Firstly i wasnt saying that this is like i said 100% of teh time

Secondly there is no HU anymoar so my poast referred mainly to ringgames

Thirdly there is no highstakes hence i was talking mainly about games which r currently offered

What difference is it if its ring games or hu, the good regs will still adjust to fish easier if they really are good regs especially hu regs who join 6 max tables.

I wanna congratulate you for cutting your peak traffic more than in half with those recent measures, they are the bomb!

http://www.pokerscout.com/SiteDetail...92#PeakHistory

The new lobby looks so juicy and inviting, that all the recs and fish are pouring in and drooling all over it... wp, FT, wp.

Okay so I played a session today and my opinion on the lobby has changed. It's a mess. My filters that previously filtered out all shallow and 6max games is not working now and I see a bunch of games I have no interest in ever playing.

Yes, and the more HU they play they less likely it becomes.

Yeah, that's a little annoying that there aren't advanced filters anymore. Certainly we'll have a solution for that by the time we do the lobby overhaul.

None of those answers have been announced yet. I will say the current plan is to still reward the top 3 players on the leaderboards, although the reward won't be exactly the same as it currently is.

That's correct.

No final decisions have been made here. About HU SNGs in general, not just Super Turbos.

We'll revisit this decision as soon as we feel we have enough data to see how many players we're losing like you describe. Starting tables and keeping them going can be tough work, and our feeling was that we'd be giving them the best chance possible to keep going if they started with more players. Nobody will feel pressured to play heads-up when they aren't comfortable doing so, but can still buyin and wait for the game to start.

Yes, but not like this change. The schedule itself will likely change in the coming months, but other than "lower average buyins" there isn't a solid set of changes planned.

I foresee an ongoing internal HUD discussion that will eventually lead to action. The current state of HUDs is almost surely out of hand at this point, and we'll need to put in a bunch of work to figure out exactly how to properly deal with it. We're definitely not the only site needing this.

There was an error at $2/$4 Rush (and $2.50/$5 ring games) that gave them the wrong rake structure, but it was fixed yesterday. Sorry for the confusion.

Soon is a tricky word, but it's the next major update, yes. One thing I can say is that no "progress" will be lost. If your current amount of play puts you in a certain group in the new rewards program, that's where you'll be. It won't be starting from scratch.

Yep, for sure we talked about it. Thanks for your detailed suggestion, and for the record if we hadn't decided to stop spreading HU entirely, our solution would have looked a lot like your suggestion. Although without this bit, which I do like:

If, after going over all the data, we eventually decide to bring HU back, we'll be keeping all of these suggestions in mind to make sure the version of HU that comes back would work for more players. However, I wouldn't expect anything like that anytime soon. We have to see how our current decisions play out instead of making knee-jerk changes to our current strategy.

At one point we had a full lobby for each stake level (like a Rush lobby) that listed all of the players. But we ended up simplifying the process of getting into a game even more so you were taken directly to a table instead. So that's one reason players aren't listed. The other reason is that it would simply become another way to moderately table select, and we didn't want to have that.

How would a seating script work with yesterday's update? I don't think we need to ban something that's now useless, yeah?

That's fair. We knew going in that a significant number of players would never want to play without the ability to table select.

No question, and we'll be putting in a lot of work on a new lobby design that should help solve that issue.

Thanks for the detailed post about this. It's definitely not something we have an interest in being developed. I'm a little confused how it would work, though. I agree if enough players used it the software could create an accurate image of all of the players at each table. What I don't understand is how it would then use that information to accurately table select. You can't pick and choose which table you're sat at. So if you decide to sit and get a "bad" table, you'll still have to close it manually (and you now have a 30 minute timer created). So you'll keep doing that until you get the table you want (or run out of timers) just like you would if you didn't have the software.

So I think I'm missing something, but I'm not sure what it is. Can you maybe walk me through an example of how you think this software would be used? I see what you're saying in the table creation case, but what about a normal case where all the tables aren't full and there are like 3-5 running?

One point to make: requesting a move and actually being granted a move are two different things. We'll pretty much never move a player from a 3 handed table to another table, for example (we don't want to create a heads-up table).

