Timebank argument

paige55

In Response to Re: Timebank argument:

Personally I make my decision in the first 5 seconds, may make me a bad rec but thats the way it is. I feel if timebanks were introduced it would have a detrimental effect on small stakes tournament players like myself,and I could envisage myself playing less and getting discouraged from playing.  I can understand the point for higher stakes players, but as mentioned balance is the key and moving forward it is recs like myself who are the bread and butter of the game.
Posted by tomgoodun

agree,agree,

percival09

getting discouraged from playing? really? because of a 10 second timebank that when used, runs out completely and is replaced with a 5 second timebank the next hour? 

I actually believe this to be completely unreasonable from those in favour of no timebank - 10 seconds and then less when fully used seems like common ground. 

Lambert180

Some of the comments in this thread just seem bizarre.

Are people really saying you would not want to play on Sky anymore if they gave players one 10 second timebank? Where would they play because every site has one, they'd totally stop playing online poker?

Let's assume about 20 people are left in the roller round the bubble (about average) and every single one of them decided to use their full timebank of 10 seconds (vvv unlikely), that's 200 seconds, barely 3 minutes, about 25% of 1 level. Is that really a big enough deal to make you leave online poker behind?

From a personal POV, I don't really feel the need for a timebank, but I've got no problems/quite happy to Sky to add one

DOHHHHHHH

Add 5 seconds on to the current time allocation and barely anyone will notice. 

tomgoodun

@Lambert and Percival, my opinion may seem bizarre to you but as we are all of sometime different opinions I am just being as honest as I can at this moment in time, as to where would I play - nowhere, I would take up another pastime, poker is not the be all and end all, and as I have politely...pointed out recs are the bread and butter of the game.

I cannot speak for all just myself, so yes I would just stop playing if I am not comfortable with the way the gameplay is.

Itsover4u

In Response to Re: Timebank argument:

@Lambert and Percival, my opinion may seem bizarre to you but as we are all of sometime different opinions I am just being as honest as I can at this moment in time, as to where would I play - nowhere, I would take up another pastime, poker is not the be all and end all, and as I have politely...pointed out recs are the bread and butter of the game. I cannot speak for all just myself, so yes I would just stop playing if I am not comfortable with the way the gameplay is.
Posted by tomgoodun

Can you please give a reason why a 10 second timebank would have this effect on you? why would 10 seconds not make you comfortable with gameplay? nothing has changed other than the opportunity to take an extra 1o seconds if you need it (once) you are not obliged.

I seriously find the opposition to this and some of the answers beyond bizzare its like there has been a brainwashing

tomgoodun

I find playing online poker a nice relaxing interlude to my evening and as I said earlier make my desicions rightly or wrongly in probably the first 2 seconds of play, I do play 3 or 4 tournaments at a time and if timebanks were introduced and used on every table I play ( Which may happen ) I would probably get bored with the gameplay.

I may have a short attention span or just like the way things are and am too old for change.

I am not a serious player like some are and can understand their points on timebanks for big decisions.

I play small stakes so decisions to me are sort of ok if win, ok if I lose- Maybe I am not cut out for the nuances of the game and will never be a big winner or loser so I hope you can see where I am coming from and my previous post doesnt seem as bizzare.

FeelGroggy

I'm genuinely surprised about any backlash towards having a small time-bank. It makes minimal difference if someone spends 15 seconds longer in a hand every hour, people are acting like its going to add a minute onto every hand.

In my opinion a time bank would benefit recreational players as much as multi-tabling regs. In theory regs will have more 'hands where the decisions are pretty 'standard' and will be experienced in certain spots whereas lesser experienced might need more thinking time. recreational players are also more likely to miss hands browsing the internet whilst playing. On the flip side regs might be multitabling more so need more time on certain hands. As someone who generally plays 4 or less tables a time-bank isn't crucial for me but would be nice to have when neccassary and there's definitely spots where I don't have enough time to think through the hand.

reeler

In Response to Re: Timebank argument:

I'm genuinely surprised about any backlash towards having a small time-bank. It makes minimal difference if someone spends 15 seconds longer in a hand every hour, people are acting like its going to add a minute onto every hand. In my opinion a time bank would benefit recreational players as much as multi-tabling regs. In theory regs will have more 'hands where the decisions are pretty 'standard' and will be experienced in certain spots whereas lesser experienced might need more thinking time. recreational players are also more likely to miss hands browsing the internet whilst playing. On the flip side regs might be multitabling more so need more time on certain hands. As someone who generally plays 4 or less tables a time-bank isn't crucial for me but would be nice to have when neccassary and there's definitely spots where I don't have enough time to think through the hand.
Posted by FeelGroggy

im with ya use it once only per hour 15 seconds what is 15 seconds in 1 hour nothing and im gonna make ya laugh. while i typed this i timed out with aa flop a lol

chicknMelt

In Response to Re: Timebank argument:

I find playing online poker a nice relaxing interlude to my evening and as I said earlier make my desicions rightly or wrongly in probably the first 2 seconds of play, I do play 3 or 4 tournaments at a time and if timebanks were introduced and used on every table I play ( Which may happen ) I would probably get bored with the gameplay. I may have a short attention span or just like the way things are and am too old for change. I am not a serious player like some are and can understand their points on timebanks for big decisions. I play small stakes so decisions to me are sort of ok if win, ok if I lose- Maybe I am not cut out for the nuances of the game and will never be a big winner or loser so I hope you can see where I am coming from and my previous post doesnt seem as bizzare.
Posted by tomgoodun

I really doubt time banks, especially if they are small, will make much difference at all. I play on other sites alot that use timebanks, and its not that often that someone will dip into their timebank. There will of course occasionally be individuals who use it in an annoying way, but overall I think people want the game to move at a reasonable pace.

however, if you do find yourself twiddling ur thumbs a little more... then just play an extra table and that should soon solve that problem.

for those of you that are worried about regs having more time to make decisions, and therefor outplay you more, i would suggest as Groggy did that timebanks would likely be equally benefitial to recreational players as they are for regs. I would argue that alot of timebank time that is used for regs is because they have multiple complex decisions to make at the same time due to the number of tables (definately the case for me), wheras a recreational player may use the timebank more often to think about one decision.

Im not that bothered about it, but am in favour of timebanks. 

On a side note, timebanks could lead to slightly increased traffic on the site, because people will feel able to play an extra table or 2 without the fear of having the occasional time when they have too many decisions to make. 

Benchmark

Regarding stalling on the bubble, a 'friend of mine' who shamefully plays on another site has noticed that timebank stalling starts pre-bubble, before the hand for hand play starts.

chicknMelt

In Response to Re: Timebank argument:

See "Parkinson's Law". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law In brief, if you give people more time to complete a task (or space, or whatever) you can be sure they will use it.
Posted by Tikay10

A timebank is a reserve amount of time you have to spread across multiple decisions, so I'm not sure how much this would apply - people dont want to use their timebank up incase they need it later. As an example, I would say that I reach the final stages of tournaments with most or all of my timebank far more often than i do with none or a small amount left, because I want to save it for the really big important decisions as much as possible.

chicknMelt

In Response to Re: Timebank argument:

Regarding stalling on the bubble, a 'friend of mine' who shamefully plays on another site has noticed that timebank stalling starts pre-bubble, before the hand for hand play starts.
Posted by Benchmark

yes, this would happen. its annoying. so is hand for hand. In my opinion its a small price to pay for a bit of breathing room in the other 95% of the tournament

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Timebank argument:

I find playing online poker a nice relaxing interlude to my evening and as I said earlier make my desicions rightly or wrongly in probably the first 2 seconds of play, I do play 3 or 4 tournaments at a time and if timebanks were introduced and used on every table I play ( Which may happen ) I would probably get bored with the gameplay. I may have a short attention span or just like the way things are and am too old for change. I am not a serious player like some are and can understand their points on timebanks for big decisions. I play small stakes so decisions to me are sort of ok if win, ok if I lose- Maybe I am not cut out for the nuances of the game and will never be a big winner or loser so I hope you can see where I am coming from and my previous post doesnt seem as bizzare.
Posted by tomgoodun

Just because you hold a different view - one shared by the majority, I suspect - does not make it "bizarre" Tom.

Tolerance to the views of others will get us all to the right place sooner.  

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Timebank argument:

In Response to Re: Timebank argument : A timebank is a reserve amount of time you have to spread across multiple decisions, so I'm not sure how much this would apply - people dont want to use their timebank up incase they need it later. As an example, I would say that I reach the final stages of tournaments with most or all of my timebank far more often than i do with none or a small amount left, because I want to save it for the really big important decisions as much as possible.
Posted by chicknMelt

wassup melty,

Yes, I do know what a timebank is!

