Do you consider HUDs a form of cheating ? (1 Viewer)

[Legend5555]

Total tangent here, but NLHE is a double edged sword in this regard. It’s such a simple game to learn, that competence can be achieved with very little effort. When I started playing, at a low stakes home game, I went from total novice to one of the better players at the table in about 4 sessions.
So in that regard, NLHE can be good for poker, because it really is that easy to learn the basics.
But my god, take that home game competence to a cash game online or in the casino, and you know just enough to get sheared or skinned. Because the people willing to put in the extra work, to come close to mastering this solvable game, will crush people who’s mere competence gives them misplaced confidence.
I really hate cash NLHE, because (and I’ll freely admit it) I’m merely competent. For NLHE, I’ll only play tournaments. And it’s not because tournaments are easier - they’re not. It’s because you’re playing two games at once - you’re playing NLHE and you’re playing a tournament. The extra skill set required, and the added variance, makes NLHE possibly profitable for people who haven’t dedicated the time to solving NLHE.
Of course, the more interesting solution is just to play different poker games. But casinos won’t facilitate this because they don’t need to - as long as they can keep filling those NLHE tables with 9 player and keep raking, what do they care? And your average players don’t seem to want to learn those other games, because they already know NLHE. But the industry continues to embrace it - god knows why. The recent US Poler open had 12 events, 7 of which were exclusively NLHE. The guy who won played only NLHE events.
So there we are - NLHE drives the poker economy because it’s easy to learn and possible to master with a lot of effort. Blah.

Sorry for the rant that has nothing to do with HUDs.

Long term, this isn't going to be a problem with just NLHE. All forms of poker will likely suffer from solving. If it wasn't NLHE that became popular then it would have been whatever other game was. And if it was limit game, then it would have been even more solved than NLHE is. At least NLHE has so much info that you can't really easily memorize it. There are general strategies and heuristics that you can learn. But there is still enough going on that even good players need to run simulations. And even those are baseline vacuum plays. You still need to be good at making exploits especially in live play.

Bottom line though, NLHE is still massively profitable live. Is it like shooting fish in a barrel like it was in 2003-2010? Hell no. But that was never going to be sustainable anyway. Even online is still beatable if you are decent as long as you are playing on an anonymous site or away from the big heavily trafficked sites.

I want people to play more games too. Half so I can crush them, half because it's more fun. But I just like playing poker. I basically don't care what the game is as long as it's not circus nonsense. I draw the line somewhere around Drawmaha. I won't turn down NLHE. Hell, I even like LHE. But until someone finds a way to get people into stuff other than NLHE, I'll happily play NLHE.

 

[utgtrash]

This is such a funny thread to read - so prickly over a clearly controversial topic. If you want to stay away from controversy in your "homie" game, i would just disallow HUDS. We had a guy show up to our friendly pokerrrr2 group, in which there are a lot of not so serious players who dump regularly, and this guy was very not fun to have around, he would chat things like "BOOYA" when he sucked out/won a big pot, and just kind of had shitty personality. AND he was crushing the game. everyone banned him eventually, and i felt bad because i thought he was a tool but if he was winning fair and square why not have the competition.

If I found out he was using a HUD (u can't i don't think in this app) i would FEEL like he was cheating the nice ppl of the game and would agree on the ban based on that alone. I think the point is, sure they can use a HUD if they suck and still lose and are nice about it, but if they are beating you consistently and a HUD is involved, do you really think it's non-controversial and fine to allow?

 

[Mojo1312]

I don’t consider HUDs cheating per se. I just consider it lame.

Half the edge one can get in of poker is being more observant than your opponents.

HUDs allow any idiot to be observant.

With a HUD, you no longer have to pay attention to how often your opponents raise preflop, whether they are playing too many hands, etc.

Sure, it’s a very handy tool. But it takes a lot of the fun and challenge out of poker.

The above is my school of thought on the subject. NLHE is a game of edges. Any analytical tool that breaks down your opponents patterns is going to prove useful. It may not be cheating, but you can't deny that your decisions at the table are being influenced by the intel/stats collected by the HUD.

I have played up and down the ladder from .10/.20 blinds to $2/$5. I have played in a couple of underground games, multiple casinos, numerous home games, MTT's at the casino and local MTT's.

Such devices have no place in live games for obvious reasons. Every one has to rely on their own wits. Online is different, because of the difficulty in preventing players from using the analytical tools discussed in order to gain an edge, however small.