Anyway, I do agree in general, and we'll do what we can to prevent this sort of thing if it becomes a reality. For now I'm not even sure we have the liquidity in stakes players like this care about to motivate that software to be created.

Yep, exactly that.

It's been on the list of projects for a very long time, and unfortunately keeps getting bumped for higher priority work. It's still there, though, constantly reminding me that we haven't done it yet.

Another one of the casualties of being bumped for higher priority features. We'll for sure get some physical items in the store at some point, I just have no idea when.

Why is it completely absurd? If seeing 2 players playing is what attracts the third player, that's already what the 3rd player will see in the lobby if 2 players are already sitting there. So I'm not convinced that you get that third player sooner if the first two get to play heads-up.

If the absurd thing is that players would rather play heads-up for an indeterminate amount of time while waiting for that third player to join, we simply aren't a site that promotes heads-up play now.

We'll know after looking at the data how many players join as one of the first two players and then leave instead of waiting for a third player to join and the game to start. If it turns out we're starting a lot less tables now then before, we can revisit this decision.

This may happen at some point for NLH, but it's unlikely to happen for PLO, where shallow is actually more popular than regular stack.

Let's not go crazy here.

You did indeed, although when I reported your findings it turned out we also found it and it was already fixed. The fix should be in the small update currently planned for tomorrow.

Agreed. We'll see how quickly we can change that icon for the 9 to make it easier to tell apart from the 6.

It was technically much easier, unfortunately. I wanted real names too!

Pokerscout hasn't updated whatever they use to count our butts in seats.

I'm pretty sure those numbers you linked are our Rush only numbers. Yesterday's overall peak was actually pretty close to the previous Tuesday.

I'm seeing what it will take to at least get sorting by the "Type" column to first sort by handedness, then shallow vs. regular, then stake, so it should be really easy to find only the tables you like playing.

Although if you only have the one stake group you play in selected in the stakes column there shouldn't even be a single page worth of tables listed, yeah?

Re SNG players being blind registered : SpinWiz style software will 100% overcome that so be aware it will still be bumhunter central on there with no rec on rec action happening.

Can you please fix this, so we can test your new system at non 20bb tables please.

Edit: this = 2k normal PLO tables

It's absurd because people like to play poker (that's why they are logged in to your site!) and you are forcing two people who would be happy enough to play against each other to sit there and stare at a screen waiting for another person to show up. Also, while they wait their money is tied to that table so if I'm waiting for a 100$ fr game to start and only have 100$ in my account I can not play something else while I wait for my preferred 100$ game to start, this rule will push people away from stakes/games that already struggle to get games going and into stakes/games that are already running and healthy or off the site all together.

I dislike a majority of theses new rules but this is the only one I have commented on because I don't think it helps anyone (recs,regs, or the site). Other rules while they may be bad for me, I can see reasonable(ish) arguments for why the changes have been made for the anticipated benefit to the site and/or recs. Arguing against those rules would be perceived as little more than self interested foot stomping.

this is just getting worse as I keep reading...


people can spin it anyway they want but

Flipouts.
Jackpots.
Streamlining of Monthly Edge Reward Leaderboards.
Reduced Rakeback.
Increased Rake.
Removal of Cash Table Selection.

SNGs/MTTs fine as they are, if they are touched it's game over

please eliminate the shallow tables for PLO.

How long do you have to be seated out at a table before you get booted? I was playing at a few tables for quite a while, sat out to use the washroom, came back and I was removed due to inactivity. I believe I was shorter than 10 mins.

Sparky thanks for taking the time... Today It was confirmed via email that full tilt does not offer 24/7 support. How can a company offer a 24/7 service and not have 24/7 support.

Also please tell the customer service personnel to read our emails and not cut and paste answers.

This is prime time and if the site doesn't get much more traffic it's going half it's regular game traffic over night.

There's only 4 regular tables at 100nl atm.
at Unibet there's 6 atm who there trying to copy.

