If you aren't at the same table, there shouldn't be a problem.

This of course also prohibits a winning player, from intentionally playing (and focusing) on one table, against a group of players multitabling, playing ABC bot/nit poker who believe they are sharks, when they are actually the fish.

Not hard to present these tables to those that 1 or 2 table or to email those that do. Promoting them insanely easy for their target group.

err how?

You don't even need 6 computers. Just run VMs on a single computer. Set up separate network interfaces for each, and boom.

If such a player actually exists (someone who seeks out multitablers and plays one table against them), this would actually be a very beneficial change for them, since now they can play a single-table of the non-casual game, and have fewer other single-tablers to worry about.

I don't think there's such a thing as 1 tabling regs who exploit rakeback bots. The edge you'd get by focusing on one table isn't much different then it would be, say, 3-4 tabling. I think the big difference when it comes to winning players is <8 tables for those inclined to focus/exploit, and obviously 12 or more for the rakeback pros. I cant say being restricted to one table can possibly be good.

...Actually, a solid winning players could 1 table at higher stakes, and pound away at the typical reg leaks (default lines such as shoving over button raisers cbets on dry flops, etc). You could manipulate pots to exploit regs hotkeys for set pot size fractions. But still, I cant see this being a consistent profit. People would soon catch on to what your doing.

lol. either you're talking about 10NL or you haven't played online since like 2009.

I mean instead of 24ing 20nl you could 2 or 3 table 100 no limit and youd do well for yourself in terms of absolute money earnings, not bbs/100.

Yeah, no. You can't exploit 100NL regs like that any more.

I'm not really understanding how PP makes money here?

First is the fact that unlike banning winning players this strategy relies on individuals checking their ego at the door at a poker table. Yeah...about that.

Second is that even if this works and successfully segregates the player pool it still fails. Even if regs stay in te system and play one table while putting in volume on another site, I don't see how PP will rake enough to be profitable when they limit customers to one raked table each. Their player pool just isn't large enough to support that limitation on revenue.

PP really should either get out of the poker business, or at the least offer tournament poker only. Their repeated attempts to fix their broken marketing strategies with these gimmicks is laughable at this point.

This is a pretty good view on the situation.

Not to derail this thread too much but have you seen what Party have done to their MTTs in the past few months?

well I haven't played 100nl since well before bf Im not gonna question current players as to how the game is now. I only got back playing online recently, so I don't have any kind of sample to prove it, but I have noted that even in 400nl regs still have alot of the same old leaks, especially FR regs. Of course I'm not saying you can OWN them, but they're still often waaaay too nitty and far from perfect/unexploitible. Alot of this has been discussed in the official regs threads.

idk, are you saying you cant make up for the loss loss of volume on fewer tables by more thorough hand reading, etc?

1 table is about the most you can tolerate on their new software, so its kindof moot

No, I don't have access to PP. Just making the point that every month there is a new "PP does X to segregate player pool" thread.

Was just an off the cuff statement that if they are so against cash games but still want to offer poker, they should just do tournaments. Didn't mean to imply anything more than that.

Fair enough. Just FYI, they have completely butchered their MTTs as well paying 20%+ of the field and super low 1st place prizes (example here)

Um, paying 27 spots in a 186 player tournament is definitely not 20%+ of the field. Seems pretty standard to pay 10% rounding up to full tables (so anything 181-270 would pay 27).

True, but in that example I was just commenting about the 1st prize difference

Here is the first MTT I clicked on trying to find you an example

90 spots pay, 408 entries. that's 22%

Gee - where did I hear that idea before. Oh yeah....

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...20&postcount=9

And that wasn't my first post with this recommendation...

This is a great idea, it's perfect solution to making rec players more comfortable playing online, without completely segregrating the player pool.

Multi tablers usually

1.Play tight

2.Play well

3.Play much lower stakes than where they could be expected in live casino games.

Thus semi beginners who in the old days could move up to small rather than micro stakes, and still expect pretty easy games with lots of action, now find themselves turned off when they dip their toes into these games. Allowing them to continue their ascent without bumping into pros seems like a good idea. (Mason told me that he agrees.)

Very well phrased summary of the negative impact of mass multi tablers. Totally agree too. (But fair enough: "Ranbato agrees" does not sound even remotely as good as "Slansky & Mason agree".) Great move by Partypoker. Working on re-activating that account right now.

Wouldn't be surprised if these ended up being tougher than the regular tables.

Not sure how well multi tablers do play tbh. When you're playing that many tables then it's somewhat formulaic. If someone wanted to i'm sure they could pick holes in the strategies. The finite commodity of time means they're going to try avoid complexity. I reckon the majority of multi tablers play pretty average - just by playing tighter it becomes a little less obvious.

But for the single cash game table it means that play will generally move faster as you don't have to wait for multi tablers to make their decision. But I think even the recreational players play a few tables, it's pretty rare for people to just play only one table these days.