These are excellent ideas.

Hello, first of all sorry for my english, its not perfect but i will try to text in way everybody understands me, im going to give some arguments because i think Pokerstars should get rid of Seating Scripts and something else:

Seating Scripts: I see a lot of people like TimStone who defends that its the same who take the seat firstly, when a Rec sits in one table it will be full very quick and 99% all the player will be bumhunters/regs, this will happen with Seating Script or without it.

For me this argument is right, clear and logical. Problem is about perception, i explain:
With Seating Scripts the table is going to be full in the same moment and most of times with the same players. If Stars remove Seating Scripts recs experience will be better because:

a) Table will be full more slowly, of course im not an idiot and i know how it works, it will be full very quick and the waitlist will grow very quick also, but its not the same sensation, if the table gets full in 12 secs instead in 2 secs.

b) Recs will play vs more players, for me, this is the most important. If you seat in one empty table and you see all times you are playing vs the same players, i dont know, lets say 8-10 players with seating scripts, the rec experience is going to be worse, they are going to feel more hunted. If Pokerstars take rid of them this number would increase to more than 20+ for example. The sensation changes, most of recs play for fun but they are not idiot, if they are playing vs more different people it will be more difficult they perceive that something is wrong.

Other Points:

Its very disgusting see how a Rec player runs out of money and all the players sit out from the table, this behavior is very disgusting too and of course makes bad experience from the player.

For Fix this i propose when a player runs out of money, all the other players have to play at least 2/3 Times in BB and if they dont (they get sit out or leave table) get penalized (cant join waitlists or whatever), this would be the time i would give to the rec to make the rebuy if he didnt make it in this time, he is kicked from the table, doing this is much more hard rec notices he is being hunted and Stars would make some good $ raked from action between regs.

Be able to change nicks from time to time: It would give to the Rec more sensation of anonimity and he would feel with less sensation of being hunted because he would think he is playing vs more players and again Stars would win more money because there would be more action with regs playing vs unknown that finally they regs too.

How to take rid of seating scripts? Easily, puting them into list of ilegal software, if someone keeps using it for sure the other players are going to write emails complaining and it will be very easy detect who is using them, dont give us excuses Pokerstars.

Most recs (prolly 90%) play 1 table maybe 2-3 times a week until they bust or occasionally win some. So during that week they have exactly 2-3 regulars to their left and chances are pretty damn high those 3 players are not teh same.
There is already pretty high fluctuation against whom they play currently bc of different scripts wit different speed and internet connections...
People who claim that teh same people get always teh seats are just clueless. Currently i get around 20% 6max seats and maybe 50% fullring seats i want to play. Im 100% sure both numbers would be higher for me with zero scripts...

wow. only thing you did correctly was make a throwaway account to hide the fact you're likely a clueless micro stakes player who has no idea what he's talking about

It really is difficult to see a way to reduce the effectiveness of scripts while not influencing how the tables operate, without somehow being able to remove all the scripts.

In regards to the waitlist idea, I think it could be effective but i don't think it should give the option to the player whether he wants to sit or not.

It should force the player to sit the new table and if he refuses/leaves that table, then he shouldn't be allowed to sit back on it (that 1 particular table) for x hours or so (still being able to remain on the waitlist though). Automating the process is going to be the key to any software change like that, If it's up to the individual players to select whether they want to join the next able or not (when selected) will just recreate the "R" problem while people take so long to make their minds up.

Forcing these players to join the table will likely increase the amount of action/games whilst also minimising the distraction of having to click yes/no options all day.

So i join and snap leave or join and play a blind. Wat now?

Still don't see why banning them is an option, even if it's not going to be very enforceable - if there's, say, a zero-tolerance 6-month ban policy, then the EV of using them is going to be ------------------EV even if you only get caught on average once every 2 years of using them daily.

Join, play 2 or 3 orbits and leave... then fine. Join and snap leave, don't get to sit that table again for 6 hours or something.

hahahaha please do this

Yes please do!

