I will try and get some information on the 10-20 games asap.

Kind Regards

Mike

Hi guys,
This a statement regarding the 10-20 games.

The Chico network has reviewed this specific game type and stake level and concluded that it is not ideal for their poker ecology.

This is all the information that I have been given.

Kind Regards

Mike

N00bokReme tablecamping without the intention to play unless a recreational player joins


30 minutes later Abukabar1 comes and camps too, also sitting in the worst possible situation for me

Bloodwolf, this is like the most standard thing in poker. Regs don't play other regs because of the rake. 500NL rake is definitely less suffocating then lower limits but the same logic still applies. Also you can't really camp 3 handed imo. That's just called waiting for a table to fill up. As for Abukabar, he did nothing wrong.

If it is in some way a form of etiquette breach, it is the most vanilla type because literally 95% of regs in the world do exactly what they are doing. There isn't even any scripting involved that actively seek to bumhunt recreationals.

ahhahahahah Mike. Of course double up 200$ better for your ecology, especially 1-2 years ago. Million facepalms

bloodwolf, go write in chat 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ahhahahah

p0ker_n00b. Be tolerant of robots and a Chico

You do realize Globalpoker did the same exact thing removing all the 10/20 tables like a year ago and that site is floundering now.

You remove the 10/20 games it pushes all of the best players down to 5/10 and those at 5/10 down to 2/5 and so on. The games get significantly harder and breakeven or slight winners have to move their action to lower stakes and thus pay less rake.

What needs to be done is a rake reduction needs to be implemented whenever action is two or three handed to facilitate more regs battling each other. How it is now, very few can even turn a profit playing heads up, so you have bunches of people sitting out waiting for a recreational player to join a table.

Table camping standard ? Nothing wrong about that ? The guy sits to his right, he cant be on position on the upcoming action and he's the guy willing to play. Everything about that is wrong. Also 3 people sit-out kills the games, I can get behind one sitting across but 4 people sitout is just a joke

I was telling about how I sit for 10 minutes and a rec sits and then I get cock blocked within 1 to 3 seconds by another reg that has tables open and scripting active. That is much worse than what is happening in this situation.

There is no way to improve the camping / table scouting situation without either:

1. Giving increased rakeback to table starters so they are compensated for getting the action going and often getting the worst position on a rec player, or

2. Moving to a Zoom like format (which is a terrible cash game experience IMO)

Neither is likely so best to just accept the current situation which has been happening for over a decade now.

This. There should RAKEBACK incentive (close to 100%) for table starters, not just reduced rake (I guess reduced to almost zero would be ok). A lot of poker sites totally underestimate the amount of extra profit a table starter provides to them.

A rec logs on, sees no open tables, goes off to fill their needs somewhere else.

A rec logs on, sees a table with someone else sitting and wants to get that 15 minute rush of quick poker hands.

Once rec sits down, table fills up, giving the site not 1, not 2 players but 6 players worth of rake.

Or they could just keep saying "F U" to table starters and miss out on all that extra rake.

But I guess they have the bots to do this..

Of course you can improve the camping by banning people who regulary camp at the tables, pretty much every other poker site managed to do it

1. Banning seating scripts and suspending users of them followed by banning and confiscating funds of repeat offenders.

2. Sit out timer. If you sit out for more than 5 minutes within an hour you're removed from that table and unable to join again for another hour.

3. Close all but one inactive table at every stake after 5 minutes of no hands being dealt.

4. Only allowed to sit and leave a table twice within an hour.

Poker noob, what you are talking about might be "standard" in the sense that it happens a lot, and there are worse things that happen(scripting), but it does appear to be against the rules. Read the BOL rules about Table Blocking.

I'd also disagree that a Rec seeing a table of 3 guys sitting out and not playing, would think that looks better than 1 player sitting alone.

+1

Just my thoughts.

Hi Marshall,

Some great points here, please feel free to give any other suggestions as we really are trying to make improvments at BOL in all areas.

Kind Regards

Mike

Whats the appropriate line to take here? play betforlulz HU forever? be the 5th person who sits out?

Those were just suggestions on my part as well. I don't expect any of it will be implemented and I'm not opposed to some alterations to them if they were.

