Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Heads Up NL Discussion of heads up NL Texas Hold'em cash games

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-23-2013, 06:43 AM   #651
Winwinwin
centurion
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 139
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

What about min. buyin 100bb?
Winwinwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 06:46 AM   #652
PokerStars Nick
PokerStars Ring Games Manager
 
PokerStars Nick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 282
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Quote:
Originally Posted by SherlockH View Post
My one big concern about what Nick has mentioned (aside from Rake) is that there is no suggestion that someone joining another player can leave the table whenever they want. I think this is important and the minimum hands criteria should only apply to players opening tables and waiting for opponents. Can he confirm please if this is the plan?
This is currently the plan.
PokerStars Nick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 09:12 AM   #653
klink10k
banned
 
klink10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: bkk
Posts: 11,721
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

15 tables soft koth for 25/50 the same as 50/100 now

get on it stars, simple change. 99% of the *******s that sit 25/50 would not play 25/50 vs. anyone, whats the point.
klink10k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 09:48 AM   #654
PokerStars Nick
PokerStars Ring Games Manager
 
PokerStars Nick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 282
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Quote:
Originally Posted by klink10k View Post
15 tables soft koth for 25/50 the same as 50/100 now

get on it stars, simple change. 99% of the *******s that sit 25/50 would not play 25/50 vs. anyone, whats the point.
I've now limited 25/50 HU tables to 15 100bb tables and 15 CAP tables.

Additional existing tables will persist until players leave.
PokerStars Nick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 10:37 AM   #655
kjemmy
veteran
 
kjemmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: ♩ ♪ ♫ ♬
Posts: 3,101
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Great change. Can this be done pretty soon with 10-20 and 5-10 as well (with a few more tables than 25-50 I suppose..)? I guess 3-6 and lower can be left alone for now.
kjemmy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 10:55 AM   #656
Kanu
adept
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 754
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerStars Steve View Post
I understand the consequence described. What you are asking for is to keep the ability to deny action against good players for <100bb effective, but accept action against bad players for <100bb effective. While I understand this desire, it does seem to conflict with the principles behind the 'forced play' solution.
I see your point but the alternatives have bigger flaws I think. Having 100bb regs be forced to play any 40bb'er who sits sounds really awful and having someone who sits with 40bbs being able to receive action from recreational players who sit with anywhere between 40 and 100bbs and 100bb regs only getting action from recreational players who sit with exactly 100bbs doesn't sound particularly even either. By just making it so that it is only forced if someone sits with your stack size or more you make it so that people of all stack sizes have the same chance of getting to play vs a recreational player and also allow people of all stack sizes to only play games at their preferred stack sizes, I really think it's fair for everyone.

Edit: It's important to note that under a system where it is just forced play vs whoever sits, the 100bb regs are forced to play 40bbs with any 40bb reg who sits BUT a 40bb reg who sits is NOT forced to play 100bbs with any 100bb reg who sits. So there is a clear imbalance and to make the point that 100bb regs being able to deny action to 40bb regs who sit being against the spirit of forced play only makes sense if you address the fact that 40bb'ers don't have to ever play 100bbs vs 100bb regs under universal forced play. If you make it so that both are forced to play the stack size they don't like then nobody is happy so makes much more sense to allow both to only be forced to play at their preferred stack size.

Last edited by Kanu; 10-23-2013 at 11:03 AM. Reason: added point
Kanu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 11:00 AM   #657
ranka
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ranka's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sinned
Posts: 7,491
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Make things easy:
  • if you pay 100BB rake vs X player, then you are allowed to decline him without penalty in the future (lifetime efect);
  • if joining player stack is lower than waiting player stack (maximum is 100BB), then waiting player can quit him without penalty. E.g. if waiting player have 199BB, and joining player have 100BB (maximum to table), then obviously cant quit him. But if he pays less than 100BB, you can always quit him without penalty. If joining player stack is higher than waiting player stack, then waiting player cant quit without penalty;
  • you can sit out waiting table every-time, and table disappears;
  • once per week you can use "emergency sitout" (like doorbell, phone, etc). so no penalty. but you need to come back in 20 minutes, otherwise you must pay penalty;

Also would be fun to see heads-up leaderboards. Who have "played through" the most opponents (paid 100BB rake vs certain opponent). And reward them on weekly/monthly/yearly whatever basis.

