Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > No Limit Hold'em > High Stakes PL/NL

Notices

High Stakes PL/NL Discussions about high stakes pot-limit and no-limit hold'em (10-20 and up)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-06-2012, 08:09 PM   #1
jcl
veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,332
PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

Not sure how legit this source is but came across it in the internet poker forum

http://pokerfuse.com/news/poker-room...s-high-stakes/

As I've said in the Galfond thread I think this is a great idea.

One thing I think might be good is to have the player list anonymous. This way you have to play several hands to get an idea of who is in the zoom pool, making it very unprofitable for a bumhunter to "have a look".

Another thing to remember is that we're using Zoom not for the original purpose it was built but for the de facto elimination of bumhunting that its lobby structure creates. In other words, we still want to be able to see the end of the hand so I would suggest two fold buttons:

"Zoom" = fold and move to next table
"Fold" = regular fold, move to next table when hand finishes

Last edited by jcl; 04-06-2012 at 08:25 PM.
jcl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2012, 08:15 PM   #2
old hand
 
Nice_2_Beat_U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,317
Re: PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

Wonder what they consider "HSNL", probably 10/20+ ?

Not sure if I like it overall, the railing aspect is a big downside imo, fish love HS action.
Nice_2_Beat_U is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2012, 10:06 PM   #3
True Facts
 
asdfasdf32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Treading lightly
Posts: 12,678
Re: PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nice_2_Beat_U View Post
Not sure if I like it overall, the railing aspect is a big downside imo, fish love HS action.
Assuming they don't make the lists anonymous, I don't see a reason it couldn't be programmed in to "track" a certain player, where the rail birds would see everything from a certain player's point of view.
asdfasdf32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2012, 10:13 PM   #4
newbie
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 47
Re: PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcl View Post
Another thing to remember is that we're using Zoom not for the original purpose it was built but for the de facto elimination of bumhunting that its lobby structure creates. In other words, we still want to be able to see the end of the hand so I would suggest two fold buttons:

"Zoom" = fold and move to next table
"Fold" = regular fold, move to next table when hand finishes
ctrl+fold does exactly that already
_locasdf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2012, 10:18 PM   #5
jcl
veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,332
Re: PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

Ah ok I've never played rush/zoom beyond 100 hands when rush first came out
jcl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2012, 01:58 AM   #6
adept
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: self destruction in 3...2...1
Posts: 1,051
Re: PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

if they did this I would come back to stars with a boner twice no THREE times my size!!!
lucknotskill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2012, 02:35 PM   #7
old hand
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,263
Re: PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

what would be more advantageous of this compared to anonymous non-zoom tables?
geo8o2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2012, 03:46 PM   #8
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ZeeJustin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 6,963
Re: PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

I think this could be a really good idea. If I were in charge, I'd personally test it out first as a "Zoom Only Thursday" type thing.

No observing would be a potential issue.

Is this situation possible / relevant (now or ever):

You are 4 tabling zoom. You're in a 3 way pot. Player A bets, you're next to act with player C behind. Player C is 1 tabling zoom. You see him at a new table as you get a new hand dealt while still playing this 3 way pot. That means he folded. You can now call player A without worrying about Player C behind.

Last edited by ZeeJustin; 04-07-2012 at 03:52 PM.
ZeeJustin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2012, 04:06 PM   #9
journeyman
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 286
Re: PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

there must be a delay between actions and observable actions
VictorChandler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2012, 06:30 PM   #10
veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 2,890
Re: PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

The source is legit. It's based on what a Pokerstars represenative said on a 2+2 pod cast.
andyg2001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2012, 06:34 PM   #11
veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 2,890
Re: PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeeJustin View Post
I think this could be a really good idea. If I were in charge, I'd personally test it out first as a "Zoom Only Thursday" type thing.

No observing would be a potential issue.

Is this situation possible / relevant (now or ever):

You are 4 tabling zoom. You're in a 3 way pot. Player A bets, you're next to act with player C behind. Player C is 1 tabling zoom. You see him at a new table as you get a new hand dealt while still playing this 3 way pot. That means he folded. You can now call player A without worrying about Player C behind.
I don't think they will put you on tables that will let you do this. You would need to collude with others for this to work.
andyg2001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2012, 07:08 PM   #12
grinder
 
Stally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 430
Re: PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeeJustin View Post
I think this could be a really good idea. If I were in charge, I'd personally test it out first as a "Zoom Only Thursday" type thing.

No observing would be a potential issue.

