Quote:
Originally Posted by Duncelanas
No. Problem solved.
If Phil Galfond starts accepting concrete suggestions for RunItOnce Poker, please tell him that this setup - a blind lobby with rematches that, if the rematch is declined, creates a pair randomly out of the 3 people waiting to be paired (the two who have refused to play each other plus one waiting in the lobby) - is better
for the players in general than a blind lobby without rematches.
I doubt that Amaya will choose the option with rematches - it would grab less rake for the company than the no-rematch lobby because:
1) the frequency of rec-rec games would be lower - most of the time when a rec would arrive and register into the pool, he'd either run into a stray reg waiting to be paired, or, in absence of ready opponents, would most often get an opponent after the finish of some reg-reg game, and the opponent would be one of those two regs (with probability 2/3; in the other 1/3 of cases, the two regs would again be paired and the rec would have to wait longer for another pair to break); rec-reg pairs would break up far less often than reg-reg ones (recs would be rematching regs far more often than regs would be rematching each other);
2) regs would still be able to develop extensive reads on recs during long match series, therefore edges would be still big enough, which Amaya is striving to prevent.
Certainly, some of the HU recs will quit if the rematch ability is taken away, but as I said, I think Amaya hopes to retain most of the HU recs by adding some twist into the game.
To be frank, I do have a selfish interest in such a twist, as I don't like to play traditional HU that's been solved rather accurately already and requires a lot of memorisation to stay competent, but regardless of my interests, I've explained why Amaya isn't interested in maintaining traditional HU with rematches.
Last edited by coon74; 07-19-2017 at 09:42 AM.