Or table, "Most players crushed" <== leaderboard where best players who have paid 100BB rake vs opponents, and have best winning%.

EDIT: and player can always check his players list. Its like "trophy list" or something like that, and can see the results:

You vs...
  • WCGRider (89BB rake, 2122 hands), you leading
  • vs XXXX (230 BB rake, 18410 hands), you are losing.
    ....

Last edited by ranka; 10-23-2013 at 11:05 AM.
ranka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 11:07 AM   #658
ranka
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ranka's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sinned
Posts: 7,491
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Quote:
Originally Posted by SherlockH View Post
My one big concern about what Nick has mentioned (aside from Rake) is that there is no suggestion that someone joining another player can leave the table whenever they want. I think this is important and the minimum hands criteria should only apply to players opening tables and waiting for opponents. Can he confirm please if this is the plan?
No way. Then some guys start "freerolling". Join table, and hope player is AFK or giving up or whatever.
ranka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 11:42 AM   #659
rbracco
Pooh-Bah
 
rbracco's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Bitch please...livin my life
Posts: 4,618
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Thanks for all the thought and work you're putting into this. I wanted to point out that even if you make it so that the table minimum is the amount the first person sits for, it still makes it so weak regs and/or lottery players should buy in 40bb to discourage regs from sitting them. I imagine if this is implemented everyone who doesn't want to play will just sit 40bb deep and bumhunt and they won't get sat anywhere near as frequently by regs because the vast majority of regs don't want to play 40bb poker.

I think as long as we can find a solution to this (and the low-stakes problem) you guys have found a fair solution that will help the well-being of the games.
rbracco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 11:54 AM   #660
GobletTamer
journeyman
 
GobletTamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Russia
Posts: 221
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

The tables are 40-100bb, please don't forget that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerStars Steve View Post
I understand the consequence described. What you are asking for is to keep the ability to deny action against good players for <100bb effective, but accept action against bad players for <100bb effective. While I understand this desire, it does seem to conflict with the principles behind the 'forced play' solution.
Exactly! Thanks for the confirmation. Soft KOTH at 25/50 is good as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ranka View Post
Make things easy:
Also would be fun to see heads-up leaderboards. Who have "played through" the most opponents (paid 100BB rake vs certain opponent). And reward them on weekly/monthly/yearly whatever basis.

Or table, "Most players crushed" <== leaderboard where best players who have paid 100BB rake vs opponents, and have best winning%.

EDIT: and player can always check his players list. Its like "trophy list" or something like that, and can see the results:

You vs...
  • WCGRider (89BB rake, 2122 hands), you leading
  • vs XXXX (230 BB rake, 18410 hands), you are losing.
    ....
100BB rake at highstakes is absurd. Also the trophy list is not a good idea, imagine what a trophy list of a rec player will look like.

PS. Maybe Stars should consider introducing "Add a Table" button? The new table would spawn, even if all 15 tables exist atm. This table will obv disappear as long as the match is finished.
GobletTamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 12:01 PM   #661
PokerStars Nick
PokerStars Ring Games Manager
 
PokerStars Nick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 282
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Quote:
Originally Posted by GobletTamer View Post
PS. Maybe Stars should consider introducing "Add a Table" button? The new table would spawn, even if all 15 tables exist atm. This table will obv disappear as long as the match is finished.
This is one of the "Additional Heads Up Lobby Improvements" that we are likely to implement.
PokerStars Nick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 12:31 PM   #662
TooCuriousso1
Golden 2017
 