They would have had a better chance of making cash games rush only than to copy badly copy Unibet's approach.

ok few points and you have already alluded to some of it. it is true if the reg to fish ratio goes down there will be higher profit ratios attainable. However there is a limit to how much of an edge one can have against opposition and your not getting enough to compensate for that if you really focus or study etc.

There are always ways to improve few players are perfect against there opposition, However you cant gain an infinite edge and it does not matter how much GTO you learn or etc your never going to be able to multiply an edge so exponentially.

further reducing the table cap to 1/3rd etc does not reduce the volume by 3rd it reduces it by more heres why.

most regs work on rotation as soon as one sit and go is complete bust or win, another one is opened if there is a higher ratio of games going the rotation can accelerate. Further casual players do not like to wait around for games. it seems odd but when regs drop off the traffic decreases it does not increase.

casuals do not want to wait 60 seconds for a game to start, I have seen sngs go down in numbers regularly when slow to start I mark regs red so i notice whats going on and the people unregistering due to time constraints are usually never red. Reds unregister sometimes if it becomes red saturated.

one thing that is so obvious but seems oblivious to some on here and indeed the sites, is that in order for me or Pro X to make money someone has to lose it.

and that someone is hardly going to be the site.

I have a figure I want to be making from poker, the fantasy and a figure which if I know is not attainable I will walk away from the game.

all regs have both figures in mind whether they consciously think of it or not.

my dream target is $1mil within a few years note this is fantasy figure my attainable figure is $40000 a year if working full time hours or pro rata etc.

$1mil may or may not ever be attainable for me due to ability time etc. I know $40000 annually is.

for people elsewhere or different circumstances the figures may be a lot higher or a lot lower.

the fact is if the 40k pro rata is unobtainable I am gone.

the money has to come from somewhere the casuals have to lose.

and you can say suit yourself good riddance but the fact is every time sites lose players like me the traffic dies significantly because casuals do not like to wait for games and were the ones eagerly waiting to start them.

what you need to retain recs is incentives eg earn 3000 points and you can buy into the turbo take down, clear 20000 points and get free football tickets etc. figures may or may not be appropriate as i state for incentives but once that rec has a targeted points to work towards they will start playing more.

more interactive software, communities might help maybe as suggested by some already a facebook like theme where you can add people build profiles and follow people etc.

what many miss too is many of the casuals also dream of been the pros. kill the dream lose the game.

Agree with you on this one, if the site is open 24/7 then support should be there 24/7. I will bring it up when I'm next in Dublin.

A minor irritant has cropped up relating to Ring Game tickets.
If I play for a while with (say) four Ring Game Tickets, and one of them goes to more than the initial value of the Ring Game Ticket, and I then leave the game, a paradox occurs if I try to sit down again within two hours (the new "rat-holing" period).
The Ring Game Ticket cannot be of a greater value than its initial value. I.E., if it were a $10 ticket and you left the $10 6-max table with $10.20, you can only sit down with $10, not with $10.20. The 20 cents is "moved" to your general account.
However, if you return to the $10 6-Max table within two hours, it will not let you sit down with your Ring Game Tickets at all. This is because if you try to sit down with the $10 which FTP software allows you, it says "you must sit down with $10.20", whereas if you try to sit down with $10.20 it says "you cannot sit down with this amount.

My suggested solution would be to allow players to "carry over" a balance greater than the initial Ring Ticket balance for the period that the rat-holing restriction applies. What is happening with Ring Game Tickets at the moment is that, the second you leave the table, the FTP Ring-Game Ticket software "goes south" for you. But then another part of the FTP software bars you from sitting at the same kind of table because it thinks that you are rat-holing.
Effectively, therefore, the value of Ring Game tickets declines, because you have fewer chances to sit down at a table with them. This is partly the result of a single type of game now in effect being a single table, and partly a result of the extension of the rat-holing period. I emphasize that I am all in favour of this longer rat-holing period -- it's the FTP software that is stopping me sitting down again with the higher buy-in.

Hmmm that is definitely annoying - not sure there would be an easy fix software wise though. My guess is nobody thought of this issue arising. I'll see if someone can come up with a solution.

