Tracking Software - Do I need it?

I have been toying with the idea of investing in tracking software for a while, but don't know if it's necessary.

I play 2NL hold em, would like to be able to improve and move up, but playing at these low levels, is it really worth getting some software?

And if so, what would you reccommend out of Hold Em manager and Poker Tracker?

The reasons to use HEM or PT @2nl, in order of my perceived importance:

1. You want to improve your game by analyzing and tracking your own play
2. You multitable 4+ tables and need help keeping tabs on everyone
3. You want to maximize your edge, plan on moving up stakes in the future, and would like practice with the HUD and software

Reasons why buying tracking software @ 2nl might not make sense:

1. Your 2nl bankroll is less than the cost of the software.
2. You only play one or two tables simultaneously, take good notes, and can follow and be profitable at the game this way.

-----

My personal story is that I started out without any poker software. I made a $0 bankroll challenge for myself and get started with starting capital promos and freerolls. Once my bankroll got up to about $120 or so and I was considering moving up stakes to 5nl, I decided to use the Poker Tracker 60-day trial to see how it was, and if I liked it and was profitable with it I would probably be able to afford the micro version of the software after 60 days.

I was profitable after 60 days, and the micro version was then easily purchasable at that time without making too much a dent in my bankroll and keeping me well rolled for the stakes I was at.

When I still had my roll at FTP, I was playing 6-8 tables of 6-max cash ring 25nl. With that number of tables and stakes, I wouldn't think of starting a session without my tracker running. Less tables or stakes and it can still be profitable without a tracker, although not maximally so.

Try doing a 'search' on the forum for related threads & you will find ALOT of information & other member's views on the subject.

I've played around on 2nl tables & don't think you need it (this is while 12-15tabling). 'IF' you have plans for pursuing cash tables in the future & have hopes of moving up in limits then it would probably be a good idea. Personally I think you'd be better off at first to just practise playing without it (esp. if you're fairly new to the game & if you're only playing a couple/few tables).

mrmonkey's post pretty much hits the nail on the head.

At 2NL there's not a ton of value in gathering info on opponents because at those stakes they tend to be (a) so bad that you don't need stats to tell you that, (b) so numerous that you might seldom sit with the same ones (depends on site obv), and/or (c) those that are taking the game seriously are getting better rapidly and moving up quickly.

However, it is *never* too soon for self-study. In fact, the sooner the better, as when you're starting out you have a lot more improvement ahead of you, and trackers are an excellent tool for self-improvement if used properly.

So with that said, I recommend that anyone who is serious about getting better at poker and wants to put in the work to get profitable (as opposed to just recreational players who deposit and donk it off for fun), to invest in a tracker ASAP, no matter your stakes or BR. The ROI will be swift if you take it seriously and use it properly to improve your game.

Have you sat on 2nl tables at the various sites recently? Just sayin'....

PO, you really should consider using multiple quote tags to break up and comment on peoples' posts. My eyes totally crossed trying to discern your comments from mine.

And no, I've not sat at 2NL for years, in fact I barely gave it much time then. What I did see though was frustrating and I couldn't wait to play higher, primarily because the ROI for the amount of time I had to play meant I had to move up or lose interest. I just didn't have the patience.

So you could very well be correct, as I do realize there are some serious 2NL grinders, but to me they seem like a fraction of the pool compared to a few levels higher where it seems a larger percentage takes the game more seriously. But ofc I never said someone can't be profitable at 2NL, I just don't get why they wouldn't move up to make more because honestly I don't find say 25NL or 50NL significantly harder to beat, especially if you can avoid most of the better regs. If it's a BR issue then I understand, but the grinders that rake in thousands of $$$ over millions of 2NL hands are rolled enough and should (in my mind) easily be able to beat 25NL or higher at a significantly better winrate. But it's largely subjective I guess and based a lot on player patience and preference. I just don't have the patience for it myself. You can call it counter-poker-strategy, but I enjoy the challenge of the game as well as the money, and I get bored/impatient/frustrated when floundering in a sea of fish that I can't easily read or apply more sophisticated plays against. The general strategy against that type of field is to nit up and grind volume, but I just don't have that sort of patience. I need to LAG it up more to make the game interesting, which makes the variance at those stakes harder for me to tolerate.

Use the free trials to find out which one you prefer.