TooCuriousso1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: @TCfromUB
Posts: 5,727
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

sweet this is great!
TooCuriousso1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 12:41 PM   #663
Kanu
adept
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 754
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Goblet Tamer it is much better if we can have a discussion about what is fair rather than what is good for you, at the moment i think I have suggested a very fair solution in which you don't have to play 100bbs if you don't want to and i don't have to play 40bbs if I don't want to and we both have an equal chance of action from recreational players. I don't think you can get much fairer than that. You want to be able to play 100bb'ers at 40bbs as much as you want while never playing 100bb poker. If you can explain to me how that is fairer than what I suggested then please do but if you can't talk logically about what is fair and just keep posting the best ideas for 40bb regs at the expense of everyone else then it is hard to take you seriously.
Kanu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 12:45 PM   #664
Kanu
adept
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 754
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerStars Steve View Post
I understand the consequence described. What you are asking for is to keep the ability to deny action against good players for <100bb effective, but accept action against bad players for <100bb effective. While I understand this desire, it does seem to conflict with the principles behind the 'forced play' solution.
Just to make this absolutely clear, a lot of 40bb regs would be sitting with 40bbs and denying action 100bbs deep against any good 100bb players but would instantly rebuy to 100bbs and accept 100bb action if a fish sat with them 100bbs deep which is exactly the same thing and would be possible under a universal forced play system.
Kanu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 01:13 PM   #665
rbracco
Pooh-Bah
 
rbracco's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Bitch please...livin my life
Posts: 4,618
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanu View Post
Just to make this absolutely clear, a lot of 40bb regs would be sitting with 40bbs and denying action 100bbs deep against any good 100bb players but would instantly rebuy to 100bbs and accept 100bb action if a fish sat with them 100bbs deep which is exactly the same thing and would be possible under a universal forced play system.
I think this would be not totally unreasonable tbh. I think the problem is that lottery players who currently sit 100bb deep will start sitting 40bb deep and following this strategy in order to be sat less frequently by 100bb regs.
rbracco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 01:53 PM   #666
GobletTamer
journeyman
 
GobletTamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Russia
Posts: 221
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Kanu it is much better if we can have a discussion about what is fair rather than what is good for you, at the moment i think I have suggested a very fair solution in which you have to play whoever sat you, if you want to keep this table for yourself. There's a soft KOTH at high stakes, remember?

Okay, seriously speaking. The tables are clearly marked 40-100bb. Everyone, who is sitting here should accept the fact that both regulars and recs can buy in within that range. What you want is to give 100bb regulars a chance to dodge some regulars they don't want to play against. What's the next idea? Opensitting player can exit without penalty if Ike/WCG is the second player?

If you don't like that 40bb stacks can join you and force to play this short stack game, maybe you need to ask for deep tables? Or delete 40-100BB tables and introduce 50BB (or any other number in between 20 and 100) cap and 100BB cap tables? That would be actually fair enough, right?

Last edited by GobletTamer; 10-23-2013 at 02:02 PM. Reason: My English is bad :(
GobletTamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 02:05 PM   #667
PokerStars Steve
PokerStars Poker Room
 
PokerStars Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 3,002
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanu View Post
I see your point but the alternatives have bigger flaws I think. Having 100bb regs be forced to play any 40bb'er who sits sounds really awful and having someone who sits with 40bbs being able to receive action from recreational players who sit with anywhere between 40 and 100bbs and 100bb regs only getting action from recreational players who sit with exactly 100bbs doesn't sound particularly even either. By just making it so that it is only forced if someone sits with your stack size or more you make it so that people of all stack sizes have the same chance of getting to play vs a recreational player and also allow people of all stack sizes to only play games at their preferred stack sizes, I really think it's fair for everyone.

Edit: It's important to note that under a system where it is just forced play vs whoever sits, the 100bb regs are forced to play 40bbs with any 40bb reg who sits BUT a 40bb reg who sits is NOT forced to play 100bbs with any 100bb reg who sits. So there is a clear imbalance and to make the point that 100bb regs being able to deny action to 40bb regs who sit being against the spirit of forced play only makes sense if you address the fact that 40bb'ers don't have to ever play 100bbs vs 100bb regs under universal forced play. If you make it so that both are forced to play the stack size they don't like then nobody is happy so makes much more sense to allow both to only be forced to play at their preferred stack size.
There might be less of an argument against a 3rd HU table type if we were to implement changes of the type being discussed. Perhaps '50bb-50bb' and '100bb-100bb' options would end the debate, or maybe 50bb CAP insted of 50bb-50bb.

