1. No 2. Yes (gl im not in cartel)

I imagine this would be really difficult to monitor

correct, not gonna happen. Its a stars division .

So are the blue names on the list leaders?

Just like to point out that I sat 4 members of the list today just for amusement (I'm not a HU player) and 2 of them (LikeTonyG and Hun_B) quit me well within 30 min with no explanation, and Hun_B snap declined after the first game.

Well since you're not a HU player maybe they didn't think you were trying to get into the division/you're not on the sitlist, hence they don't have to play vs you

but what exactly is difficult to monitor? do you mean obeying these rules? If I'm 3 tabling him then probably it should be a sufficient proof that I'm not sit declining? The other 2 rules that he has to follow I can allow him to break so that they don't require monitoring (so far he's been willing to 2 or 3 table though so there is no problem). I still don't get why these games wouldn't count. If the guy has the same sn, is the same person then what's the difference whether these games are on ftp or stars.

Im gonna play devils advocate. Imagine if a sitlister has a different sn on ftp. Then he could freefoll the div (play big sample vs some of the guys. If he loses then he doesnt mention it, if he wins then "heey i've been winning on ftp too".

this isn't how it's supposed to work, in every other division you don't have to say "I'm trying to get in" in order to have them not decline you, if you aren't in the group you play anyone that sits you for at least 30 min and anyone you sit for at least 30 min. There is no "sitlist", your sitlist is everyone who isn't in the cartel. Otherwise your group will never be effective.

Pretty sure if you're not telling them that your'e trying to get into the division and you're not on the division "sitlist" you can decline if you want. The 30 minute rule for the sitlist is there so that people can put in volume to get to the required games to get into the division. If it's a random recreational or even a reg from another format who has no intention to put in the games to join the division, then why would you be forced to play them?

I think the 60s and 100s is the same but I could be wrong.

It definitely was not that way, I've battled regs in both 60s and 100s, if you don't snap play everyone, your cartel will not be effective in keeping the lobbies clear.

What's the difference between divisions?

Why are some names highlighted in blue?

Why are you posting a screenshot of a spreadsheet instead of creating a public spreadsheet on google docs?

It is really of interest why one of the top 5% of division players doesn't further occur on list but appears in lobby; maybe he got replaced because he just plays 1.5k games a month? But well he was replaced by guys that make 0.43$ per game on average. This continues to be funny.

i know of at least two top who players that aren't in, both of them were considered but left by their own choice.

you are definitely right, an unknown should effectively count as a sitlister. i just see one situation that MIGHT have occurred, where there was a lot of sitlisters to be sat and he made the choice between battling an unknown or a sitlister and chose the latter.

however, it is definitely reasonable to believe that some people are trying to freeroll the division, before the division was found we saw that this is the natural behaviour of most regs, i.e. trying to avoid anyone with basic poker knowledge. hopefully and likely those players will be replaced by determined ones in the near future.

while critique is necessary it should only serve to improve the working of the division. nagging about the current situation is stating the obvious fact that such a group needs time for establishment.

[QUOTE=ohly;44955301]i know of at least two top who players that aren't in, both of them were considered but left by their own choice.

It's of interest because he obviously can't bring a few thousand games a month because of his job; apart from that by his skill level he should easily be in.. I play by myself just between 600 and 2k games a month because of job and wonder if there are volume requirements to stay in the group after played in; for now I'm up 240$ev after 300 games which basically says nothing but entry requirements aren't obviously set up too high.. Could anyone of leaders say something on what is required?

Entry requirements are based on confidence intervals, what do you mean by they are too high?

They should likely add a requirement for 2k games games since it's a 30s cartel.

From what I understand they haven't been able to keep up with the amount of sitlist / fish so if you are battling at all right now and performing well you will probably get in before the EV requirement anyway.

I mean it is not hard to get in but I wonder what volume is required to stay in the group (when in with ev results) as I am not a 5k games a month grinder..
There is already a 2k games requirement by the way..

Well there really shouldn't be a volume requirement to stay in.

You aren't taking up nearly as much of the fish pool so in a sense that's really good for the rest of the members.

It'd be really silly to have a volume requirement.

At the moment they are just trying to work out the best possible system and the group will make mistakes and learn just like the other groups have.

Uhm... how about we post nothing, then you have nothing to complain i guess..

Didn't know they have put a 2k requirement in, that's really awesome.

alot of the points you mention are still up for debate, that is why it is so important to form your critique in a positive manner instead of criticizing the current state, so that your suggestions can be considered.

Agreed it doesn't make any sense to have a volume requirement. For a division having 2 players who play 1k games per month is the same as having 1 player who plays 2k games a month, there's no disadvantage to having a somewhat higher cap with a lower avg volume. There's actually a disadvantage to the volume requirement which is that if you exclude good players because of this you are lowering the skill of the division.

Even 100s doesn't have a volume requirement, I don't see why 30s where there will be more people who are part-time should have one.

The 2k game requirement to get in is good but the last I heard it was temporary for some reason, it shouldn't be IMO.

Of course it makes no sense to have a volume requirement (or indeed a cap), but it's fair enough to ask. It certainly wouldn't be the first nonsensical rule implemented by a division. + I thought there were indeed volume requirements at the higher divisions, maybe it's only 60s? I'm not sure now you say 100s don't have one.

a group gets harder to handle with increasing number of members. also weaker individuals might be able to avoid strong sitlisters in order to not get kicked out if they have no requirements at all. there are tons of factors to consider, probably a minimum number of games against sitlisters plus a certain fraction of your games against them will be a sufficient requirement.

i personally agree that the group should be as liberal as possible while still functioning, hopefully it will develop in that way.

Why are you posting a screenshot of a spreadsheet instead of creating a public spreadsheet on google docs?

Why so defensive? A public spread sheet like the 60s and 100s have would be an improvement because it would be up to date - there are bound to be quite a few changes in the first few weeks as things sort themselves out and a real-time up to date list would avoid confusion and be an improvement. I am sure that you will get around to these things in time but I think that to say - if you ask too many questions maybe we will post nothing is a bit unnecessary.

lol, your posts are so epically ******ed. I hope people don't read them and give them more credit than they deserve cos they see you are a mod. Of course volume requirements make sense. Not to have them when sitlist action is high would be completely ******ed. Letting people get away with small volume the 1st month only to benefit in subsequent month from the smaller queues, whilst having contributed very little to that makes zero sense. Perhaps not everyone can go 2k games and they'll get kicked. However if they are good enough they can easy earn their spot back (although I should note that nobody who fell foul of this rule at 60s managed to produce an ev sample that allowed them back in) and contribute to cleaning up the division by sitting weaker guys. If they are good they can play with no volume requirements, help clean up the division and when they have done their fair share of work they get 30s lobbies, all with no volume requirements (presuming they will be removed in future when action is lower, which they obviously will be).

Also, you lacking the ability to deduce the reasoning behind a rule =/ a nonsensical rule. Every rule had thought behind it before the introduction of it. Some rules likely didn't have the desired effects. However, based on observation along with member and sitlist feedback these rules are often reviewed and edited.