My mention of Parkinson's Law was an attempt to lighten the mood of the debate, & introduce a little levity, as I sensed the thread was descending into cynicism, rudeness & sarcasm.

Clearly, it was a fail, on my part, as it continued in the same vein.  

I'm really not sure why it is not possible for grown-ups to be able to debate such things in a calm & civil manner, & without resorting to belittling others. We win debates by winning hearts & minds, not be belittling those who do not agree.

I had high hopes for the thread yesterday, & plenty of similar such threads in the future. Now, not so much.

Never mind, faint heart never won fair lady, whatever that means.

Tikay10

Just so everyone knows....

I asked Danny (ItsOver4U) to start this thread, so that a good debate could ensue, & then, once complete, I'd send it upstairs. In turn, they have promised to try & give us clear decisions, as far as they are able, so we all know where we stand.  

The plan was to have such debates, about different subjects, every week, & really make this Forum a better & more useful place.

For these to succeed, some tolerance & attempts at understanding the views of others is necessary.
 
Thanks.


 

tomgoodun

Hi Mr Melt, thanks for your feedback. You have some valid points which make perfect sense to me.

I may have had a bit of a knee jerk reaction to the Op, based on my lifestyle. When I play the DTD games on Monday for instance and if I am fortunate enough to go deep in them it can go on til almost midnight, and I get up at 5.30am for work, and I have to visit the bathroom at least twice a night so I feel rather wiped out in the morning, if you have any advice to alleviate this I would be most grateful - nope the wife won't tolerate a chamber pot

Btw thanks to sky's splendid give aways on the rewards free rolls I am in the super roller tomorrow, so fill your boots if I am on your table good luck.

MattBates

It would be good to clarify whether the suggestion is all games have timebank or whether only certain games, say main/mini/£55bh would have the timebank. My only issue is when MTTs get near the money and players stall (its bad enough as it is in tournaments like the roller) but apart from that timebanks would be a good idea. 

No idea on what the line would be in cash games for when the timebanks would be added. Cant see a need in DYMs for a timebank. 

While it is great to discuss this, it all boils down to have feasible it is to add it in. If it is not simple to add then it should be a non starter. 

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Timebank argument:

It would be good to clarify whether the suggestion is all games have timebank or whether only certain games, say main/mini/£55bh would have the timebank. My only issue is when MTTs get near the money and players stall (its bad enough as it is in tournaments like the roller) but apart from that timebanks would be a good idea.  No idea on what the line would be in cash games for when the timebanks would be added. Cant see a need in DYMs for a timebank.  While it is great to discuss this, it all boils down to have feasible it is to add it in. If it is not simple to add then it should be a non starter. 
Posted by MattBates

THIS.

When the debate has run it's course, I'll send it Upstairs, & if they say it's not something they can reasonably do within, say, x months, or justify the development resource, then I'll tell everyone accordingly. 

It can't be a bad thing for them to know what the players think, though, to assist them in their decision making.  

FCHD

I think one of the benefits of a small timebank will be a help to those who suffer disconnections. The Sky Download in particular is very sensitive to minute fluctuations in wireless broadband signal.

The other point I'd like to make is that if it is going to be implemented in a particular format, is that it must be implemented at all levels in that format. Giving facilities to those who play higher stakes while denying the same to those of us with more modest ambitions should not be a starter.

MattBates

In Response to Re: Timebank argument:

I think one of the benefits of a small timebank will be a help to those who suffer disconnections. The Sky Download in particular is very sensitive to minute fluctuations in wireless broadband signal. The other point I'd like to make is that if it is going to be implemented in a particular format, is that it must be implemented at all levels in that format. Giving facilities to those who play higher stakes while denying the same to those of us with more modest ambitions should not be a starter.
Posted by FCHD

From the (admittedly very limited) feedback it seemed as thought it was not welcome at all levels so thats why I suggested it was just included in certain games. 

unknown_username

When Ive played with timebanks on other sites, and  you get a few tables where people use up their timebank to pretend they are thinking it creates a unsavory atmosphere.

If I  run out of times at the tables, im either not focused or im playing too many tables.