 

[LotsOfChips]

On a public site like P*, where it is explicitly allowed and many players are using it - not cheating.
On a site (public or private) where the rules prohibit it, but you do so anyway - cheating.
On a private site where you have been invited and vouched for - it depends. If you have explicit permission from the host and let all of the other players know, then I suppose it is ok. Failing to do so is at best scummy and douchey, and do you really want to be a scumball douchebag?

@wask - based on your answer's to @Jimulacrum's questions, your plan falls into the latter category. You admit that almost all of the players in the group don't even know what a HUD is, let alone use one. The group is a bunch of people playing for fun. You don't feel the need to ask permission of the host or the group. Your plan is like lobbing sticks of dynamite into the fish pond and scooping up the carcasses. I'm with @Jimulacrum on this one.

 

[Jimulacrum]

I basically don't care what the game is as long as it's not circus nonsense. I draw the line somewhere around Drawmaha.

I take great personal offense to this.

For real, though, you seem like you know your way around poker in general. What do you consider "circus nonsense" and what about it repulses you?

 

[Jimulacrum]

Well that was a pretty bad call from myself considering I end up being called a cheater after my very first post in the strategy section.

But I don't want to react too defensively and get pissed about it, I'm too old now for being mad on the internet. But I'll try to build a case for myself nonetheless and let you guys be judges.

You're not a cheater yet. You were merely considering cheating, and some of us are trying to talk you out of it. You could still refrain from getting a HUD and play the fair way.

I could entertain an argument that it's not quite cheating, as there's no explicit rule against it. In that case it would be merely angle-shooting. But it's still very undesirable behavior that's against the spirit of fairness, especially in a private game among friends and acquaintances.

 

[Legend5555]

I take great personal offense to this.

For real, though, you seem like you know your way around poker in general. What do you consider "circus nonsense" and what about it repulses you?

I think they are mostly excuses to create action. Much like how some NLHE games have double board bomb pots at regular intervals. When it becomes to difficult to figure out ranges either because everyone has 5+ cards or because the game obscures the info in some way, I lose interest. This is especially true when the games are played pot limit. Because often the games just become nut peddling fests. I don't find that interesting. I think stuff like 6 card Omaha, Scrotum, SOHE, etc are just for people that don't like folding and want to be involved in more hands, whether correctly or not.

And don't even get me started on Scarney. I legit think that game is terrible. I get that there is a lot of info you can use to parse out people's hands, but the game takes an eternity to play. And any game where more than 2 cards can interact with the board is just a hard pass for me.

As a matter of fact, the length of hands is almost 50% of why I hate circus games.

I'll play:
All HORSE games
NLHE
PLO/PLO8 (not a big Omaha fan though)
Big O (however I find Big O horribly boring)
2-7 triple
A-5 triple
Badugi
Baduecy
Badacey
Drawmaha (prefer hi/hi as other versions make scooping harder)
No limit 2-7 (may fav game)
Razzdugi
And I can be convinced to do Super Stud variants. Reason I have issues with super stud is that I don't like games that make starting ranges stronger in what feels like an artificial manner.

And I prefer these games limit unless otherwise noted.

 

[upNdown]

I think they are mostly excuses to create action. Much like how some NLHE games have double board bomb pots at regular intervals. When it becomes to difficult to figure out ranges either because everyone has 5+ cards or because the game obscures the info in some way, I lose interest. This is especially true when the games are played pot limit. Because often the games just become nut peddling fests. I don't find that interesting. I think stuff like 6 card Omaha, Scrotum, SOHE, etc are just for people that don't like folding and want to be involved in more hands, whether correctly or not.

And don't even get me started on Scarney. I legit think that game is terrible. I get that there is a lot of info you can use to parse out people's hands, but the game takes an eternity to play. And any game where more than 2 cards can interact with the board is just a hard pass for me.

As a matter of fact, the length of hands is almost 50% of why I hate circus games.

I'll play:
All HORSE games
NLHE
PLO/PLO8 (not a big Omaha fan though)
Big O (however I find Big O horribly boring)
2-7 triple
A-5 triple
Badugi
Baduecy
Badacey
Drawmaha (prefer hi/hi as other versions make scooping harder)
No limit 2-7 (may fav game)
Razzdugi
And I can be convinced to do Super Stud variants. Reason I have issues with super stud is that I don't like games that make starting ranges stronger in what feels like an artificial manner.

And I prefer these games limit unless otherwise noted.

I agree with you on almost all of this, but not SOHE. SOHE is all about hand selection, so if you’re playing it with a bunch of people who want to be involved in every hand, you can do very well.

 

[Legend5555]

I agree with you on almost all of this, but not SOHE. SOHE is all about hand selection, so if you’re playing it with a bunch of people who want to be involved in every hand, you can do very well.