That said, I have a really hard time believing that 100bb regs would end up simply letting weak players sit with 40bb. Poker is poker, even at 40bb, and the money won at that stack size cashes out just as well than those won at 100b. At the stakes we're discussing here, adaptation is a certainty.

Disclaimer: I have not put as much thought into the topics discussed in this post, so the opinions expressed are much more likely than normal to change quickly.
PokerStars Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 02:10 PM   #668
insidemanpoker
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,570
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Quote:
^^^ That's a bit harsh. I was really reluctant to get involved here but I figure I might as well. I actually believe Stars has good intentions here. Unfortunately, good intentions don't always lead to good results. The current model is rife with problems, but no one can say it's unfair because everyone has the exact same standing to play who they want, when they want, and where they want. So it is completely fair. And while maybe not as much as in an ideal world, games DO run between weak regs or strong hobby players vs weak regs etc.

The proposed 'solutions' will suddenly alter this quite a bit. As was seen with the little Finnish gangs on Party, systems that restrict people to x, or force people to y, are going to be overrun with people gaming the system. Groups of friends who are members of the 'cool kids of poker' that are good are going to work together to dominate the tables (while never challenging each other ofc) and as has been suggested, recreational players are going to be completely forced into incredibly difficult games with those that have best gamed the system or are members of these gangs. The notion that every single hobby player is a -50bb/100 moron that would lose the same vs anyone is absurd. There are tons of players who have been playing a long time and who lose at a small rate like -3bb/100. For them, changes like this will be a disaster because they currently can get action against some more mediocre players and sometimes even have an edge and now they will be forced into extremely difficult games instead. Some hobby players will end up quitting altogether when forced with this situation.

You guys talk as if 90% of hobby players are clueless and quite the opposite is true. Many hobby players are fully aware of what is going on with online poker. That there are a ton of full time grinders who make money off of hobby players and removing heads up altogether would still not change this reality. The end result of these ideas is going to be very unpleasant and intimidating to recreational players, awful to aspiring regs who no longer can really work their way up, and disastrous to the 'weak regs' that Kanu so well explained. Obviously it will be bad for the lottery players as well but that is the only part that isn't that upsetting.

The way changes like this are likely to shake out are a bump in action at the beginning before the dust has really settled with the new systems, but after that, it won't be pretty. People like me (in no way a lottery player but also rarely will sit the #1 player at my stake), along with the weaker regs, and upstart HU players looking to improve will effectively be driven out of the game. The landscape will be overrun with bands of friends that do include some great players dominating the tables such that the truly unaware hobby players will basically be forced into playing just them. The climate will be even uglier to recreational players (now it is ugly but they certainly feel no force or pressure) and the net result will be little if any boost in rake after the dust settles, and money flowing into a very small few pockets. This is bad for Stars, bad for recreational players, bad for weak regs, and bad for new aspiring regs. It helps only one group of people. The best of the best of the best and their friends. PokerStars often has 30,000 players online but heads up poker will be dominated by a very small handful of people and no one else.

I know for a fact I have played many people who are posting in this thread that actually want changes (thanks for having the same PS name!) and I can tell you we won't be playing again if changes like this happen.

Finally, it can't be stressed enough how absurd it is that changes like this could come at stakes at 2/4 or lower or in games where the lobby isn't quite as bad and the bb in rake terms is higher. The notion that a game like .5/1 HU PLO is going to have these changes is just insane. Beating the rake is already hard enough there and changes like these will be much more harsh at lower stakes even though the problems there are often much LESS existent if there at all.


What I would suggest is that Stars step back a bit from this, remove this arbitrary deadline it has set for itself, and really try to see if any ideas can come about that don't have such severely negative consequences. Perhaps discussing with someone like Kanu should be step 1. I am personally all for a change that discourages lottery players but every idea I see also seems to discourage far far more than just that. I have no idea if there are really positive ideas that can come about that won't be sitting ducks for manipulation or abuse. I hope there are and I hope Stars finds them, but until they really do, drastic changes that are going to have some very bad consequences shouldn't be taken.

Want to bump this now that Stars reps are back in the thread. I think far too little consideration is being given to non lottery playing regs that aren't that great or are somewhat new to the game. I also think the notion all recreational players are just giant whales is also totally off base. There are plenty of recreational players who have logged a lot of volume in heads up. Who are long time losers, but there lose rate isn't that bad. Forcing them into extremely tough games is terrible for them.