Leave alone is my        vote.

unknown_username

you get zzzzzzzzzzzzz now when people are thinking whats it going to be like with timebanks,dont bother me weather theres timebanks or not tbh

Itsover4u

In Response to Re: Timebank argument:

Hi Mr Melt, thanks for your feedback. You have some valid points which make perfect sense to me. I may have had a bit of a knee jerk reaction to the Op, based on my lifestyle. When I play the DTD games on Monday for instance and if I am fortunate enough to go deep in them it can go on til almost midnight, and I get up at 5.30am for work, and I have to visit the bathroom at least twice a night so I feel rather wiped out in the morning, if you have any advice to alleviate this I would be most grateful - nope the wife won't tolerate a chamber pot Btw thanks to sky's splendid give aways on the rewards free rolls I am in the super roller tomorrow, so fill your boots if I am on your table good luck.
Posted by tomgoodun

This I understand much better.... in the grand scheme of things though I think and extra minute per hour would make minimal difference and would certainly not be worth quitting this fabulous game over

Itsover4u

In Response to Re: Timebank argument:

When Ive played with timebanks on other sites, and  you get a few tables where people use up their timebank to pretend they are thinking it creates a unsavory atmosphere. If I  run out of times at the tables, im either not focused or im playing too many tables. Leave alone is my        vote.
Posted by mumsie

Yes but most sites have a 1 minute tieback which is very very different from what is suggested.... in my oppinion the benefits far outway the cons

Lambert180

Yeah I can understand being against big timebanks but just 10 seconds would have virtually no impact on the gameplay. 

I mean, assume you don't want them, don't need them so won't use them etc, but every other one of the 5 people on your table use every single second of their timebank, that's 50 seconds per hour. You get about 80 hands per hour online at 6max, so the average length of a hand increases by 0.6 seconds, and that's assuming 100% of players use 100% of their timebank 100% of the time... hardly worth quitting online poker over.

Seems like a no brainer when it benefits some, and adversely affects no-one. But as Mr Bates said, it all cmoes down to how easy it is for Sky to actually implement it.

tomgoodun

Trying to alter someone's opinion by stating mathematical "facts" sometimes makes the recipient dig there heels in further, it can be proved by maths that 1 plus 1 doesn't equal 2

Having given thought rather than basing my opinion on selfish lifestyle reasons I can see the benefit of an extra few seconds for the higher stakes players, I am not convinced however for the lower stakes like myself but I am just one voice of many and will try out if implemented, if it does have a detrimental effect on me I will have to alter my game, maybe just go to bed at a reasonable hour and let folk steal my blinds.

MattBates

In Response to Re: Timebank argument:

Trying to alter someone's opinion by stating mathematical "facts" sometimes makes the recipient dig there heels in further, it can be proved by maths that 1 plus 1 doesn't equal 2 Having given thought rather than basing my opinion on selfish lifestyle reasons I can see the benefit of an extra few seconds for the higher stakes players, I am not convinced however for the lower stakes like myself but I am just one voice of many and will try out if implemented, if it does have a detrimental effect on me I will have to alter my game, maybe just go to bed at a reasonable hour and let folk steal my blinds.
Posted by tomgoodun

Your mathematical facts comment made me think of this. 

Kent Brockman: Mr. Simpson, how do you respond to the charges that petty vandalism such as graffiti is down eighty percent, while heavy sack beatings are up a shocking nine hundred percent?

Homer Simpson: Aw, you can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. Forty percent of all people know that.

GaryQQQ

If 10 seconds has no impact on gameplay what's the point bringing it in?

The overwhelming majority of players will still play the same number of tables as they do now (one table in most cases) whether there's time bank available or not. Therefore any increase in available decision time will equate to fewer hands being played.

Are Sky Poker really going to be inclined to spend a load of money developing a new feature that will in all likelihood lead to a slight reduction in rake collected? I think not.

MattBates

In Response to Re: Timebank argument:

If 10 seconds has no impact on gameplay what's the point bringing it in? The overwhelming majority of players will still play the same number of tables as they do now (one table in most cases) whether there's time bank available or not. Therefore any increase in available decision time will equate to fewer hands being played. Are Sky Poker really going to be inclined to spend a load of money developing a new feature that will in all likelihood lead to a slight reduction in rake collected? I think not.
Posted by GaryQQQ

What about the additional players that would play on the site if there was timebanks available?

The additional tables players could play given timebanks?