"It could be possible to have something in place about needing to have played a few hands at a limit in the last month in order to be able to join the interest list." Originally Posted by Kanu
Yeah apart from this the Kanu's solution looks ok. But there are other ways to get around this problem. There just needs to be some punishment for people who abuse the queue without taking seats.
I think something like, 'if you abuse the queue, then u can't use it for x time' would work.

Jep, and cut down traffic a bit bc no matter wat they do i will not start playing marginal lineups in 2014 and id assume im not teh only one even though im prolly teh only one poasting tis

I think forcing people to accept seats and play 2-3 orbits will just lead to the strongest 4-5 regs at that particular stake playing 2-3 orbits at a table and then rejoining the waitlist. That way they can force everyone on the waitlist to either play loads of hands or leave, and so would chase any weaker regs away. This would get recs to not only play the same regs all the time but also lose their money faster as they would only play the strongest players at those stakes. In addition it would make it even harder for a reg to move up stakes.

I am not too concerend that people would let the timer runout often when a seat is offered to them. After all they do not really have an advantage to do that. Obviously some time limits should be set. A couple of ideas that I formed right now (and threfore did not think them through):

1) You have a very short time to accept a seat (eg. 10 seconds) and in addition a waitlist timebank (similar to the timebank you get for playing hands when seated at a table) of, say, 60 seconds that gets reset every 24 hours. A consideration would be for the timebank to also be refilled by, say, 10 seconds if you play a certain amout of hands, say, 100.

2) Each seat at a new table could be offered simultaenously to 2 or even 3 players. That would reduce the likelyhood dramatically that seats are blocked but not taken.

In addition one should decide on the desired starting stack before joining the global waitlist. This would prevent any delays that could results from the player having to type in their buy-in after accepting a seat.

won't cut down on traffic at all. traffic revolves around recs not bumhunters

cry more

Traffic = amount of people playing = amount of tables

But yeah, prolly u play 15 moar when i play 15 less so traffic stays same lolol

Any adjustment that PS makes takes too long and seat scripters adjust faster.
Its just requires PS crew to watch lobby and see how SC still gets the best place.
Why a thread for this ? Why a meeting ? I dont get how is possible a billion dollar company has people who cant solve this - unless Amaya doesnt give a **** -.

teh math is weak in this. this equation is true if each player is seated at exactly one table ;-)

Not at all, It would basically mean regs playing the stakes that they are comfortable playing so an equilibrium will be reached at the player pools. They are also not forced to play, they can refuse and leave, but get limited to not sitting that table again for X time.

The people on the waitlist still won't have to play, they'll just miss the opportunity to resit that 1 particular table, so will reduce their chance of sitting with a rec player. It nullifies the effect of scripts and also (to some degree) reduces the extreme bumhunting.

And I mean, arguing that they will still play the same group of regs seems a bit silly. Scripters say fish don't care playing the same group of hunters, so why would they care now? Also I think there is a huge distinction between a rec player having the same group of scripters always instantly joining him (where it is obvious enough that most of which aren't playing other tables at the same stakes) to being joined by a guy that is clearly also playing other tables. As is, a rec will have the same chance of playing every player on the waiting list.

Will it reduce people moving up... not really. At the moment the people that are moving up from small stakes to mid stakes either a) have the fastest scripts or b) are willing to start tables/challenge themselves in the reggy line ups. If stars is going to remove the ability of (a) then it's not as if the tables will suddenly get more difficult, it's going to be the same regs starting those tables but maybe they might be some encouragement for others to get involved too.

1)The problem with a non automated system is this, lets take it to the extreme. you have every single bumhunter waitlisting 400nl.. reg joins a table and the seats get reserved and start getting offered to the regs. each reg has 10 seconds to accept or decline. It's going to be way worse than the current system since the R issue will be back in force. can you imagine how long it will take for each table? There is absolutely no incentive for any player not to join every waitlist at every stake. you're going to have 300 people on a waitlist and a v limited number of people willing to play when a reg joins. You need it to be really quick if you don't want it affecting how the tables operate. And you need to slightly decentivise the ability to just super bumhunt the waiting lists if you are actually trying to reduce predatory behaviour on stars. Otherwise, just keep allowing scripts.

2) So each seat gets offered to 3 people.... first to accept gets it? So we're back to scripts and clicking speed again, whoevers fastest gets the seat? it doesn't solve anything. Everyone accepts, see's table is ****, leaves, repeats and the tables become a ****fest again.

Removing the ability to rejoin that table for x time is going to be key to incentivising people to play and tables to run without there being a total **** storm.

Removing scripts is going to be the thing that makes it more difficult for most guys to move up, this system probably means that people would have to play at a stake that they're comfortable with to have any benefits. People will still be able to waitlist higher and get some of the tables (which is a far better deal than they get at the moment if they don't have the fastest script) I'm not going to talk about what's fair or not, that argument is dumb but here people will have to play within their skill level. you're not going to have Mr x who couldn't beat a 50nl reg table, making $150k a year from high stakes just because of some arbitrary reasons like fastest script or fastest internet.

What I'm curious about is what are Pokerstars objectives for Seating scripts. To this date I'm not sure any of us have been given this info.

1) Is there priority to reduce the noticeable effects of SS but allow them to keep the games running at full speed?

2) They are trying to get rid of scripts because they feel they are predatory by nature and unfair to other players.

If it's 1 then the concern is their own bottom line. If it's 2 they are showing genuine concern for the state of the games.

And the stuff about traffic is true. traffic 100% revolves around the recreational players or with regs willing to play with other regs. If X player suddenly decides he won't play in a game with a recreational player, there will definitely be some other guy that will. There is 100% an equilibrium point where the ev of a game will ensure that a seat is filled. If loads of bumhunters leave, they will be replaced by other players willing to pick up the ev.


S7G, they said they want to nullify their effect. I imagine it's a bit of both, but bottom line will likely come first. That being said, some things that are good for stars can also be good for the players too (albeit most are not).

Pontylad I get your concern about people just waitlisting with no intention whatsoever to join, but I am not sure it is founded. I admit I only played for a couple of months on FTP earlier this year, but in that time I was very happy with their global waitlist at high stakes (i.e. 1k-5k). I did not have a script there and I started very few tables (except with a female ex stars pro when she was around) but still I got quite a few seats with recs from the global waitlist. Ok, they have less traffic thatn Stars but then their waitlist system was also the opposite of elaborate.

I thinkyou overestimate the amout of time people that will join the waitlists with the intention of rejecting 99%+ of seats. The reason is hassle: having to reject seats every few seconds (which you would have to if you are on waitlist for 25+ different stakes and game types). But if I am wrong, we can go back to Kanu's suggestion to require that you play some (small amout of) hands per month at a stake before you are allowed to join a waitlist for that stake. Or Stars could restrict the number of waitlist one could join to, say, 10 (ante, FR, 6max, EUR, PL, etc... are obviously different waitlists). That should be an easy solution to prevent waitlist "spamming".

In any case I remain convinced that forcing people to join tables would allow the top 4-5 regs at a stake to monopolise the waitlist system.

lol @ bumhunter xela acting classy

If u do make a global wl for nl200 there will be 100+ people on it. Muchs funas...

Rejecting and accepting seats could be completly automized with a script...

People complaining recs get annoyed by tables instafilling (which is hoax and would potentially only annoy teh 5% tablejumper) bc of scripts

AND NOW WIT TIS SYSTEM A REC SITS AND 3 EMPTY SEATS GET INSTARESERVED BY STARS (instead of scripts)

Ridiculous

sometimes big fish use waitlist can you imagine

.