Finally, you can't have it both ways with this whole VPP threshold to allow to deny action. If the threshold is too high, then the gangs and group play issue will flourish, if it is low, then it doesn't really do all that much. It's a very flawed idea. I think people are getting caught up in 'change at all costs' because this idea has a lot of downsides to many many players that are not lottery players.
insidemanpoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 03:00 PM   #669
klink10k
banned
 
klink10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: bkk
Posts: 11,721
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerStars Nick View Post
I've now limited 25/50 HU tables to 15 100bb tables and 15 CAP tables.

Additional existing tables will persist until players leave.
awesome ty!
klink10k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 06:09 PM   #670
Shane Stewart
grinder
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 561
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerStars Nick View Post
I've now limited 25/50 HU tables to 15 100bb tables and 15 CAP tables.

Additional existing tables will persist until players leave.
Can you please make these limit changes to PLO as well please?
Shane Stewart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 06:45 PM   #671
Kanu
adept
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 754
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Quote:
Originally Posted by GobletTamer View Post
Kanu it is much better if we can have a discussion about what is fair rather than what is good for you, at the moment i think I have suggested a very fair solution in which you have to play whoever sat you, if you want to keep this table for yourself.

I explained why this isn't fair already, please re-read and ask if you are confused about anything.

Okay, seriously speaking. The tables are clearly marked 40-100bb. Everyone, who is sitting here should accept the fact that both regulars and recs can buy in within that range. What you want is to give 100bb regulars a chance to dodge some regulars they don't want to play against. What's the next idea? Opensitting player can exit without penalty if Ike/WCG is the second player?

Again please try re-reading, if english isn't your first language tell me which bits you don't understand. Under your system the 40bb regs get to dodge ever playing 100bbs deep vs regs yet the 100bb regs have to play 40bbs deep, can you not see how that is not balanced?

If you don't like that 40bb stacks can join you and force to play this short stack game, maybe you need to ask for deep tables? Or delete 40-100BB tables and introduce 50BB (or any other number in between 20 and 100) cap and 100BB cap tables? That would be actually fair enough, right?
I would be fine with 40bb CAP and then 100bb min buy-in on other tables but there are some disadvantages (not catering to anyone in between for example) so I think my suggestion is better.
Kanu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 06:49 PM   #672
Kanu
adept
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 754
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Quote:
Originally Posted by rbracco View Post
I think this would be not totally unreasonable tbh. I think the problem is that lottery players who currently sit 100bb deep will start sitting 40bb deep and following this strategy in order to be sat less frequently by 100bb regs.
I don't really see this as a problem, 40bb regs would sit with them and if the 100bb regs are that bothered they can sit and play them at 40bbs. If they are good enough at 40bb poker that nobody sits with them then fair enough, they get to sit the same as any other 40bb'er.
Kanu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 11:38 PM   #673
klink10k
banned
 
klink10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: bkk
Posts: 11,721
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

btw PS Nick, have you noticed that the amount of regs battling 25/50 and 50/1 went up a decent amount? feel like the same system for all stakes is good for the game overall. Possibly have 20 person koth for 10/20 30 person koth for 5/10, etc

or keep it the same at 15 theres prob more 25/5+ action than 10/20 and 5/10
klink10k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2013, 05:02 AM   #674
insidemanpoker
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,570
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Interesting. I've looked three times and three times I've seen 15 tables of one person sitting alone and not a game running. Not saying no games have run, but it certainly doesn't look like some crazy amount of action going on. On top of that, if two people wish to play each other now and neither are seated at a heads up table, how the hell are they supposed to play?
insidemanpoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2013, 06:00 AM   #675
TheLuckFactor
grinder
 
TheLuckFactor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Sailing the 7 Seas
Posts: 539
Re: PokerStars Heads Up Lobby Changes: Feedback Requested

Really needs add a table ASAP. A lot of guys 4 table 25/50 hu, if they want to do that it's over 1/4 of the 25/50 tables.

Otherwise it's a good change.
TheLuckFactor is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online