I'll post this for a 3rd time and see if it gets a response this time.

I had the following happen to me a 2nd time so I know it wasn't a fluke.

I have auto post and wait for BB checked in the options. The bug occurs when the person who is supposed to be the BB is on my direct right and they sit out instead of posting their BB. Instead of auto posting the BB for me nothing happens and I time out meaning I have to wait another round to post.

+
+
+

+1 for vip program

and +1 for another rush promo to attract more pàpeople

I agree. That would be in keeping with the spirit of Rush imo, which basically tore up the rule book for table dynamics. The guy you doubled up or doubled up through won't be sat with you for your next hand anyway. Should be feasible too, just change the parameters of auto top-up to auto adjust, & start every hand with our set preference for stack size. Any chance?

x1000

Being a software developer myself I can't help but laugh my ass off everytime I see someone post "it would only take 1 programmer 15 minutes to fix/change". I wish programming was that easy.

+1

You absolutely can prevent ratholing at rush, and here's how. If it makes no sense, show it to one of your programmers, he'll understand.

A rush entry is just two numbers, a flag and a timestamp: the stack depth and the number of hands since playing the big blind, the flag says whether the player is playing that entry currently, the timestamp is when that entry was last played (used for ratholing timer).

(Extra request: don't ever expire that hands since big blind count! I'd like to come back days later and not be penalised by posting the big blind if I left immediately after posting it last time. Rush poker is the embodiment of "it's all one big session" and if there's no penalty for joining and leaving whenever we like it can become an even better fit for people with busy lives.)

(Extra extra request in case there's some crazy objection to the first: infinite or unreasonably long (12 hours or something) sit-out time allowance for rush. Don't count sat-out entries in the lobby statistics.)

When a player sits out of or closes a rush entry, that entry is flagged inactive and the timestamp is updated. Catch: whichever entry you try to close or sit out of, the entry that is marked inactive is ALWAYS the one with the most shallow stack out of all the active entries (at the end of the current hand in that entry). For the GUI, force a close of a different window or swap the entry associations.

When a player joins, his minimum buy-in is the greatest stack size of his inactive entries that have not timed out or the table minimum if they have all timed out. You must buy in before you can open another table. Rebuys are just to the normal table minimum and maximum.

With this, it is possible to rathole once and only once per player for an entire rush pool until he stops playing that rush limit entirely long enough for the timeout to be reached. It cannot be circumvented with sit out and it doesn't matter how many tables he plays.

Cliff notes: no option to sit out or leave a specific entry, only to reduce or increase your entries by one. Entries are always sorted deepest to shallowest.

windows pro 2000, oh well back to stars, could be worse.

There is a BB penalty(rat hole) in Rush for leaving and coming back in. /end

There's a "BB penalty" at every table for leaving and coming back. You can wait a few hands after you post the BB in rush just like you can on every other table, it just requires keeping track manually.

That is not ratholing protection, it's just protection against joining a table and leaving without ever posting a blind (protection which is unnecessary for rush because of the player with most hands since last posting posts, every else random rule). Ratholing protection is ratholing protection.

asking ftp to stop rush ratholing makes no sense!

imo, ratholing is seen as a bad behavior regarding to the other players from your table
(eg: non ethical to take some money, leave with them and join back with less money)

but in rush the concept of "other players from your table" is totally different or even non-existent..

q.e.d.

Well I personally don't care if people keep coming back with 50bb but this is the solution if it's a genuine problem. I do want the big blind and sit out changes regardless though

Since the new update the client is periodically freezing for me. Have mentioned this in the regs thread and it seems it is not an isolated issue as many others are experiencing the same thing.

Approximately every 15 mins the client will freeze up and Ill time out on all tables.

I was gonna say they might have broken it accidently, since they break something that wasn't supposed to in every update, but these are the minimum requirements.

I wonder if it really runs on a Pentium 266 with 64mb RAM tho...

While the shortstack infestation at the regular tables was a big nuisance, the "shortstack" ratholers at rush suck, they can't handle playing with 35BB. Let them stay

Same thing happened to me last night while playing. I can't even see any tables or tournaments listed today and have tried re-installing the client and everything. I'm about done with FTP and their shoddy software/support anyways.

I agree with you 100%, but your solution is probably overly restrictive.

Allowing players to "sit out or leave a specific entry" would only allow people to rathole 4 times per given time period, so I don't think these restrictions have much value compared to the functionality that is lost.

It would be more permissive if the were sorted shallowest to deepest, and still prevent the multi-table ratholing.

The concept of "player pool" exists. And you are very likely to play (a lot of) hands with other players from the same player pool.

Removing money that is in play, while continuing to play in that same player pool is a parasitic behavior.

Also, Doug has said that the reason ratholing is allowed is because it would be difficult to stop while still allowing multiple entries to the same player pool. It is not a "feature" of rush, and I don't think it can be defended as one.

There is absolutely no reason to sit out an entry other than the shallowest apart from ratholing.

Let them stay until enough of them figure out how to exploit their inherit strategic advantage, then ban them?

If a player is 4-tabling and one of his entries gets so deep that he is uncomfortable playing. Should he be allowed to continue to play on the other 3 entries?

I think he should, but your solution does not allow it.

I think the solution should stop players from using ratholing as a strategic advantage, but otherwise be permissive as possible. I do think such a solution exists.

+1 For please re-introduce the waitlist column (with amount of players in the waitlist). It was there before and I have no idea why it was removed.

This.

Cannot believe they removed this feature. It's so tilting having to click each table individually to see how long the waitlist is.

There are some changes in the waiting list system: before we went to the top of list if I were playing for long time.

Thanks for this idea, just started using my points to buy tickets to play these and they're easy to cash in and pretty fun to play too.