Urubu:

Biggest issue is not table speed by far. Pretty sure that booth me and Joeri think its rake, with honorable mention to the bigger discussion that PLO is a seperate game. Rake discussion , PLOaintNLHE

I think its important but I prefer most of the features of the normal tables, I agree the total time can be cut down a bit here and there but absolutely would hate warning timer at 8 seconds. Would really kill my gaming experience. By nature Stars make a destinction from 5/10 and up and I feel those stakes deserve bether speed structure then stars proposed. I feel the biggest problems is at the stakes just under 5/10 (I played them tons last year) with lots of SNE chasers. Most play significant less tables on higher stakes and Ive heard the complaints about people playing to slow isnt true for highstakes (25/50+ at least).

I 100% dont use 1 sec on every decision, I dont think Im of the slowest multitablers but sometimes you get big decisions, that are really complex. Its also really bad for anyone timing out for their gaming experience. I see lot of fish and regfish use more time then the regs, sometimes by slow or nitrolling un or intentional, being confused pre or postflop and so on.

What if Pokerstars just punished the slowest persons Urubu instead of all of us that SOMETIMES need more time when we face multiple decisions for stacks? What Im saying is that anyone slower then y% of the average speed for example preflop get their tables capped for a set amount of time until they improve it to acceptable levels. Whats acceptable is judgeable by judging vs the rest of the player poll and especially those playing same amount of tables as you.

I also think tableninja could delay your actions to avoid giving away timing tells, this is obvs really bad and could (was/is) abused to buy more time to play more tables.

Amateurs are used to livepoker where its much much slower, why is internet poker so bad in comparition where you got internet, music, facebook, p*** and whatever else you want for entertainment.

Lastly who says the bored amateurs starts playing more tables if their bored? Thats what you should ask them to do like the rest of us can handle if they think its to slow. Thats a win for us and stars!

Clayton,

those regulars who are starting turbo tables I am talking about are those who still play 16 tables or more. It seems like they are fine with that. The reason I am bringing this up is that EVERYONE, including those who start those tables, seems to agree that there is not enough timebank.

I applaud anyone who is willing to start a normal ****ing reg game these days, fast or not.

When does the 40bb min start?

I guess at the next server restart.

I don't know if most of you are already aware of this post, but if it's true this is going to be beyond outrageous:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=507

I checked the discussion in the PS forum as I understand Russian and it seems that the PokerStars rep in deed confirmed the approval and the upcoming full transition to TableStarters which means no more table selection despite the close to 100% negative feedback.

..wow

what is TableStarters?

This

Cliffs: No more table and seat selection by the players, Stars will automatically put you in a seat of their choice.

This is not needed for PLO in my opinion and as Ive told Pokerstars if they are to implement it, try it out on one stake first.

Afraid if they do it fullscale, it will be epic fail.

If this is true, is the new tablespeed (aka fast vs 2) part of this scheme to make cash into Zoom?

It needs to be done. I applaud Pokerstars on this bold move.

Probably not a very good thing for me, even though I dont tableselect, but kinda like it, since bumhunters gonna hurt from this. You bumhunters only have yourself to blame.

"We get too many complaints from rec players that they are being constantly harassed by regulars so you had it coming. This change is already approved and will be introduced'

For what stakes and games do you think its needed and what games do you play?

I would agree if this was for HUPLO, but 6max isnt broken. Obvs cleaning up some bumhunters with others means there as well like restricting who could seat and wait, banning autoseat scribt and so on would be nice.

PS there is ZOOM poker for those who want that.

am i understanding the system correctly? you ask to be seated at x tables at y limit/range of limits, and can then either decline or take the seats that come up? So, if i ask to be seated at 12 tbls of 5/10, and it seats me at 12 tbls hypothetically instantly, i can leave 6, stay at 6, and it will seat me/put me at bottom of global waitlist for 6 more?

For midstakes its probably a good thing blopp. Always 12 people on waitinglist when 1 rec is at the table, and people are constantly instant seating out when fish does etc, always claiming the rec doesnt notice

are there still going to be waitlists for existing tables? and TableStarters is just for new tables? or

ZOOM poker is a very different concept. The way i understand this change, you will still have the same relative position the whole time you're at a table and will be abe to develop history.

I think it's good because it'll make the games betterfor rec's. Obviously I agree that this change is way more neccessary for hu play, but I think it improves 6 max, too.
Of course regs won't neccessarily be happy about it, since you won't be able to waitlist to take a shot/select the softest games, but I think it generally is a good idea.
I also agree that trying it at one stake first is best.

I personally think, if nothing is done about the rake at lower stakes that these games are ultimately going to be close to unbeatable.

If you cannot have any kind of table selection at games where the rake is effectively 100bb/100 hands.

Online poker rooms are more and more turning poker into a CASINO game.

- Remove table selection
- Keep high rake
- Remove High stakes
- Faster tables

I play anywhere from 400PLO down to 100PLO. The amount of bumhunting that even goes on down here is ridiculous.

What goes on with the super highstakes doesn't really bother me, but I think that it's a good thing for Midstakes/Smallstakes.

Bumhunters are sucking the $$ out of poker, if we hurt their livelihood, I am 100% for it.

On a different note. I have noticed that the pokerstars rewards shop has Kaspersky antivirus for 1600FPP.

My antivirus is about due, is this the best option for antivirus? I understand that Norton/AVG are bad, but haven't heard much about Kaspersky.

I'd hope this is not true. This will be terrible for everybody, except the very very best players. And ofcourse for stars...

And jeah, the combination of high rake, worsening reg-rec ratio's and the elimination of table selection, is a lethal one.

Whats wrong with table selection, esp at these limits? Offcourse creating a preditoral climate is bad, if it gets too extreme (like sitting out when the fish does). But if i play 200plo for a living, i would surely tableselect very strictly in todays game/rake.

^^^ prob not what the cool 19 year old internet kids like to say/read.

i think kasersky is good, as it doesnt really slow down your computer. i have no clue how they compare in effectiveness.

i had some problems using the code stars give you when i bought kaspersky through them about 18mths ago, so i switched to panda which seems to work very well.

so wait does the table starting thing mean it will be almost impossible to play HU/3handed/4handed at 6max/fr tables?