SOHE is one where game speed is the bigger issue for me.

 

[Jimulacrum]

I think they are mostly excuses to create action. Much like how some NLHE games have double board bomb pots at regular intervals. When it becomes to difficult to figure out ranges either because everyone has 5+ cards or because the game obscures the info in some way, I lose interest. This is especially true when the games are played pot limit. Because often the games just become nut peddling fests. I don't find that interesting. I think stuff like 6 card Omaha, Scrotum, SOHE, etc are just for people that don't like folding and want to be involved in more hands, whether correctly or not.

And don't even get me started on Scarney. I legit think that game is terrible. I get that there is a lot of info you can use to parse out people's hands, but the game takes an eternity to play. And any game where more than 2 cards can interact with the board is just a hard pass for me.

As a matter of fact, the length of hands is almost 50% of why I hate circus games.

I'll play:
All HORSE games
NLHE
PLO/PLO8 (not a big Omaha fan though)
Big O (however I find Big O horribly boring)
2-7 triple
A-5 triple
Badugi
Baduecy
Badacey
Drawmaha (prefer hi/hi as other versions make scooping harder)
No limit 2-7 (may fav game)
Razzdugi
And I can be convinced to do Super Stud variants. Reason I have issues with super stud is that I don't like games that make starting ranges stronger in what feels like an artificial manner.

And I prefer these games limit unless otherwise noted.

Fair enough. I can't argue with some of what you're saying, especially since you're willing to play a whole lot of games that most folks won't touch. I've known a lot of people who basically cry when anything other than NLHE is mentioned, and it's hard for me to support that, but clearly it's not where you're coming from.

Time per hand is one major issue with some of them. Particularly in a home game, a hand of Scarney can take forever. (Scarney also has the weakness of killing people's hands for missing a discard. Fine in a really competitive game, but a sure turn-off to recreational players. Or at least it will be the first time it's enforced against them.)

But at the end of the day, all poker is an excuse to create action, and some "circus" games do a fantastic job of it. The ones that don't, tend not to gather a big following, like Courchevel (a nit's game if there ever was one) and Super Hold'em (everyone's afraid to give action because board texture tells you so little).

I prefer high-high Dramaha too. Just a better game IMO, mainly for scoopability, like you said.

And of course limit is best, especially with more complex games. I feel that way about all poker. Even Hold'em. It's just better for the game.

 

[Jimulacrum]

I agree with you on almost all of this, but not SOHE. SOHE is all about hand selection, so if you’re playing it with a bunch of people who want to be involved in every hand, you can do very well.

I'd say SOHE is equally about hand selection and hand construction. Most players both play too many hands and split them poorly. Doesn't matter if you wait around patiently for nice openers if you split them so that you almost always have to hit a parlay to scoop.

 

[EasyE]

I haven't thought about using a hud or solver and prefer the thinking that goes on inside just my head when playing. If there aren't rules against it, it isn't cheating. I just don't like it. Too much automation and instant suggestions that are better suited for pre game studying not in-play action. I mean, what if a baseball team knew what pitch they would most likely be reacting to.

 

[Josh Kifer]

Well that was a pretty bad call from myself considering I end up being called a cheater after my very first post in the strategy section.

Well, to be fair. You asked if using something was cheating and said you used it. That would mean if someone believes using a HUD is cheating.... They would believe your cheating.

Never ask questions you are not prepared for the answer for....

I don't start a post asking "are sarcastic people who post memes assholes" then get all up in arms if someone calls me an asshole.

Don't take any of this crap personally and more look at the answers as answers to your original topic. Yes, it's a controversial topic, but it's not like you arnt getting the answers you asked for.....

 

[Chip1525]

I wouldn’t call it cheating but I’d bet some of your opponents would consider it an unfair advantage if you’d explain its use like in your post. Imo, use the HUD multitabling on a commencial site but don’t in a private casual game.

If I found out someone was using a HUD in our private game they wouldn’t be invited back.

Exactly this. Cheating, strictly speaking? No.

But showing up to a friendly golf game with a laser rangefinder, GPS course map and pro caddy, when everyone else is just sort of eyeballing it half drunk... probably not going to get a callback next time I reckon?

Although to be fair, who is to say that no one else out of the 30 other degenerates isn't using a HUD? And if I understand correctly what a HUD does/doesn't do, in theory you could achieve the same by keeping notes in realtime, so maybe more of an administrative shortcut than angle shooting.

But I would probably announce it if you are planning to use it, and just check there are no objections so it is all above the table.

So TLDR not cheating but maybe just a bit tryhard and unsporting, depending on the rest of the crew. Only you can be the judge of that.

