I'm not a big fan of players that use the max time to act on nearly every hand. I feel it does impact recreational player enjoyment to some degree. It also reduces my edge by reducing the number of hands per game. That said, I do like having time to act when needed.

Apologies for grunching if this idea has already been discussed. I'm intrigued by the idea of limiting the average time to act. The idea is to leave the max time to act but limit a player's rolling average of actual time used over the last 100 or 250 or 500 or whatever number of hands.

For example, if the max time to act is 15 seconds, limit the average to 10 seconds. Track each players actual time used over the last 250 hands. If they have averaged more than 10 seconds, their maximum time to act will be reduced until the average comes back down to 10 seconds. If they have averaged less than 10 seconds, the full 15 seconds will be available.

didnt they say a while ago they would limit number of max tables if ppl take too long? I would think the do something similar, anyone has any experice with that, did it acctually happen?

No it won't if it's a soft cap like cash. In cash games if you habitually take too long to act they reduce the number of tables you play, some people play so fast with 24 tables stars increases the amount they're allowed to play.

oh cmon guys..its not like everyone plays 20 tables.. some ppl like to think and use their time bank when theyr 4 tabling..

I like how you say the 20 tablers dont think

I agree with this and I have suggested stuff like this before (here) but it never went over well. I didn't bring it up at the meetings but I think it is the #1 thing that PS can do to fix games. The speed of hands at 180s, at FR NLH, at SNGs, or pretty much anything that is grinded, is abysmal.

The easiest suggestion I feel (that I have made before) is this: You normally get 16 seconds to act. When preflop and folded to you, if you took longer than 12 seconds to act, you lose 2 seconds [so you have 14seconds, then 12seconds.] If you took shorter than 12 seconds, you gain 2 seconds. (So if you had 12 you are at 14, if you had 14 you are at 16.) If the hand isn't preflop and folded to you, you still always get 16 seconds.

I like that idea, Alex. It's sounds more reasonable in terms of actual implementation.

this stuff is unneccesary and too complicated

just make hyper time to act + size of timebank on turbos and nonturbos, this willr emove alot of the zzz'ing

How much is time to act i hypers?

6 seconds b4 timebank getseinitiated which is 10 secs, so if u ever do 16 seconds about a hand pre u have 6 secs for remainder of the sng

^^^

Then i like this! Do it.

This will never fly, recreational players frequently take more than 6 seconds. Proof if anyone wants it: watch a zyngapoker table. It needs to be a solution which lowers the average but allows people to take ~12 seconds pre on occasion without dipping into timebank.

How about you can slowly earn your lost timebank back by acting promptly pre-

Ya I think this is the best suggestion currently, something like X seconds to act + you get 1 second back in your tb every hand you dont use your timebank on your first preflop decision ?

Played a $35 buyin live tourney the other day in NorCal (lol). A lot of discussion at the table (like every live casino) about high hand bonuses, who'd gotten what great hand in the past months, etc.

Would love some pure luck-based small promo like that for net depositors to chase. Not BBJ where you take extra rake, but take a % of whatever set promotion budget you have and spread small promos like that for a straight flush using both cards, etc. Even $50 or $100 at a time (irregardless of stakes) would be awesome.

I don't see anything wrong with time to act as it is now (other than the 60sec timebanks for nonturbos). You need to allow players adequate time to think about hands.

I'm assuming you guys are making a fuss over players who timebank every hand only to fold the majority of the time. PokerStars already has a solution for this on their cash tables. If you constantly timebank you receive a warning that your # of tables will be reduced. If you continue to constantly timebank then your # of tables is reduced. If you further continue this then your # of tables is further reduced. All PokerStars needs to do is implement this on SNG (and possibly MTT) tables.

This isn't rocket science. Let's move on to the next suggestion and stop getting bogged down on trivial matters.

How about a limited double-stack hyper offering? Start with 1,000 chips at 10/20/2 and use the hyper structure.

Has antes, it sounds logical/is digestible to rec players, and you don't have to overhaul any existing format to offer it.

Plus the rake would be something that could sustain a bigger ecosystem (presumably)

Why are there no 60$ 9 man hypers? I am dissapoint.

This +1 mentioned before itt, and I really hope they will come. $100 9man barely runs.

I feel this is unfair because sometimes are way bigger then others. For examply hypertimebanks are way shorter then turbo or lolnonturbo.

Also, i agree that we can think of a better structure then both turbo and nonturbo is right now gramps but 3 structures is like the max imo and dumb regs will cry when they remove nonturbo or turbo and replace it by different/hybrid formats even though this will be way better for them longterm

We need to gather 30+ regs in turbo formats and think which would be the best new structure to have. There are many suggestions like put ante early or reduce timebank etc but we will not have any changes if we dont gather all together. Another suggestion could be to reduce turbo time in 4 mins

why would u do that?

Games will end faster

and that would be good why if rake didnt go down also?

more games/hr?