Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerStars Nick
The difference at HSPLO is just 5 seconds per action. It may have less impact than some players fear.
Im gonna be offensive since thats your statement.
That its just a 5 second per action difference is a disgusting lie. And that we don't understand the impact (after playing combined millions of hands on fast tables) also don't give us credit for understanding the changes + Pokerstars doesn't care about our opinion on the subject. Obvs its Pokerstars shop and you can do what you want even if its alienating lots of your customers on the way (hopefully upper management understand this bether), but no point in asking the most educated crowd in the world about the subject (HSPLO) and then not listen..
This are all the differences for HSPLO that I'm aware off:
- 5 sec less postflop (35 goes to 30) this is the change Nick acknowledge
- 25 sec less preflop first to act (35 goes to 20)
- 7 sec shorter warning timer, from 15 --> 8 (hugh cut and same as fast tables)
its not just a simple 5 second per action change. If Im wrong, and Pokerstars actually dont make any other changes and differences, for example the other two I pointed out, I apologize in advance and withdraw my opinon on table speed. I wholeheartedly hope I'm wrong.
I might have small details wrong about these three, but
its def 3 changes that I see, not one, 5second change, like you claim. The three differences as Ive said already is the 5sec postflop, less time pre first to act, and almost cutting the warning timer in half
last 100% similar to a fast table and works booth pre and postflop!.
If you are waiting for tech to make a adjustable timer we can adjust ourselves, why not meet in the middle and make it 12 seconds while waiting for tech? Even bether do the ubiased survey (by question bias) and check if HSPLO wants only fast tables preflop with fast tablestyle warning timer postflop as well.
And why not acknowledge that you have cut preflop time more then 5 seconds first to act? Im shocked if you dont know or actually think the difference is JUST the 5second cut.
Why does stars want warning timer cutted down so badly too 8secs, that they don't listen to our status quo (15 second) wish for HSPLO?
Later on you think we (me/I) are confused about the warning timer. I obvs grasp it, Ive 1.5-2m hands at your site mostly in PLO, how many HSPLO and cashgame poker hands have you played Nick?
Who is the one that is confused at best? I fear its the guy that runs the thread about table speeds (superimportant subject that impacts the whole community) in internet poker for Pokerstars and voicing opinions on their behalf. Please give us Baard (that asked us about the subject) or Lee Jones (use to post in plo from time to time) back.
Ill also like to point out that the tabular Baard gave us
baardtabular, is modified to hide the warning time change you say doesnt affect HSPLO (then dont change it if it doesnt matter..)
nicktabular.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerStars Nick
In case there is any confusion, there is no situation where a player is only given 8 seconds to act in any type of ring game. The 8 second warning timer is to alert you that your time is close to running out at a table, and your table should have already come to the front when action initially fell on you. Changing the warning timer would *not* change the total amount of time to act, only the point at which the warning timer sounds.
I 100% know what the warning timer is and what it does. I was the first one calling out in the stars reg thread on HSPLO (when Baard proposed changes to make all tables into fasttables vs 2) that there was a change from 15 --> 8 sec that was really bad. Consensus is keeping it where it was.
8 second warning timer pre = fast tables = plague. Also lot of tablestarters says they cant start tables with that warning, would be 'good' for everyone if people stop starting as many tables .
Stars reps threat that change as its not a big deal so why change it at all for HSPLO when we want it as it is?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerStars Nick
2) Time to act at the table
We did specifically ask for feedback from PLO players and took it into consideration when making these decisions. The feedback we received regarding PLO players needing extra time at the tables did initially make sense to us until we looked at the actual playing habits of players in both our NLHE and PLO games.
As it turned out, there is only a very small difference in the amount of time PLO players take to act on average compared to NLHE players. Some of the remaining difference can be attributed to the fact that a higher percentage of actions in PLO games take place postflop, which in the new system will also result in additional average time to act.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerStars Nick
For those who are unconvinced
So you don't think we know this game and the situation at cash games on stars? And just make uneducated opinions without first hand knowledge? That is ignorant at best. We got asked for advice that we clearly gave, then you just found your own arguments to make it as you wanted all along.
Reminds me of discussing with my xgf, she asks what I want and if its the right answer (what she wants from the beginning as well) I get my 'wish' and if its the wrong answer its her time to decide fueled by some non logical arguments I'm not supposed to challenge .
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerStars Nick
I understand it looks like we solicited feedback just to ignore it, but I assure you we were sincere in our request, and were actually very convinced through those threads that PLO needed more time per action than NLHE, and we had even initially planned to give PLO more time to act. However, when we looked at the actual in-game playing speed of PLO players versus NLHE players, the data did not bear out the difference we expected as described above.
Whats the main reason to change it then, when we want it like it is (backed by opinions in HSPLO and the facts in what actually table type( = normal), running most on highstakes PLO the last years)?
As Ive heard (and witnessed) people don't complain at highstakes about slow games so why change it there because a selected few is to slow at midstakes?
And rec's are used to live environment, isn't online much faster anyway for them? Some aren't stressed if its fast tables and will have a worse gaming experience by timing out more often (quite a few regs play 2-4 tables) ?
Lastly for those complaining, why not simply tell them 'you can play many more tables if you think single-/two- tabling is too slow, most of our users play more then 1 table and online pokers is constructed to play multiple tables at once. Onetabling is what you are used to in landbased casinos but we have software that support this awesome multitabling technology. Did you know some of our pros play over 20 tables at once online? Are you ready to challenge yourself to more tables at once?'
You also say you restrict tables as I suggest for those playing to slow, Karls_Hungus (slowest ever?) say he was never restricted, just called a few times about the issue. If he was not restricted, who is restricted? How many plo grinders have been restricted totally (and what stakes)?
Wouldnt it be bether taking out the worst offenders (by capping the slowest players amount of tables) instead of changing the whole system if its the reasoning behind the change is what you say? Obvs if there is another agenda like raking faster, pls be honest about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerStars Nick
This clearly demonstrates that, when appropriate, we are happy to consider PLO differently than NLHE.
Can we please prove that PLO is different then NLHE too Stars just like FLHE are different then NLHE (even they at least have same amount of cards) so they can demonstrate its appropriate to have a separate rake structure for PLO?
A raw comparition to FLHE playing styles vs NLHE and vs PLO could also be very interesting over big datasamples.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerStars Nick
1) Rake
We have posted on PLO rake here.
Can you please answer why FLHE have a different rake structure then NLHE/PLO?
Can you then please explain why the same arguments for different rake structures isn't valid for PLO then?
Why specific is PLO and NLHE grouped together besides its just always been like that?
Why shouldn't such a separate game with totally different fold to 3-4 bets, different betting structure, more players to flops and higher amounts of hands played have different rake structure just like flhe?
And please not link to Steve's post about rake without at least answering bolded.
///
Lastly Im one tabling 25-50 right now (table Tergeste) and its not painfully slow at all, and I still believe slow its a midstakes problem (that also can be tried solved by other means = capping offenders tables).
How many complaints from different users about HSPLO tablespeed have it been and on what stakes?
And why do you think waste majority of HSPLO tables started are normal ones and not fast ones?
Last edited by blopp; 01-19-2013 at 05:58 PM.