Nah I don't know the comparison between the house edge with blackjack and the rake pokersites take. But you are talking bollocks. I wonder who you work for.

Edit 0- directed at LT22's post regarding blackjack.

I know most think the idea of a SNE is a tight nitty reg that just slows down the table and makes it boring to play, but IMO there not all like that. Having a rec room will encourage fish to play there and imo this is unfair to the SNE's or even just a high small stakes grinder, we still need fish in the games. Putting them or encouraging the to 1 side is kinda silly

say what? I don't work for any one other than myself.

Wouldn't all the poker sites have to agree to do this though?If just one did it i think allot of players would leave and go else where.

I don't see poker sites making any drastic changes that might effect there finances. I i really don't think poker sites are too concerned about whats best for the game either.

If and when they do make any changes, its because they feel they will be financially better off

what weighs more, a pound of feathers or a pound of lead?

that said i, sorta, get your point in that pit game fish lose money faster to the casino then poker fish but they both still lose and there are comps that can be offered.

saying big players wont gravitate towards a "rec" style room and saying its "wrong" is pretty stupid imo. i gave good reason and have the imperical example of live poker to back me up.

but its prob gonna happen. my bro-in-law is a exec at Wynn (in international marketing so TIFWIW). he told me they plan on opening multiple sites trying different approaches. while i have no confirmation one will be a "rec-room" catering to their comped pit game players, i can guess one will, its pretty logical.

fixed it for you...do you seriously not understand the difference and why you can't give huge poker whales VIP comps like you can to a baccarat degen?

is it?

edit: I should know better than to post in NVG, but my gosh where do some of you people come up with this absolute horse ****

exactly.... where does it end? To the strongest, smartest, most well prepared go the spoils I say. This is how life and nature are, why should poker be any diff?

this sounds fun, would make me want to play cash games again

I think you would find that regs would play where they could earn the most $/hr. If the sites marketed it as a "click one button and play, so much easier" approach, us fish would probably appreciate the simplicity.

I don't remember where I saw it, but I remember seeing a quote about Stu Ungar suggesting that he died broke at least partially because he refused to learn "the art of the hustle." He'd just sit down, crush guys, dominate them, and it was done.

Meanwhile, guys who could be friendly with a fish, console them on their bad luck, and be polite were making a lot more money.

Players having a good time in your game is good for your bottom line, even if your immediate ability to crush them and mock them and teabag them in front of their mothers is slightly reduced.

If there's one thing that I'm pretty sure is not in dispute, it's that plenty of players have been intimidated or otherwise discouraged from playing HU, and that's bad for you. Making the game more approachable is not only +Life EV, it's +$$ EV as well.

seems the opposite of ridiculous. more like evident.

as an unabashed bumhunter, i just play the minimal rounds to keep my seat while waiting for a fish to sit. in the meantime id be firing up other tables and sitting out after a round to increase the chances of finding a fish.

in short, this scenario will result in a lot of players sitting out.

Suggestion: Number of KOTH open tables = 10% of active tables capped at min 3/max 15.

With a single wait list system you could remove sitting out as an option entirely. Sitting out makes sense in a real world cash game, where after a long waiting period a player finally has a spot at a table. If he then wants to go to the toilet or something losing the spot and going back in the huge queue (finite number of tables available) would suck. In online poker you could leave and then get a new table again almost instantly. Perhaps give players a sit out timebank each day to make sure people aren't abusing this feature.

I was a marginally winning player at low stakes on Tilt - 25/50 mainly. I didn't have an HUD but took notes and used PTR to table select etc

when tilt closed down, I tried a few of the sites under different names. On a few of them, with a new name and ID, I was amazed at the waiting lists I created...particularly on Stars, where I had lost a few buy ins very quickly when I started. It really put me off.

I've since joined a casino site which offers anonymous 6 max tables, 30% rakeback, weekly leaderboards with prizes, pocket card manager and even a rabbit hunting function.

it's brilliant and I've told pretty much all of my friends from my home game, many of whom had stopped because they were scared about being HUDs. Playing on anonymous tables has actually forced me to think and observe mroe during the play.

I think it's the future

I think too many players think oh well i'll do what I want which is a far too short sighted view. Cash games need to change because at the moment even at low stakes they are quite boringly nitty

The regs who bumhunt might leave this site but the rec/fish players who just want to play a game now would like it IMO.

GLOBAL WAITING LIST / MUST MOVE TABLES

+

SIT-OUT TIME BANK (maximum X minutes per hour, you can save up minutes every hour by playing and not sitting out.. but it is reset every 24 hours)

ffs, I would want this just purely to keep from getting picked up at six-max every time I stand up to take a piss and get a drink.

I think making people play for 30 min is nonsense you cant do that. But what u can do is make high stakes games pay rake by the hour once u first sit in.....

my terminology of "global waitlist" is pretty stupid because it implies you are waiting to join existing tables but this list would be just for starting new tables. "must move tables" doesn't mean much to mean but i guess it's from live poker? Or maybe "startlist"

I had to read this 3 times to make sure you were agreeing with me, lol.. but yes you are correct. With the current system, on 6max fast tables.. even if you have been playing 10 hours straight, if you sit-out for 5 minutes to go to the toilet etc.. you get booted off the table. A sit-out time bank would solve both problems. People would not be able to sit-out all day, but regular players could have longer breaks.

Everyone please +1 my first post if you agree.

Why not just have one wait list that seats people at tables with open spots and creates new tables? Also, say for 6max games, have the software merge two and two three-handed tables to create full games. That way people who are playing with each other move together and you won't lose all game dynamics/notes/whatever when the tables are changed.