracker. (I would guess that almost ALL the winning players use it from $5/$10 and up.)

Maybe not "other software", but PT's gotta be pretty damn prevalent.
-Sam

[theRabbit]

Let's exclude software or the part of software that tracks your own play. I aggree that using poker tracker (or poker office) for that purpose is very cost effective.

I am thinking more of real time software that scans tables, rates the other players, etc.

[jfhst18]

It's not even close. Putting in the effort to learn the tracking software and then putting in the further effort of building a data bank is what pro's who play low-limit do and htey do it in teams. I'll be surprised if a single person on this forum offers an argument to the contrary--though I'd like to hear it.

There's no way around it IMO because if you play at the big sites they all have this data on you so you better have it on them as well as being technologivally prepared to find fish.

By the way I agree with you that learning the tracking software is tough.

[theRabbit]

Nice post!

[DrGonzo]

[ QUOTE ]
I've used/looked at a number of the popular tracking/monitoring software available. They are, I am sure, useful, but I have found there is a steep learning curve toward mastery.

Hypothetically-

If a winning low stakes poker player's goal was to make say, $50+/hr, would they be better off learning to use the available softwares or using that time to study the game?



[/ QUOTE ]

Well, you should do both. I think in the beginning, studying the game is more important. At the lowest levels you will not bump into the same players a lot and all players are so bad that you don't have to search the tables to find fish. As the player pool becomes smaller and the skill level of the players become more varied, stats becomes more useful.


[ QUOTE ]
Also, do any Professional's use extra software?


[/ QUOTE ]

Most of them. At the very highest levels, notes become more important than stats though, because players are adjusting their game a lot more depending on the opponents they are facing and what "mode" they are in.

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not even close. Putting in the effort to learn the tracking software and then putting in the further effort of building a data bank is what pro's who play low-limit do and htey do it in teams. I'll be surprised if a single person on this forum offers an argument to the contrary--though I'd like to hear it.

There's no way around it IMO because if you play at the big sites they all have this data on you so you better have it on them as well as being technologivally prepared to find fish.

By the way I agree with you that learning the tracking software is tough.

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF? hahaha this made me laugh, I'm sorry if that sounds jerkish.

Who the hell is a pro low-limit?

If you are learning the game, learn how to play poker first, poker software hell isn't even needed to beat many games up to 15/30. There are people who play much higher at sites that don't support it.

Yes, PT helps, but it isn't the end all where I won't play a site because it doesn't support it.

Learn the game, then learn the software, never other way around, or else you won't even know what a 25/80 showdown means = hand reading