Problem #4: Sitting out when fish sits out

In a 6max game, when all players instantly sit out when the fish either sits out or leaves the table (especially egregious when he just sits out for a second).

Options:

(1) No Change

(2) Sit Out One Sit Out All Button
- If you choose to sit out on one table, you must sit out at all of your tables.
Note: How will this work with timing out?

(3) Not be able to rejoin a table for 10 minutes after a player leaves.

I think (2) is best. Sitting out at less than all of your tables is game selection. The only drawback is if you're playing a decent amount of tables and maybe get HU action, and all of the sudden you have more action than you can handle. Sometimes I'd like to sit out on a table or two briefly, but this wouldn't allow me to do that. I still think it's the best option though, and can be a huge deterrent if someone's in another juicy game.

When the fish leaves, obviously multitabling bumhunters will leave rather than sit out, but when the fish sits out they might decide to just play a few orbits if they have good action elsewhere.

+ 1

I think option two will cause all kinds of unintended consequences.

There has to be a 2nd man walking for 6max and 3rd man walking for FR. This rule combined w/ option 3(10 minute break) is most likely to increase hands played per table at HSNL

Agreed. It's gonna be really hard to synchronize the software not to create problems to players who are playing a lot of tables. There's also a problem when someone joins your empty table and you don't notice it immediately because of a ton of other action and it gets you to sit out on all of your tables? Very well put, Justin.

P.S. some people might start mass joining your empty HU tables to get you seated out at the 6max table or something like that...gonna be pretty hard to implement this one...

I think it's a better poll if somehow people can cast thier vote before they read the comments. Ideally, they would read the question, think about all choices, and decide for thierselfs what the best option is.

People saying "X" choice is best for "X" reason makes the poll a little inaccurate imo.

In #2 you have either an obvious exploit of sitting out and snap sitting in again when just before bb on table where fish has just sat out so as to avoid . or a system where you cant wait for bb to sit out, which means for a 20 tabler who needs bathroom break they have to spend a couple bb ev everytime which im thinking is about 8-10BB everytime no?

surprised 2 is way ahead in votes

#3 has obvious exploit of simply not leaving tables when they break incase a fish sits back in, this would clearly happen in every mid-highstakes game since its just standard prisoners dilemma

i disagree zeejustin/lima, i don't think it would be hard to implement, they allready have
''sit out all tables bb'' option, you would just have to have two options, ''sit out and leave this table'' or ''sit out all tables''.

where exactly is the problem? you'll have to leave anyway if stars makes hu semi koth and somebody you don't want to play tries to sit

(4) remove "sitting out". ie: if u sitout, you get kicked off the table

Why not sit out one, sit out all, but with a small buffer (say 3 minutes) before being sat out at any table forces you to sit out at all tables? This fixes the time out issue and the too much action issue - you will have 3 minutes to sit back in at the table, and it could give you a pop up warning with 30 seconds left; and it gives people who end up with too much action 3 minutes to sort it out.

Also, I'm under the assumption that 'sit out one sit out all' allows people to play until their next BB on all tables, correct?

disagree, I think you should be able to take 10 minute breaks every 2 hours or so without having to fire up all new tables.

i personally agree and am not actually an advocat of "no sitting out at all", i just think it's the most "elegant" solution presented so far to the presented problem of "people snap-sitout when the fish sits out and snap-sitin when he sits back in". The beauty of it is that the rule doesnt depend on arbitrary timelimits/differnces between regs and non-regs or on the players to report offenders(the current status quo) and it makes it less obvious to the fish what is happening

This sounds like a good fix to me. As mentioned by others, the option as it was presented in the poll is too much of a burden on people who are playing lots of tables and can't handle a bunch of new action all at the same time (and who don't want to sit out in all the rest of their games, obv).

Also, the site could just do a better job of policing people who are abusing the sit out feature. Hiring one person to monitor games and follow up when people are reported for this seems like it would fix the problem also.

I'll probably get hated on for this but whatever. I don't think the vast majority of SSNL/MSNL players (you know, those little guys who pay the bulk of the rake to Pokerstars) will support any change to the current system. Option 2 in the OP would be terrible for mass tablers since its easy for them to be too busy to notice timing out on a single table, and not to mention the disconnection issue. Any solution to this issue may solve the problem at high stakes where the number of fish are limited, but it'll be nothing but an annoyance to regs at lower stakes.

Solution to 2: If you get timed out you're dealt in to the next hand anyway.

So you minimize a table by accident and get blinded off for hours?

Maybe just get dealt X more hands, and if you time out on each then you're sat out? Not sure what the optimal number would be.

Until your BB and if you're still timing out you get kicked immediately or sat out for an orbit and then kicked?

I say #2 however I think you should be able to play until your BB's on each table. Maybe the software could make it auto sit out on BB once you sit out on one table. As for timing out, just have the software deal you in next hand, if it happens 2 hands in a row sit you out on every table? Since then it'd be likely you're disconnected.

Well, it seems like this could get obnoxious when a guy times out in the BB and does the same for five more hands because he's not there/minimized the tables/etc. Perhaps after the first hand he's "sitting out" but still given cards and forced to post whatever blinds necessary until his next BB.

Regardless, to a certain extent people have to be accountable for their tables, right? If an MTT grinder accidentally minimized his table and blinded out deep in a sunday major, I don't think he'd get much sympathy.

People can sit out whenever they want in a cash game and you can`t say you have to play BUT just like live poker if someone leaves and comes back right after fish comes back this annoys the fish and everyone wants this guy out of the game, eventually he/she will not be able to play in these games anymore because they`ll get a blacklist. Something similar should be implemented, just ban them for 1-2 days this issue will be fixed by itself.Reason: fear of ban. If you need something automated give 3 minutes to the players who sit out and after kick them out of table if they haven`t been playing on this table for lets say more than 1 hour if so give them 6 mins etc.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=815

I say stop being Rich Nits. You hs guys fight over the weirdest things. Most of you have bigger problems then getting grimmed.