+1 000 000

Your definition of "more room for play" is screwed up. Introducing antes = stack lasts fewer hands = less play. Your position makes absolutely no sense - you're complaining about the shortness of stacks but want to put those stacks under more pressure. It's utterly absurd.

If antes suits your particular style of play more than, hey, great for you (and same here!), but don't try and paint it like everyone will love it because that's rubbish - recs are really quite interested in how long their $2.50/$8/whatever lasts.

To be quite honest you're coming off as a degen action junkie.

###

Hi the new "IM READY" button it would be nice to see how many players have ticked it, due to if I press it on my last table up but then need the toilet...I dont know if it will resume or not due to not knowing how many players have ticked it and we have no option to untick im ready

+1 to this

I definitely think there should be an "I'm not ready" button to reverse the decision. I've accidentally clicked "I'm ready" a couple of times mistaking it for the "sit back in" button and come back from my sync break to find myself getting blinded out.

+1

this, just ftp style

or just don't tick it until you're ready?

8.80r turbo 180

When I have table ninja 1 open and play and come at a FT, it automatically clicks the ''I'm ready'' button which is realy annoying as I do want a break..

It isn't stars fault that your third party software doesn't do what you want or expect it to do; this is something you need to take this up with the people at Table Ninja.

Table Ninja support thread

Changing the sound when a new table opens from the action sound to something different. Unless I am completely missing something in the options but some spawning sound would be cool.

Then just un-check the "Automatically click "I'm Back" for tournaments (Never Sit Out)" box if you want a break.

keep dreamin, it's been done to death D:

Hello all,

Time flies, and it is time to reply to the thread again:

As I mentioned in another post quite recently, all 45+ player SNGs are part of the Tournament Leaderboard. So while it is true that there is no exclusive MTT SNG leaderboard, you are in fact participating in a promotion when you are playing in the MTT SNGs.

The main reason why we don't offer more than one lobby for each of our MTT SNGs is that we don't want to clutter the main lobby more than we have to. I am also of the same opinion as other posters here, that it would not necessarily mean that more tournaments would run. The regs would sign up for more than one tournament, but the recreational players would still sign up for one tournament at a time.

We have still not made a decision on which 90 man tournament to try out as a PKO, but I expect that to be done just over Easter.

It has not been forgotten, and I should be able to finalize the analysis shortly after Easter.

It seems to me that the use cases for these features are quite limited. First of all, I would think that most players decide whether or not to click this button in the first 30 seconds of the break. This means that you will not have a lot of time to change your mind about the toilet.

Reversing the decision of having clicked the ‘I’m ready’ runs into other issues. There is always the risk of lags in the communication between our servers and the players’ clients, and this means that the server can already have received the approval from all the players to skip the break, before your reversal has been processed. In such a case, you can be halfway down the corridor when the dealing starts, and I think the one time that happens will be far worse than you not being able to change your mind about whether or not to skip a break.

On a further note, I suggest that you try out the functionality for a while to get used to it, and then see if it is still an issue after you have fully adapted to this feature.

As with other requests for more rebuy tournaments, our position is to not add more tournaments of this type.

Thanks,
Baard

The fact that 45+ MTTSNGs participates in the TLB is just a cheap way to avoid any serious debate on the matter cuz is obvious is practically imposible for a 45+ MTTSNG regular to actually earn any decent money out of that promotion when playing against MTT regulars that might play 45+ with their MTT schedulle but only to fill out their tables and keep their volume up, thats just unfair, pretty sure most 45+ MTTSNGs regs would like to see a leaderboard exclusive for their format even if that means excluding 45/90/180 SNGs from their MTT TLB.

A deeper stack reg speed 180 man with 3000 starting chips would be nice. Also, for every turbo 180 man stake, offer a reg speed option.

I'm currently playing a final table against a guy playing on a phone, he keeps disconnecting and for some reason he gets unlimited time ...

This is the 2nd or 3rd time he takes like 2 minutes to act ... Fix pls?

+1

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...32&postcount=3

This is a very good thread showing how some of the top regs from earlier years are now doing in 180s since the payout structure change to 27 players.

Using this spreadhseet made by Aliquantum I think my proposed structure was the best one for making $$$

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/1...structures.jpg

As far as structure goes I think its time some big changes are made. The 180s are such a bad structure that even the fish aren't playing them anymore because it's such a tough grind..

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showpost.php?p=42210732&postcount=3

This is a decent starting point.


Lets jump on this guys and get some changes made!!

+1

I messed up the links. I'll repost

This is a very good thread showing how some of the top regs from earlier years are now doing in 180s since the payout structure change to 27 players.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/61.../#post42210732

Using this spreadhseet made by Aliquantum I think my proposed structure was the best one for making $$$

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/1...structures.jpg

As far as structure goes I think it’s time some big changes are made. The 180s are such a bad structure that even the fish aren't playing them anymore because it's such a tough grind..

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...32&postcount=3


This is a decent starting point.


Let’s jump on this guys and get some changes made!!

Couple of quick thoughts.

First just that I don't know why you all insist on figuring out our side of the negotiation in front of the other side of the negotiation. I'm just so confused on that, and everyone keeps calling me an idiot and I just can't understand what we are trying to accomplish doing that.

I appreciate the subject, a lot, I think we should spend most of our poker studying discussing these things.

I'm new to 'data' and 'samples' etc, but I do wonder if your tables need confidence intervals. They may not, but just asking because a 15k sample is not a big sample, and depending on what we are looking at 40k might not be big either.

If I'm seeing it correct (its kinda confusing to me), we don't need to use actual player data to compare structures. We can just use a bell curve as data to compare them no?

Because of this, It seems to me we can look at this from a formula perspective and identify the actual optimal payout structure.

So I guess my question is how we beat Awice in accuracy here?

And if we can get our answer, we should be able to give a number that shows each reg how much this would effect their bottom line, by giving the change with respect to x games played and y% roi even if there is variance to consider.

That would have a lot more pull with players if they could see they exact amount $ the change effects them each year. We could also stop arguing about whether a change like this is significant or insignificant.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...32&postcount=3

This post I truly don't understand, and I don't mean I think its wrong, I actually just don't understand.

We want the blinds to be 150/300 +4 at level 12?
This seems like a big statement, do we want level 12 bb300 and start with 1000 chips? And then just drop and 25/50 level in exchange?

I get that the structure changes but why is it for the better? If anything aren't we just changing the length of the tourney? How are we quantifying the ev of the change?

This seems random to me, what don't I understand about this?