Another suggestion: synchronize breaks across ALL tournaments, including single table tournaments and 18 mans

I would like to see tables opened that do not allow for mass muti-tabling. I am so tired of players timing every time its his/her turn.

I also do not like the fact I can't search for some people. When I sit at a game and a player constantly times I search for them to see if there playing 1000 tables or something ridiculous. If I don't know how many tables they are playing I am wondering if they are having a connection problem or mass multi-tabling. Or if a player is multi-tabling give them less time to act.

Allow observing of cashgames only by actual realmoney players with an account thats actualy played on. For instance : per 100hands played in the last 24hrs you can observe 1 tbl for 5min.

I think that would make it really hard for PTR to continue datamining.

Oh and to PTR if you happen to read this : ALLOW OPT OUT ALREADY!!!!!

+1

But I think setting up limits for observed tables isn't solution because now you cannot observe more than 20 tables but still PTR datamining. So they have modified client or something like that.

( sorry for bad english )

pokerstars should give FPPs to someone who was dealt in a hand and left it before the end of the hand.

reason : players leave after the end of the hand to get their FPP and just before posting BB so the next player in waiting list has to wait for the next BB to come back ( 8 hands in full ring )

so :
1) pokerstars dont win any rake for the player who wait the next BB to play
2) players have to wait 8 hand in FR , 5 hands in 6max before playing wich is quite boring

It's best not to think of 'splitting the games'. Instead, think of adding games to the existing offering.

One of the key driving forces behind this project is getting licenced throughout Europe. We already have a licence in Italy, and France looks next. We expect these licences to bring in thousands of new players.

We expect France to have global liquidity immediately, and Italy to open up in the future too. So we will definitely have Euro tournaments and ring games - the question is, do we hide them from .COM players or allow them to join in?

We'll be doing things a bit differently to the competition - you will need a Euro balance on your account to play in Euro games (which, if necessary, will be automatically opened for you when you go to play in a Euro game). The idea will be to keep currency conversion to a minimum so that players don't pay conversion fees very often, if at all.

Yes. However this thread is just one of several sources that we use to monitor demand for new features. The request to change this behaviour almost never comes up in emails sent directly to PokerStars, for example.

That said, I am currently working on a project to do with fast tables. There will be a survey going out soon which will give some hints on the direction we are taking. It will be a long term thing though.

This sort of thing just gets you added to my ignore list.

Not just yet. The next major update will be after ICOOP, in Week 2 of October.

It's possible I could retrieve these from the archives for you, although you will need to provide the Tourney IDs. Write to support@pokerstars.com.

Because reading your hand is a fundamental skill. It's one thing to lend a helping hand in play money games where people are still learning the basics. However, when real money is involved, it's not fair for us to remove that skill from the game.

I'm listening - do you have anything constructive to add?

Again, let me reiterate that this thread is not the only source of new ideas. Demand from all players is one of the key things that drives new development, which is why something like Sync Breaks (the most frequently-requested feature of all time) got developed quickly, but highlighting ring-game tables took longer.

We develop new features for many reasons. To address the two examples you quoted - we moved the replayer button because in it's previous location, you couldn't press it if you had the table at a very small size or used certain languages - and the new lobby pictures are for promotional reasons (hopefully you won't begrudge us a bit of marketing every now and then).

I'd love to see a feature comparison, if you care to do one. As part of my job I keep such a comparison with our nearest competitor (I expect my counterpart there does the same).

New features is something I'm very passionate about and I regularly irritate our CTO by being critical about our offering. The competition between us and other sites on new features is great for players on every site, and the industry overall.

Very unlikely to happen. Somebody has already suggested this here on 2+2 and it met with a profoundly negative reaction. I can't imagine how unpopular it would be with the general public, 90% of whom don't multi-table.

I've thought about this a lot and it's something that often bugs me when I play online poker myself (not at PokerStars of course). I don't think we can have tables where multi-tablers can't play, but there are other possible solutions.

In general I think some multi-tablers need to be more considerate and realise that they are driving players away from the game by acting slowly. Also, I think there is a common misconception that playing as many tables as possible is the best way to maximise the number of hands you can play in a session. That may be true for some players, but I suspect that many would be better off playing quickly at a say, 20 tables than slowly at 24. For every player there will be a 'peak' on the curve of hands played versus tables open - it won't be a linear trend. I'd like to see more research done into where this peak lies (a job for 2+2, perhaps).

Oh, and regarding datamining - we are making progress in this area, with sites such as SharkScope offering genuine 'opt-out' functionality. It remains a priority for us. Perhaps my colleague Michael J can elaborate a little, if you ask him nicely.

Perhaps I'm a little behind as I haven't payed attention to single table sngs lobby lately but when did they add PLO DoN's ?

They've been around since the beginning.

Yes, I told you so and shared some of it in this thread too.
May be I should have used Caps Lock?
Let me refresh your memory:

That is exactly what I did and how it became so clear pokerstars is not good at all.

Regarding the betting slider - I agree that improvements can be made. However, requests for improvements to the slider are actually relatively rare, so they don't get priority over more commonly-requested features. In addition, there is active opposition to adding bet-sizing buttons from some players. That may well change in future but I can't promise anything at this point.

Regarding Euro accounts - these are already in beta testing. You can take part if you want - email beta@pokerstars.com but please allow up to 72 hours for a response.

Regarding NLO8 - this idea belongs in another thread - this thread is for software improvements.

Regarding Favourite Tourneys - this is a great idea but again, doesn't seem to float to the top of the list. If more players ask for it, we'll get it done.

It's too bad there isn't a practical way to penalize them for slowing the game down.

I really hope you have a better method for prioritizing things than "whatever gets requested the most."

Id like to see stars have some cap games just like ftp.

If I'm reading this to mean that I don't have to worry about a Bet Pot button anytime soon, then I Alex & PokerStars even more than I did before I read this post. tyty

What thread would this type of request go in? There is no other thread that I know of for stars improvements and FTP just has 1 main thread for ALL players' requests about everything involving their poker room and it works fine for them. It just seems easier to post requests in this thread.

I want to 2nd both of these as well as adding bright colors to the back of the cards. There are to many times that those little dark colored card backs have cost me money cuz I didnt notice that someone was still in the hand. Ive never had this problem on FTP like I do on stars.

It's one of many factors we use when we make the decisions. Obviously when deciding what features to develop we need to consider how many players will benefit from each proposed feature.

I'm open to suggestions about how to tackle this issue, but I tend to think that maybe the best way to address this would be to reward players who play quickly, rather than punish slow players.

I don't really work on many tournaments on PokerStars.COM (most of my work is in managing PokerStars.IT and new software features) so I'm not the best person to give feedback on them. My esteemed colleague Bryan, who is the person most directly responsible for the SNGs and special events (like WCOOP) at PokerStars, monitors the Tournament Poker forums for ideas, so there is probably the best place.

I do try to pass on .COM tournament-related suggestions to the right people, but I can't guarantee that every suggestion will be implemented.

This.

Oh I didnt know that was about touneys, I just saw NL08 and just assumed cash games. Earlier in this thread I requested nl and plo cap cash games just like FTP has. Where would those types of requests go?

To be honest the best thing to do with any request is to send it to ideas@pokerstars.com. That way someone is guaranteed to see it and it will be tracked.

The person who deals with cash games is not a regular 2+2 reader, although they post here occasionally. I can make recommendations regarding what to spread but I don't have any direct control over it.

Sounds like we need a different thread. This one is obviously going nowhere. We're told to send ideas to an email address. Told that "cash games" are handled by someone who doesn't read this thread. Time to take this thread off the useful list. It makes NO sense that if this is the "Official Software Improvement thread", that we are told to go elsewhere with our ideas. Maybe the "elsewhere" will be another site that does listen to customers. Or, we need to just stop contributing to this whole thread.

I just wanted to highlight that we're continuing to work on this issue.

PokerStars recognises that it is currently a problem. It is, however, closely linked to one of the most sensitive aspects of our services - our hand history process.

Our integrity is the very basis of our business, and the key foundation stone for our integrity is the confidence that every hand is recorded for posterity - allowing people who suspect something wrong (whether it be concerns about random shuffling, collusion, anything) to independently verify the facts of the matter.

We are therefore very careful before fiddling with this crucial building block - we don't want to stuff it up and cause much greater damage than datamining causes in the first place.

The people who seek to break our rules on datamining are very smart people, and there's going to be an ongoing battle here. One of the key limitations that any poker site has (due to the fundamental requirement that the PokerStars client be running on a machine owned by the user) is that we need to tell the PokerStars client what is happening: transmitting that data to a machine, and not have that machine able to record that data, is a really difficult technical challenge to overcome. We're working on it, and we have some ideas of how to combat this challenge, and we'll continue to do our best.

Hollywood is collectively spending billions of dollars on the challenge of preventing data sent to a PC from being recordable, so this is not a challenge unique to either PokerStars or the online poker industry as a whole. Hollywood even has the advantage of being able to enlist hardware manufacturers to their cause, which isn't likely for online poker in the near future.

If you have any feedback on ideas on these issues, please feel free to email support@pokerstars.com anytime.

Sincerely,

Michael J
PokerStars Game Security Team

Hi Michael J,

How about this idea? it can be done now instead of maybe sometime in the future when they might find a way to counter illegal copy/downloads.

Other than that the Partypoker way of allowing SN change every month would be a solution also.

This is disapointing. I was under the impression that someone relevant @PS would have reading this thread on their : lets say "weekly" to do list .
That would be (i imagine) less work than responding to all extra emails individually now that we need to start sending those to linked email.