Can you guys elaborate on this one?
My suggestion would be to have a maximum limit for HU. At Winamax this is 200nl. I agree with your quote for the highest limits, let that be 400nl+.

There are plenty of weak bumhunter regs who are just waiting for the "nuts vs nuts"-spots against fish. They have no idea how to play the small pots and bluff/bluff catch.
I believe the fish would lose their money the quickest in HU, if:
- All their bluffs get caught
- They get bluffed successfully
- And they get value towned by thin value bets

Weak regs are not able to do these very well. The strongest regs will, and the fish will lose their money quickly to these regs.
Against weaker reg, the match will last longer. In HU it's also more likely that the regular starts tilting and the fish could win because of that.
Fish gets to play in position ½ the time. In 6-max one leak that fish have is playing too many hands out of position. Especially calling 3-bets out of position, which would never happen in HU.
I have seen winning players who are limping 30% of BTN's. HU lets you be creative and work your own strategy.

So I just don't see what's the difference between HU and 6-max. In 6-max there should be less rake paid. Skill edges may even be bigger in 6-max against fish, because of the positional advantage. It's also more likely that the fish goes broke because of multiway pots.

I also don't like the idea of HU zoom poker or anonymous HU. Poker is a social game and you want to get to know your opponent. Only question should be, how do you get people to play against each other?

Thoughts?

Just so true, both of these.

You need to look at how SpinWiz manipulates the tables for Spin n' go at Stars.

I had a couple of posts on this in Stars thread on third party software that might help:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...postcount=1627

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...postcount=1658

Essentially the SpinWiz style software lets players coordinate table registration, they queue together then the queue software registers them in a coordinated way to target other players.

Now SpinWiz lets users target non spin wiz users, it also lets spin wiz users grab tables with other SpinWiz users in a way that facillitates collusion. Even colusion against other SpinWiz users!

Quite how this type of server based queue system for insiders would work with your new lobby is not quite clear but essentially by coordinating table registration it would let 2/3 or even more insiders register at the same time to target non users, it is a collusion tool and a table selection tool for a system very like your auto seating.

By "pulse" registering they could use this s/w model to target recs using the default system whenever they hit your queue of 2 players, they choose the 4 registering to generate the new table ether as just insiders or as part of a collusion group picked from their queue. It requires scale to work but the software development hit is relatively small - the race to be the monopoly queue manipulated started the moment you announced this change.

As I tweeted, a statement saying you will prohibit such softwae and exclude players using it might help stop them coding it up as we talk. If you come out strongly against third party software designed to subvert your lobby it might make some decide it ain't worth the effort to build a monopoly queue behind your table queue, especially as such a queue is fairly easy to infiltrate by just buying in to it and seeing who else is using the software you prohibit.

with the pulse registration some may get put on an existing table but in a way that helps target the new non queue using recs by blocking them from joining existing tables whilst the insiders nab them.

I hope this helps.

What is quite sad about this is that decisions which have such a huge impact on the site and its customers are only discussed vividly now after the fact.

Stars is considering to ban a lot more 3rd-party software, and they are discussing it now with the players and feel out opionions ... why was it not possible to do so in this case ?

I really don't think the Spinwiz type software is going to affect this type of cash games as it wouldn't particularly be worth doing it on a non-stars site as you would be 1 tabling.

Well it facillitates table selection/bum hunting and the queue system for colluders would let colluders work over more than one table....that may not be wise in a cash ring game, it becomes too obvious compared to Spin n' Go but TBH an audit of past Spin N'Go would likely reveal the colluders who before people twigged what they were doing thought that the automated table selection via the client protected them from scrutiny.

The worst bit about the queue system is that it facillitates large "stables" of colluders playing off a shared roll - spreading that to cash games is a nightmare.

While its true that fulltilt hasnt that much of traffic lately you forget the rushpool and if you add up rush and normal table the traffic is higher than unibet. Its just the way that rush is a huge portion at ftp while non existence at unibet (they had one some time ago bit no traffic) so you cant just rule rush out.

I dont see them proactively promote normal cg over rush because of the higher rake for tilt but it would be better if they have good liquidy on both games