 

[Jimulacrum]

And if I understand correctly what a HUD does/doesn't do, in theory you could achieve the same by keeping notes in realtime, so maybe more of an administrative shortcut than angle shooting.

It would be a very rare talent to be able to keep up with the data collection and analysis a HUD does by simply keeping notes, in real time.

 

[Kain8]

And of course limit is best, especially with more complex games. I feel that way about all poker. Even Hold'em. It's just better for the game.

 

[Chip1525]

It would be a very rare talent to be able to keep up with the data collection and analysis a HUD does by simply keeping notes, in real time.

Fair point. Maybe theoretically possible but practically not feasible, and advantage gained.

But to the question of cheating, if it isn't explicitly disallowed by the host (even if it maybe should have been), technically not cheating, right? Just maybe in poor taste and not getting invited back to our type of games.

But again, I would probably leave it to the OP to be the honest judge of that.

 

[Jimulacrum]

But to the question of cheating, if it isn't explicitly disallowed by the host (even if it maybe should have been), technically not cheating, right? Just maybe in poor taste and not getting invited back to our type of games.

Yes. But it's "not cheating" in the same sense as positioning strategic mirrors around the room to see people's cards isn't cheating. It may not be in the rule book, but it's very clearly against the spirit of fairness of the game. At minimum angle-shooting.

 

[Frogzilla]

Yes. But it's "not cheating" in the same sense as positioning strategic mirrors around the room to see people's cards isn't cheating. It may not be in the rule book, but it's very clearly against the spirit of fairness of the game. At minimum angle-shooting.

Thats a terrible comparison, I’ve never been in a card room that let anyone put mirrors up. In contrast, many major online poker sites explicitly allow HUDs. Some even have them built in

 

[Legend5555]

Yes. But it's "not cheating" in the same sense as positioning strategic mirrors around the room to see people's cards isn't cheating. It may not be in the rule book, but it's very clearly against the spirit of fairness of the game. At minimum angle-shooting.

You're fighting a losing battle. Big data is here to stay in all forms of life. Would you say collecting all the data and referencing it when playing against a certain player (no HUD) is cheating? Is making notes and referencing them when playing cheating? Where is the line for you exactly when it becomes cheating? Somewhere between manually entering all hand history data in into a spreadsheet and having a program create a database of that data is an issue for you. But where is that line and why?

Playing online is different than live and should be treated as such. The player pools on the big sites are incredibly large. When you are playing multiple tables, it's hard to just see a screenname and remember how they play. Live, you have a lot more info to go off of and things to help you remember. And you have a lot more time to play attention. Online poker is about playing as many hands as possible and making a profit. The games are tighter and tougher. Volume is the primary way you win money. While it's certainly doable without a HUD, in think it's foolish to not use one of allowed to do so.

I go back to my original statement too. If you are playing online in what is essentially a home game, then I'd not use a HUD.

 

[DrStrange]

Let's not use the word "cheating". Perhaps "advantage, {unfair in a private game?}" is better. Be mindful the original post(s) were about using a HUD in a private MMT.

I found HUDs were much less useful in a tournament setting than in cash games. The ever changing blinds / antes made the data dubious - preflop decisions are totally different in the short stack / late event time frame vs what happens at the beginning of the tournament. And the shrinking table at the end of an event make it even worse. Using a HUD in a small MMT could easily be more harmful than helpful for many users - the data is that tainted.

The HUD data in a cash game is an overwhelming edge when playing the same cast of characters. But not so much of an advantage in a small, fast MMT. I wouldn't play online cash in private games where HUD usage was an issue. I wouldn't care much if someone used a HUD in a MMT.

As was opined earlier, the original poster can answer his own question by deciding if he is willing to make his HUD usage public information. If the host and the rest of the players are OK with the HUD, fine use it. If Hero isn't willing to preclear the HUD, then it isn't a good idea.

DrStrange

 

[Eloe2000]

It would be difficult to really judge the situation for us since we don't really have a good first hand perception of the situation and the group. HUD provides an advantage. In most small groups like this I bet HUDs haven't been discussed previously. Think to yourself, am I comfortable and confident letting everyone know I am using one? If the answer is "no", than IMO something clearly isn't right and I wouldn't feel comfortable using one in a small-ish group like this. If the answer is "yes" and it hasn't been discussed before then go ahead and let the host know to make sure you are in the right.

I find in life that we typically instinctually know what the "right" answer is, and we only debate it ourselves because the "wrong" answer is easier/faster/cheaper/simpler and the "right" answer is just more difficult.