I can see why many players don't like it, but fast tables are clearly better for the games in the long run (for the reasons urubu posted). Every reg will just have to play a few tables less, but will also get (significantly) more hands/hour/table given everyone is acting faster. Ideally every table is fast but they add extre timebank ( I def want to be able to analyze important hands and make better decisions, the annoying thing is just that so many ppl take time preflop where they basicalyl know their range already)
i think a compromise like splitting the difference between fast and normal for all tables with a slightly larger timebank would be ok. all fast is terrible however, even 6 tabling all fast is difficult.
I used to start up as many fast 2/4 tables in December as I could get going lol l I remember people were saying i should open normal speed instead because after a long session almost all the tables would be fast. Both versions are basically the same for me but when I was 1-3 tabling below 5/10 the regs would take ****ing forever to act. Above it really isn't an issue at all though because hardly anyone is mass tabling
Seems like this would hurt stars more then anything
It would def affect highstakes players (10-20 - 50/100), it isnt really true that those doesnt mass table and do it by mixing limits and keeping more games going (good for Stars). Even if you dont want for example Eire to play in ur 5/10 games and fast tables might get him to play only higher stakes its not hard to see how its bad for Stars to loose the rake and a tablestarter and person that keep tables alive from those tables if things change. Most will be forced to play way less tables and without it being close to made up from more hands on those tables.
Stars (less rake), masstabling regs and tablestarters (that do so while playing 6m tables) is hurting by this suggestion.
As Chinaski says, 'Fast tables would be a disaster.they are horrible.'.
Those highstake people Ive talked with as well have expressed the same, and as Maurice says will make people give other sites and network more action since then it will be no advance for Stars anymore as its right now.
Maybe something in between fast and normal tables is possible if it have to change, or even easier just focus on those very few 'abusing' the time given and give them less tables allowed something instead of changing the whole system for worse for most of us, and taking away or option to choose what tables we want to start and play. Those who want fast tables are free to start them anytime atm. And free to stay away from normal tables. Like quite a few regs try to avoid fast tables.
I doubt Stars is willing to sacrifice the rake and piss off and take away options from lots of their biggest customers anyway.
After talking with Gavz the answer for fish thinking games are to slow seems supersimple. They can simply seat at tables marked fast, even fish understand what fast tables is and they always have the option to use those or Zoom. And games fill around what they wish anyway, seems retarded if we have to play every table fast cause some fishes prefer that. If they complain, let them know about fast ones.
I think stars will def find the balance between making the tables so fast that they are unbearable + losing rake against having the game at the regular tables go too damn slowly because there are too many multi tablers. Pokerstars has a history of getting these decisions right in the long run even if people are outraged by the decision they just made.
hey guys, what do you think about brunopontara? plo200-plo600 reg. he ran so hot vs me. actually i have no idea if i got owned or if he ran hot... its unbeliveble, everytime i try a bluff, he calls, everytime i has the goods , i bet he folds. wtf?