+1 OP

Ok thanks for clarifying.

Amazing exploit, I'd never even thought of this.

So how do we support? Just email them?

your argument is good but i think it will be pretty tough to convince ftp to change this policy because you are assuming that fish will just sit at the A tables everytime

I'm a recreational player who kinda sucks at online cash games, so from now on I'll start from the bottom of the list okay OP? :>

lol, i just looked at the lobby filtered for high stakes and heads up.

40 tables with people sitting alone.
1 game running.

Surprised Full Tilt hasn't thought of this earlier.

Clayton,

(A) Do you have any actual evidence that the 'A' tables get more action? If this were true I would expect to see more 'A' tables active, but just a casual look at the lobby suggests no particular bias towards A tables, or tables early in the alphabet.

(B) Has support actually punished people for refusing to leave a table they sit second at? What has the punishment been?

(C) It seems that if you think this is actually a big advantage you could just keep joining new hu tables very quickly waiting for FTP to spawn a new 'A' table and then close all of your other tables. It's very unlikely that you'd get in trouble for this since support doesn't have any sort of automated mechanism to make sure you're only at 1 table / limit.

HU is pretty much a bunch of that it looks like.

make a poll. and send it to full tilt.

TY CLAY TON

lol that is so ****ty i cant believe it works like that there

I've never understood why someone is allowed to deny action and still stay at the table. Can someone please explain why this is logical?

EASIER SOLUTION:

Anonymise all HU tables. It's not like any cheating can take place after all.

Easy eh Clayton?

A) I don't have any concrete evidence. I have heard of a player who has paid people to camp "A" tables for him, and I'm throwing in a little common sense. Day-to-day table startups is likely noise, but I'd bet that over a yearlong sample a player who only sits at "A" tables has a higher winrate than an identical player who only sits at "D" tables and so on.

B) Yes FTP punishes people. A highstakes HU FTP player has told me that it goes, "Warning, 3 day ban, weeklong ban, permanent ban" or something close to it.

C) Probably, but that would just be another goofy flaw in a system that shouldn't exist.

It's not a solution that FTP would ever implement anytime soon. It would provide an environment that recreational players would feel less comfortable in.

People coming from a live/recreational poker environment want to play poker where you can look at an opponent and know who you're bluffing. Throw in an element of anonymity online and this recreational player will suddenly fear if he's playing against an FTP employee.