I'm not a big fan of a sit out all immediately rule. Sometimes you just paid the blinds at one table while you are about to be in the blinds at another. I prefer a must sit out all tables after current orbit rule.

Make the sit out timer 10 minutes then. I prefer 5 minutes, just like MTT breaks, but anything is better than nothing. I mean really if you're going to be away for significantly longer than that then just find another table when you can play.

You could put an actual timer on the table so that everybody is aware of the rule and where they stand.

I think your thoughts on a few extra inactive tables makes sense. I definitely think it should be a small amount though. With the NLHE lobby you'll often see 8+ tables at one stake with one player sitting in and another 1-3 players sitting out. It's unnecessary and forces you to monitor a bunch of tables if you're not using a seating script.

What players sit and leave a single table more than twice an hour the most? It's the bumhunters hoping for a better seat. That's who we're trying to disincentive. Recs are more likely to single table. As long as there's an open seat somewhere they'll be fine.

This situation does suck, and I hope they find a way to remedy it.

Even worse is the guys who are monitoring all the tables while you're sitting alone at a table and when a casual sits, they insta-Jesus seat them every single time. Makes it seem pointless even starting games when you know these regs are active. These same regs will also sitout within a second if the casual busts. They don't even try to hide it a bit by playing a hand or two more, they might as well announce to the casual in chat "you're being preyed upon".

Then you have the reg who constantly changes seats to make sure he has the absolute best seat at all times.

I'd be fine with some variation of MCAC's rules. You sit out more than 5 minutes, you're locked out for 30 minutes. Leave a table? Locked out for 30 minutes. Similar rules as the ratholers who double up and want to return again with the min. stack size. Casual sometimes leave a table and come back a bit later or want to change seats to a "hot" seat, but they'll adjust quickly.

Also, here's a revolutionary idea: obvious bots should be banned. But as n00b mentioned, they're the de facto table starters which is why BOL won't touch them.

Also, I commend Mike for letting us know quickly what the decision was wrt 10/20 tables. Much better to be upfront with the players regarding changes, even if they won't be well received, rather than jerk us around saying "we're in meetings" for 4 months regarding issues that should be easily resolved.

+1

As somebody who has played themselves up from 2NL(When they offered it.) to 1KNL(When the poker gods show me love.) I was hoping to one day be able to play at the 2KNL tables with a reasonable roll to do so. While that doesn't look like it will be possible anymore I do appreciate them communicating a quick response with us when such big game altering decisions are made.

ok . bloodwolf ( NINzent ) then please explain why you use script for fast sit? And also i saw you today sitting out at 5/10 together with from_HELL.

the easiest way to solve the blocking problem is to make it impossible to press Sit in - Sit out without the obligation to play a hand and to make the time for kick shorter. The software of the room kicks the person after a short time of his sitting in the sitout. In order not to be kicked, they made a script that automatically presses the sit-in/sit out buttons. Formally, he returns to the table and the room counter starts anew ...

BTW THE DREAM of all scripters is only 1 table for each limit. Because when it is only 1 table opened the script works correctly loooool

I think Tigermindset's script works pretty damn well no matter how many tables are open. He's not the only one who almost always gets the best seats, but he definitely gets the best seat as much or more than anybody.

While it might make it easier for some of them, it is much easier for me, or any individual not using a script, to get a seat, or at least get to the top of the wait list, if there are fewer tables, if you are paying attention. I have a much worse chance of noticing a table start to fill when I have to manually monitor 8 inactive tables between playing hands.

I'm rarely ever going to get the best seats without camping, scripting or paying a high price to play short-handed, but I can almost guarantee myself a seat at a good table if I only have to monitor a couple of tables. At the very least I'm pretty good at getting to the top of wait lists when I don't think I'll get a seat in time. I consistently get higher spots than several people who I'm sure have their seat script set to auto-wait-list them if they can't get a good seat. So while fewer tables might make a script work better, it also makes it easier for me to get a seat at a good table without doing the other stuff everybody complains about.

1) Don't lie
2) We both know that without script you will never sit the table after fish because script much faster then your hands even when you dont watch porn near one opened table.