Is this situation possible / relevant (now or ever):

You are 4 tabling zoom. You're in a 3 way pot. Player A bets, you're next to act with player C behind. Player C is 1 tabling zoom. You see him at a new table as you get a new hand dealt while still playing this 3 way pot. That means he folded. You can now call player A without worrying about Player C behind.
The test run idea sounds good to me. I agree with zoom in concept, my concern is how it affects volume long-term.

Or even when you're doing something a lot more common: debating a preflop raise on one table, and see a player who is still to act on that table join a new one.

you'd need to be playing multiple tables and be tracking how many other tables the player in question was at, but it seems quite plausible with a small enough pool?

Last edited by Stally; 04-07-2012 at 07:10 PM. Reason: didn't mention the first part of the post
Stally is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2012, 08:20 PM   #13
grinder
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: bumhunting HSMTTs (playing sundays)
Posts: 612
Re: PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

Preface this post with: I'm not a high stakes player

You have to question the motive behind a move like "Zoom ONLY HS" games from the pokersite. As other posters have alluded to this would seem to be aimed at curbing bumhunting.

I agree bumhunting is terrible overall for the state of poker, but you are on a slippery slope when you try to stop it. I think the majority of HS players agree it is bad for the games, but then again these elite players are at the top of the food chain and against any randomly selected "peer" are either slightly -EV, breakeven, or slightly +EV. However vs high stakes fish they are all WAY +EV and vs midstakes players who will take shots in good HS games and HS regulars who will take shots in good NoseBleed game they are also VERY +EV.

It seems that the HS and NB players advocating moves that "curb bumhunting" are in a way encouraging moves that keep the HS and NB fish more inaccessable to next step down the rung of winning players. I won't elaborate further as I may be wrong but it's certainly something to chew on.

I will say this:
The greatest opponents of online gambling's (and regular gambling, alcohol, marijuana, porn, etc) moral center lies at limiting the freedom of what the majority of taxpaying adults do with their free time and aftertax money in order to "protect" some minority of that population from their own self destructive habits and tendencies. I don't think anyone here will disagree that
a) I'm pretty right on about that and
b) it's absurd and infuriating.
Yet we feel the need to "protect" fish at the highest stakes from being preyed upon. I'd say the people we consider "high stakes fish" are winners in the game of life, in most cases intelligent (or very lucky to have inherited the wherewithal to be playing these stakes), and probably need less of our "protect them from their tendencies" measures than the people putting $50 of their $300/week after tax income to play the sunday 250k or whatever. If we make moves to "protect" fish from losing too fast then we are giving credence to our legal opposition's desire to ban it all together in order to protect all fish from losing anything. Also: the fish lose no matter what eventually, it makes no difference to them who they lose it to.
In the case of eliminating "predatory" tendencies in the online poker world (bumhunting) I'd say we should be careful because although "curb bumhunting" sounds noble the main proponents have the "added benefit"
of
a) fish last longer and more games go around them generating more rake (pokersite benefit)
b) next rung down winning players don't compete with reg at HS or NB level for fish's money (reg benefit)

In almost every poker book or advice thread you read respected players advise taking shots at the next level when you see "a good spot". This invariably means one or more terrible players in the game. This has always been the advice of veterans and successful players and can be translated:
"bumhunt the next stake or two up" from your current level.

I totally agree with moves that eliminate or discourage bumhunting of a player's "current stake"...but you have to be careful not to to deny legitmate players the right to "take good shots ( bumhunt next stake up)" otherwise you are prohibiting moving up in stakes and cementing the current food chain.
(and be careful---this is great for the pokersites as well if they can lock everyone in where they are and let them lose to the rake in bad games)

Afterword: I do not play high stakes

Last edited by notR0ld4this; 04-07-2012 at 08:27 PM.
notR0ld4this is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2012, 10:15 PM   #14
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
krmont22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Buenos Aires
Posts: 7,747
Re: PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

We definitely talked about this during the meeting earlier this year. They seemed hesitant, because they did not know how the player base would react. We talked about always having "table 1" from the zoom pool as observable, so railbirds would not be missing out.
krmont22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2012, 11:36 PM   #15
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ZeeJustin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 6,963
Re: PokerStars considering Zoom-only HSNL

Quote:
Originally Posted by andyg2001 View Post
I don't think they will put you on tables that will let you do this. You would need to collude with others for this to work.
I'm not sure you're right about this. Why do you think it's true?
ZeeJustin is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive