so let me get this new WPEX thing straight

[DING-DONG YO]

[ QUOTE ]
What's easier for you to remember? The guy with the goofy hair raises a lot, or 'john2342' raises a lot?

The stats aid in recognizing tendencies. It's much easier to put faces to the way someone plays than it is to remember how a random internet name plays. Therefore, it can be argued that HUDs make online poker more similar to B&M games.

The fact of the matter is that there are players who will not play on WPEX because they don't have HUD support. There are few players who are going to flock to WPEX because they make it even more difficult for HUD users. Despite what the anti-HUD users would like you to think, the fish really don't care.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said I was an anti-HUD user. I just like having different options and at this point in time, I enjoy playing at WPEX without a HUD.

Sorry man, I respectfully disagree with you. I think no HUD is closer to B&M. Furthermore, I don't fault anyone for what they do. Use a HUD if you like.

[PokerAce]

[ QUOTE ]
The fact is that they would increase traffic for now by allowing PAHUD to work. I know of not one person that is waiting to play at a site that does NOT allow poker aids. But there are plenty of players that were waiting for WPEX to allow them to work.

I don't really care either way, but i do have a problem playing at a site where i sit down at a NL 200 or NL 400 table and see the same damn 3 people every time. If allowing PAHUD to work would increase the amount of players (even if it is some of the same) at least there would be more variety and probably an increase in the fish who would not wait 20 minutes for the only NL 200 table to open up.

For the last few months WPEX has not been PAHUD compatible and the site hasn't grown. Not sure what players the new software will attract.

Does anyone think there is a donkey out there waiting for a PT compatible site that doesn't allow pahud? Might as well just not have PT and attract the over 60 crowd of players who are scared of progress.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have had many requests to add WPEX support to my software. I have a lot of users who, now that they know how to use a HUD, wouldn't play without one by choice. A significant portion of these players might give WPEX a shot if they had PA Hud support. Since they don't, these users don't give WPEX a second thought.

WPEX severely underestimated the number of players HUD support would add to their site.

[primetime32]

and the point isn't to make the room more like a B&M. Its about making the room better. And if WPEX wants to keep its player base at around 1200 for the foreseeable future i suppose they have done a good job. If they wanted to increase the player base i would have been more PAHUD friendly. But that is just me.

I think if there were more and more "hud" players the traffic would increase and then more and more "bad" players would see that there is a large selection of games. They wouldn't care or even know about something like PAHUD.

[APerfect10]

[ QUOTE ]
However, I think many players, myself included, long for a poker experience closer to what you get in a B&M. No pokertracker, HUD, other aids, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's the problem. You are playing internet poker which has many different facets than B&M. The same can be said vice versa. Internet poker will never be exactly like B&M and B&M will never be exactly like Internet poker. They are two different beasts that share many similarities yet have so many differences.

Thats a fact that no matter what anyone does will always be. If you want to play B&M style of play, go to a casino. Don't play online. If you want internet style of play; play online, not at a casino. If I'm playing B&M, I dont sit there and complain that I dont have the exact pot size or players stack sizes easily available to me.

HUD's are only one of the differences between B&M and internet play. There are many others. IMHO, a good player will adapt to the game they're playing; not complain about the differences which no one can do anything about.

Btw, like I said earlier; simply removing player names from the hand histories does little to deter someone that wants to use a HUD. The only thing this does is separate the gap...

[PokerAce]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What's easier for you to remember? The guy with the goofy hair raises a lot, or 'john2342' raises a lot?

The stats aid in recognizing tendencies. It's much easier to put faces to the way someone plays than it is to remember how a random internet name plays. Therefore, it can be argued that HUDs make online poker more similar to B&M games.

The fact of the matter is that there are players who will not play on WPEX because they don't have HUD support. There are few players who are going to flock to WPEX because they make it even more difficult for HUD users. Despite what the anti-HUD users would like you to think, the fish really don't care.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said I was an anti-HUD user. I just like having different options and at this point in time, I enjoy playing at WPEX without a HUD.

Sorry man, I respectfully disagree with you. I think no HUD is closer to B&M. Furthermore, I don't fault anyone for what they do. Use a HUD if you like.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't referring to you as one of the anti-HUD people. I was just offering a counter-argument to your point. Time will tell if WPEX made the right decision.

The biggest sites have nothing against HUDs and have actually done things to help promote their use. If having HUD support was bad for the site, why would they be doing this? Sorry, but I have to trust the judgement of the sites with tens of thousands of users logged in versus one with hundreds.

[APerfect10]

[ QUOTE ]
and the point isn't to make the room more like a B&M. Its about making the room better. And if WPEX wants to keep its player base at around 1200 for the foreseeable future i suppose they have done a good job. If they wanted to increase the player base i would have been more PAHUD friendly. But that is just me.

I think if there were more and more "hud" players the traffic would increase and then more and more "bad" players would see that there is a large selection of games. They wouldn't care or even know about something like PAHUD.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly...

This is the problem with a "No rake" site. While I am sure it is their goal to grow their poker site to as large as possible; their bottomline isnt dependent on it therefore their decisions do not need to be sound. Anyone arguing that this decision is a good choice simply is not looking at it from a profitable/company point of view. Plain and simple. There is no legitimate argument that by removing player names from hand histories will increase traffic...

[Guthrie]

I use PokerAce every day. I love it. It makes me money.

I never used it at Paradise, don't know that it even works there. I always made money at Paradise without it. (Looks like those days may be over, but that's another thread.)

I've never used PA at Wpex. If it worked there, I'd use it. It doesn't work there. Big deal. I'm not exactly crushing the game (LHE) there, but I'm doing okay, and with 100% rakeback I'm doing really okay.

Getting HHs occasionally by e-mail sucked. Not getting HHs at all sucked worse. Getting them on hard drive won't suck. I'd rather have player names in them, but I can live without them. 100% rakeback > player names.

If the IRS asks me who I lost all that money to, I'll give them a list of all the American Taliban in Congress who voted for the online gambling bill.

I'm still undecided on whether allowing HUDs on Wpex would be good or bad for me. I'm apparently completely opposite to most 2+2ers in that I usually make more money at tight tables than loose, so maybe a bunch of multi-tabling HUDbots or whatever they're called would better for me than the moron maniacs I'm encountering there now. But as long as my account balance is higher every Monday than it was the previous Monday, I'm not complaining.

I am complaining about the constant disconnects, however. I really wish they'd fix that.

[Svenna111]

All aggressive games, 5max tables that tend to brake up faster than 6max, (perhaps people feel more comfortable with 6 max, if one leave from the table its only 4 handed, myself is not very comfortable with that too)I mean those 5 handed max tables does really not attract a lot of players, evidently; pokersitescout.com

I support PokerAce in everything he says! None people won't play on a site because there is HUD's. But I know some, and I think alot of people wont play if theres no PAHUD support.

[sharp63]

[ QUOTE ]
I still think it's funny that many high limit, well respected players use my software, but yet, a lot of low limit nobodies feel they are better than people who use a HUD.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not anti-HUD at all. I'm anti-HUDonks who complain when they aren't supported. I only play at 4 sites -- Party, Pacific, Dise, and now, WPEX. The only site I ever use PT/PAHUD at is Party. The other sites support for it is just too annoying to bother using really. I play 5/10 mostly and probably have at least twice the WR, or maybe 3x, of any HUDonk. Just using a HUD doesn't make you a donkey...relying on one as heavily as some people do does. Quite frankly, on PartyPoker, Stars, FullTilt, etc. where PT and PAHUD are super easy to get set up, there is pretty much no reason not to use them. In fact, you'd be stupid not too.

When you speak of "high-limit well respected" players, you're talking about people who could certainly survive without a HUD. HUDonks can't. I use PAHUD when it's convienient -- and it's a great tool. However, if it were banned from all sites, I would still be in fine shape. I think what the so-called "anti-hud" people are saying is that if you're relying on a HUD to win, then you're not very good.

[DING-DONG YO]

God, the reading comprehension in the zoo blows my mind. I never said the point was to make online more like a B&M. I said,

[ QUOTE ]
However, I think many players, myself included, long for a poker experience closer to what you get in a B&M. No pokertracker, HUD, other aids, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re-read it. LONG FOR AN EXPERIENCE CLOSER!!>!!!>?

I THINK, THINK, THINK, that means, my opinion is that many users want an experience closer (closer, that means kinda like it, similar, I never said online will be like a B&M, so this post:

[ QUOTE ]
Here's the problem. You are playing internet poker which has many different facets than B&M. The same can be said vice versa. Internet poker will never be exactly like B&M and B&M will never be exactly like Internet poker. They are two different beasts that share many similarities yet have so many differences.

Thats a fact that no matter what anyone does will always be. If you want to play B&M style of play, go to a casino. Don't play online. If you want internet style of play; play online, not at a casino. If I'm playing B&M, I dont sit there and complain that I dont have the exact pot size or players stack sizes easily available to me.

HUD's are only one of the differences between B&M and internet play. There are many others. IMHO, a good player will adapt to the game they're playing; not complain about the differences which no one can do anything about.

Btw, like I said earlier; simply removing player names from the hand histories does little to deter someone that wants to use a HUD. The only thing this does is separate the gap...

[/ QUOTE ]

IS REFUTING AN ARGUMENT I NEVER MADE!!!

AND some of us don't have the option of playing in casinos as there may not be one within a reasonable distance.

Also, pokerAce, you did call me an anti-HUD user:

[ QUOTE ]
Despite what the anti-HUD users would like you to think, the fish really don't care.

[/ QUOTE ]