You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Comments
Ok Beaneh's response could be taken in a slightly derogatory manner (lol) but at least he had a point, and was making it well.
But now this is just silly, how is it relevant how much Percival plays on the site? He obviously does play on here because he nearly did the Jackpot the other night, but volume is irrelevant really. And then we got Pipunch again...
'here's me agreeing with big name player who's talking nonsense'
'oh look but some other big name player refuted it'
'ok guess i was wrong'
and what reason did you have to mention me in your post? is it because you look like the mutant, tashless offspring of barry chuckle? is that why you feel the need to come on here and try to constantly make a name for yourself?
If we could cool it with the personal stuff guys, we could get back to the purpose of the thread & have a good debate.
No need to get personal at all. This was my original point above, that things were getting side-tracked from an interesting thread... and then the messenger got shot lol.
anyway removing heads up tables will not do any good for anyone except sky and weaker high stakes players.
those who play heads up will simply close the 6-12 tables they're sat at waiting on sky and join another site and do it there instead.
also if an 'ND' wanted to play 6max and not go for (what they may see as a spin) heads up, then they'd be playing it already?
2nd bold: surely its the exact opposite, almost all the people who are sat at the HU tables are weak players
If SKY can't code/program something to limit the problem then nothing is going to happen
it's a common problem, created by the regs at that level
It's only them that can change it, but they are just too selfish to actually do anytihng else - simples !
I don't blame them, but surely if you want ND's to sit at 6 max tables then maybe you should start playing them yourselfs.
Limit I play I will start 6 max tables because I know a ND will join the first table that has a seat or seats.
Obviously ND's are very rare at NL00+ so the REGS sit at HU tables so they get them to their selfs which is fair enough.
Question for the regs, if none of you sat at HU tables would a ND sit at an empty table ?
Or would they join any empty seat at any table at that level.
beaneh- I cant be bothered reading your post, I am sure its having a go at me, if its not i apologise
james - my win rate has dropped so has everyones, If I never make another penny from poker my entire life I will be more than happy. Poker has enabled me to achieve so much, more than I ever imagined. I am in a position that most people work their entire life to achieve.
I started this thread as a suggestion to improve the site. If you disagree with me no problem, just an idea not saying it will work, it was just a idea.
It was rather a shame that it went from a debate to an argument, because open debate is win-win for all parties.
Hopefully the debate can continue on this & other matters that affect players.
To continue the debate:
I don't profess to be an expert on how a site should run. In fact my knowledge of what's good for a site is probably crammed full of gaps and oversights. However in my opinion:
HU table spawning: I said earlier that new tables should only spawn when two people are seated rather than one (actually not sure which is the case at present). Obviously Regs can work around this by both sitting out until a spawn with one moving on. I don't know if the techs can do this but can a new table only spawn after a certain period of play in either hands or time?
Rake Races: Beaneh said this is a short term fix, not a long term fix. I agree it is not a long term solution but I would qualify that it is and should be used as a sporadic fix. What do rake races do? Make regs play each other. What does this do? To be brutal in the long run this either turns the less skilled regs into NDs or they quit. This will either in the first instance add to liquidity or in the second spread the liquidity further around. Non-depositing regs only add to liquidity through rakeback/C4Ps and as most if not all withdraw at least this amount this effect is negligible. Regs remove liquidity, NDs add to it. Simple maths shows which helps liquidity. It would be bad to damage too many regs as you need traffic on the site to attract recreational players, but when it becomes too Reg filled that is bad also, it's a tricky balancing act which all online poker sites have to work out. One last point, I don't think rakeraces have much direct effect on HU tables, this is a side point which has sprung up in the debate and is not the focus on the OP.
KOTH: I wasn't aware of this before this thread started (like I said, lots of knowledge gaps I need to fill). Seems like a decent solution. I would say that all sites have this HU BH problem, a brief look in the lobby of 'that big one' at practically any level will show you how ridiculous and widespread the problem is.
All for now. Mod note: Play nice.
EDIT:
Forgot the most important point. I think choice needs to be maintained. IMO just doing away with HU tables is completely wrong but yes, the problem you can see from just looking at the lobby needs to be addressed. But as I said before, this problem isn't exactly new to online poker and now SkyPoker-centric.
I think I have a feasible suggestion..
Is there some kind of randomiser, similar to if you were to do a search option for a free 6max cash table. So the ND (or reg for that matter), or any1 who wants a HU cash game comes and selects from a drop down, buy in level. And it auto pairs them with the 1st in queue for that level and launches a cash table for the paring. It would be similar concept to registering for a HU sng without checking the lobby for who is playing. This would stop bum hunting as you would literally have to keep doing a table search/ selection and no1 is going to sit there all day waiting to be paired off with an ND. It would be like saying I fancy a HU match at 100NL, let’s see who else does. Obv you can leave if you don’t like your pairing but the ND, SHOULD in theory be exposed to less bumhunting, at least of the extreme sort.
It’s kind of similar to KOTH, but less of a d* kk swinging contest.
Would be keen to know if any of the mid/high stakes regs and sky staff think to this concept for
a) Workability
b) The general concept
Good
Hugo you'd still get people just sitting all day, having people pop up and then they'd decide on whether they were going to drool or not. The thing is you can watch these HUBH have someone sit in (who even Dohh would describe as not 'a super experienced player' and yet they sit out just because they don't even know. It's not lets play some hands and judge our opponent it's is this one of the well known donators if not sit out.
Even with the suggestions given by me and otheres, it's clear that many solutions only fix one aspect and can increase the extent of the other problems.
pretty sure you'd soon get banned from playing there
I have not seen one suggestion (including my own), which solves the problem without causing another. I dont know what Sky will choose to do but whatever it is, some people are going to be against it.
& you resent people sitting at HU tables waiting for the nd's
then everyone starts doing the same
then everyone starts moaning about no 6 max nd's
the answers in there somewhere, stop being selfish and think about the bigger picture
old skool saying "to get action, you have to give it"
what's even more annoying is when they sit out and then have the nerve to stand and take up a new seat directly to your right, so that they get position on a recreational player should they join the table. i could name a few regs at 100nl who i remember doing this, it's just such disgraceful etiquette.
I never understand why these 'pros' would only want to sit at heads up tables waiting for the off chance ONE random 'ND' is going to turn up.
I believe the saying goes 'to be the best, you've got to beat the best'
So if these 'pros' sat at 6 max tables, they now have five opponents of which they can play and beat, Five more chances to stack people, more rake as they are actually playing and not waiting and guaranteed action!!!
Ok it may take abit of work to learn there playing tendencies etc, but these 'pros' are good players, surely with abit of time and effort it would be more profitable in the long run??
I'll be honest, i don't understand the whole liquidity thing, but maybe this would help that too!??
Not sure if this makes sense to anyone else lol, I know in my head what i mean but not sure if it comes across how i've wrote it as i suck at writing!!!!!!