Are built-in HUDs the future of poker?
Instead of banning HUDs to protect recreational players, could built-in HUDs actually improve their poker experience?
This month iPoker launched their own in-built HUD to mirror similar innovations by RunItOnce, GGPoker and Winamax. HUDs are a controversial topic in poker with some operators allowing them and others banning them. In-built HUDs are seemingly a meet-in-the-middle approach that limits the depth that third-party HUDs offer and also allows people who don’t use tracking software to benefit from data collection.
We so often argue about whether HUDs are hurting recreational players that we never really stop to ask if they might benefit from them instead? After all, remembering screen names is not an easy task when they are long and full of numbers. I’ve been playing for years and I still occasionally mistake the new player in Seat 2 for the player who recently bust or was moved from Seat 2. So a few simple HUD stats that remind us that a player has been tight or loose might actually benefit everyone.
Likewise, we live in the age of distraction. Even though a recreational player might not be playing lots of tables, it doesn’t mean they are not also browsing Twitter and watching Netflix. A very basic HUD might stop a casual player from making a massive mistake just as much as it helps the serious players make a good exploit.
HUDs have always had an image problem
My own position on third party HUDs has changed over the years. I have never considered them cheating because I accept the argument that the more tables you play, the worse you are on each of them. A 4 BB/100 player on one table might be a 2 BB/100 player across eight tables. A HUD just reduces the disadvantage they bring upon themselves, rather than give them insight they otherwise would not have had.
However, I do think poker would be better without third party HUDs for the simple reason of optics. I know they are not cheating because I have spent years writing about them, but a new player coming to poker would understandably be horrified by them. They look predatory to an outsider.
I personally play on Unibet, partypoker and GGPoker. Three sites where third party HUDs are not allowed. This is for many reasons, one of them being that I think most operators will eventually ban them so I am getting a head start on not playing with one.
A way to reduce the stigma of HUDs?
It’s not all great playing on HUDless sites. There is a very strong argument that banning HUDs at major sites is what has led to the rise of GTO play. After all, if you cannot exploit a player’s stats, the only way to play a lot of tables is to ditch an exploitable style altogether.
A HUD really doesn’t matter if you play GTO, in fact it would be a distraction, so there is a plausible argument that HUDless sites play closer to GTO at the higher stakes.
So in-built HUDs might be the way to go. You don’t have the bad optics for the game but you still have a small guide for when to play a more exploitable style. Recreational players will also get the benefit from the HUD for the first time and it might even bring them around to the idea of HUDs not being all that bad in the first place.
Do you think built-in HUDs are a good idea? Let us know in the comments:
