Why not just require anybody sitting on a heads up table to play x hands vs the person that sits them (obviously can quit if they get stacked)?

Only people willing to play anybody would sit first.

this is so bad on so many levels

hey FTP Doug, I really appreciate you making this thread. Major major props to full tilt for handling this issue and even moreso for asking for our opinions

Heads Up is my main game as well and as people said, I think the pot limit tables should stay. Even though there's a minority, why take that option away from them?

I def. do not like the idea of combining limits. If fish wanted to play deepstack then they'd sit at the deepstack tables. UB lets you sit 200bbs but I've always gotten more action on all the other sites' 100bb tables. I think they should be separate. Some fish don't want to play 200bb poker w/regs. If they wanted to, they'd sit at the deep tables

I really do not think the buy in minimum limit should not be changed. THe heads up tables are not filled with "professional shortstackers". There isn't anyone abusing the game nor do I think most shortstackers would bother to learn it as so many regs already sit out vs. other guys. I like that casual players have the opportunity to play for however little they have and I don't think it's appropriate to take that option from them since the game is not being purposely being exploited

Why?

- Add my vote for combining tables and making them all 35-200bb buyins

- I don't really ever use CAP tables so I wouldn't mind them going away. Aren't SNGs kind of the same concept? And I think it's pretty clear the PLH tables are useless.

Also,

This idea is absolutely brilliant. I've never thought about that but now that I've seen it mentioned it seems incredibly obvious. And finally,

All of this.


I am very impressed with FTP these days. It's really great that you guys are actively trying to improve your pokerroom.

I heard a rumour that they're making 1kbb tables? is this true doug?

anonymous tables

i second this.

there should be incentive to get better at poker... there is no incentive to get better at poker with this current system. The only thing you have to do to move up limits is get more money... instead of get better.

FTP Doug... if you ask any "Good" player or any player that is a well respected coach at a training website... they will tell you

KOTH > anything else. also please keep tables with 100 bb max. the option of deep/reg is a nice

/in before bumhunters cry and complain about **** being unfair cuz they aren't actually good at poker and rely to leech off those who buy in for their accounts.

You don't need incentive to improve more than the usual incentive in other poker games.

You just need to create a healthy hu cash economy where people are actually playing games.

The problem I have with KOTH, is that it seems to narrow down the available games, perhaps more narrow than the economy of hu cash requires.

That's why I thought a solution of requiring anybody that sits down to play a minimum amount of hands with whoever sits them is a better idea, then the player decides if he wants to sit first, and the players will decide how many tables are open and getting action.

The better players still get unlimited action, but there's no table restriction to prevent the 6-7-8th best players that are online from sitting. It can still be profitable for there to be 10-15 regs sitting hu cash under this policy, when the action dries up the better players will find the weakest reg, and if he can't survive long enough against the superior player, he won't be able to get the same fish action the others that are sitting first will get, as he will be forced to leave the table.

This keeps the regular incentive to improving your game, without restricting the amount of tables in an extreme way.

It also eliminates the "steal a blind and leave" problems people complain about.

Otherwise, are there even any more real issues? If you can't play well vs a 20-30bb short stack in hu, you need to improve your game, not complain. It can be very profitable to play these guys, and if it's a very good shortstacker, then you treat him like a good full stack player, somebody you have to play once in awhile to keep your table. As others said, eliminating short stackers as a whole is bad, because so many bad players buyin short. They won't go buyin full, they will play lower or find a new game to play.

This exact method has worked extremely well in heads up sngs for a long time. I have no idea why hu cash has not been altered, it's been ****ed up structurally for so long and it does nobody any good, the poker site nor the poker player. Changing caps is pretty irrelevant from what I can tell.

good post. i agree with alot of what you wrote here.

Doug already said this isn't the place to talk about KOTH.

FT is trying to make some improvements.

Get off your high horse.

FYP

"Basically, just get rid of anything that I don't personally play, cause it's all worthless. kthxbai," is essentially the entire thread. ^^

I don't get the point of everybody arguing about all the table buyins. Isn't it counterproductive when the problem started before these new tables were introduced?

Aren't the real issues people not playing each other and people stealing your blinds and leaving?

The simplest and i think best short term solution is to
-get rid of all the deep/pl tables.
-30-200bb buy ins
-1 open table per limit

kthxbai

You do more trolling than I do, but you just direct it all at me. :s

Also, it wasn't even my opinion to begin with, if you read the post immediately before it.

I vote againsts combining regular and deep tables and i dont understand why everyone votes for it. The only reason i can see is if you get stacked by a weaker player you can insta rebuy deep to get your money back, provided he doesnt leave.

But as a respected poster said, deep tables tend to scare players away, and hit n running would undoubtedly go up if all tables are deep. I dont understand why we should favorize hit n running.

Same goes if you play a competent player and you stack him. The game changes alot from 100 to 200 bb deep, and not everyone prefers to play deep.

I for one am much stronger 100bb deep, and if i want to play that way i'm happy to have the choice to open a regular table.

As for PLH or CAP, if you want to prevent gaming, just make the maximum number of HU tables you can sit at any stakes be 2, whether its NL PL CAP...

Thanks for doing this.

Combine reg and deep tables and make max buy-in 200BB.
Create two different tables for min 20BB and min 50BB buy-ins like on Stars.

yeah deff. dont combine reg and deep, if fish wanted to play 200BB deep they would sit at the deep tables but as we know no fish sit at the deep tables.

deff. no 20BB table, 35min is good and maybe adding some 50BB min tables would be good.

Doug,

Are there any updates on this? We all appreciate that you are asking poker community for advice. Definitely a step in the right direction.

Right now FTP hu lobby is clogged with tons of tables. This frustrates casual players as well as regulars. These players represent a large % of your player pool. At the end of the day nobody is happy and FTP is not making as much as money in rake as it could simply because less games are running due to predatory bumhunting practices, hit and run artists and intimidating look of HU lobby.

Specific suggestions:
-KOTH
-no need to combine deep and regular tables
- "Would be cool if you could add a button on the table that says add another table versus (screenname). If both players have it clicked another table starts""
>>Suggested by someone earlier but this is a fantastic idea. FTP gets more games and thus, more rake, while players get a higher chance to actually multi-table someone HU which is so rare these days.

thanks Doug

+1 for this.

I see no reason to combine the deep and 100bb tables, although I can't say I'm completely opposed to it.

My biggest issue is bumhunters refusing action and clogging the lobby with empty tables. I see no solid solution to this problem because it's not like you can force someone to play you if they don't want to. A queue system could possibly work (is this KoTH? I don't really know what that is). Some sort of penalty for denying action could also work. It may seem harsh to give out penalties for denying someone action, but lets face it, the empty tables should belong to someone who's actually willing to play. Maybe if you sit out against someone and it auto kicks you off the table you can't sit at another empty table for 10 minutes. It only makes sense that the empty table should belong to the person most willing to play. Bumhunters basically create 0 new games and are worthless to FTP as far as generating rake goes. It seems like it would be in FTP's best interest if the empty tables actually had people willing to play poker.

The tables are great now. Thank-you FTP for addressing in the software the problem of people sitting at tons of tables and waiting. Your site was already much better than Stars and now there's really no comparison, especially for HU.

I like the way the things are set up now. I enjoy having the option of the three different buy-in levels for each stake. I'll choose the deep tables if I'm looking for heavy thinking and an intense battle with a reg. The normal tables are good because, well, tehy are the standard game. And... the CAP tables are lots of fun if I'm looking to have some fun and get it in light.

I don't really ever play the PL tables because I don't like artificial limits on my bet sizes, but I suppose we should leave them available for those who choose to play them.

So... I think keeping the tables the way they are is good. My only suggestion (not that it's my original idea or anything) is to randomize the order in which the tables appear in the lobby - NOT alphabetically like they do now. That way, no table is better than others and people may not be as likely to sit out just to maintain their 'A' tables.

I'll second this, FTP is by far the best for HU, and it's nice to be getting some attention/recognition.