Some Features That Need to Make It into Online Poker

[0524432]

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone else understands. Why can you not visualize cards being run out simultaneously? Picture the flop, wherein two players go all-in. Then the turn and river are dealt, for each of two runs, one above the other. Before you post again, please think. THINK. I'm not going to indulge your foolishness anymore until you get smart.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's really nothing but comical how you pick and choose which parts of this discussion to respond to, but FYI, the nonsense useless comments like [ QUOTE ]
Before you post again, please think. THINK. I'm not going to indulge your foolishness anymore until you get smart.

[/ QUOTE ] will get your banned here on 2+2, I personally don't mind it, but if it makes you feel better, just be prepared to not be able to login when and if a Mod picks up on it....


As far as responding to the AIPF scenario which you only seem to be focusing on, that should be obvious, running the board out 2 cards at a time, one atop the other, would OBVIOUSLY not take any more time.

HOWEVER, are you honestly proposing that either....

The players are not given the option to see each others cards before deciding to run it twice or not

or

Players can ONLY run it twice if AIPF?

*Keep in mind if you choose the latter....MOST running it twice scenarios would be POST flop, where players have, for example, a pair and a flush draw against an OP. As opposed to, running the whole board twice when, for example, AA gets AIPF with KK or AKo vs JTs etc....

Unless of course you are telling me that you see no reason for both parties to know each others holdings before they make the decision to run it twice or not

[btmagnetw]

why would anyone care what the cards were in running it twice? you either want to want to reduce variance or you don't. its not like i love running it twice when its 50/50 but suddenly i don't want to run it twice when i'm 80/20.

do you understand what the phrase "SAME EV" means?

[0524432]

IMO

Scenario 1.....

Hero KhKc
Villain 6h7c
Board Kd3d4c

Villain: Run it twice?
Hero: No Thx

Scenario 2.....

Hero KhKc
Villain 9dTd
Board KdQd2h

Villain: Twice?
Hero: Sure.


I personally, would rather run it once when I'm a huge favorite, and more than once when the equity is rather close. The 2nd run lessens the variance so if I've got a small equity edge, during the current session, I'd rather lessen the variance for certain big pots at the time....

Although in reality, poker only means anything over the long run, which makes running it twice completely pointless, it's just my opinion on running it twice in certain sized pots in a certain game

[kindergartencop]

you have like 5 seconds or whatever to act at every decision, why cant you have the exact same time frame to choose run it twice or not? its not like it would slow games down anymore than say turning off automuck on stars and being given an extra few seconds at the end of every hand.

[MARK R]

How about insurance paid by the poker site.

They would obviousily give you worse odds than you are getting by the pot.

Mark.

[0524432]

[ QUOTE ]
How about insurance paid by the poker site.

They would obviousily give you worse odds than you are getting by the pot.

Mark.

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering the poker sites would find this especially attractive because they would be making even MORE $ than they're making already, this would be very possible to see in the future, IMO.

Although it might take some thinking to figure a way to offer players insurance without slowing down the game (ffs if they ever asked you for insurance every time you get all the $ in) although, if they're making $ off it, I wouldn't put it past the people who run these businesses to overlook the game lag, however slight it may be, to make extra $.

[AcTiOnJaCsOn]

1 an2 sound cool but none are realistically gunna be implemented

[Buconero]

Why on earth are we discussing "running it twice" for online poker? The whole purpose of running it twice is to reduce variance. If you want to reduce variance then why not go the whole way and have an exact EV split? This also has the advantage that the remaining board cards don't even need to be dealt and we're onto the next hand faster.

I agree though that any variance reduction method would be a bad idea as it is the randomness of sessions that keeps the bad players interested.

[0524432]

Now this really wraps it up.

The argument we've been having is whether or not separate tables would be needed to distinguish the current tables from the tables which would include this new "run it twice" option for the sake of players who would never do it and have no interest in playing less hands/hour because of others at the tabling doing it.

If you really want to lessen the variance, you are trying to get it closer to the actual EV. If that's the case, just forget running the rest of the board, the RNG can easily chop the pot up according to EV and move on.

Although, i know full well that some players literally enjoy seeing the cards peel off when $ is on the line, running it twice or more would be more appealing than a pure EV chop for entertainment purposes, assuming the understand the reason for running it twice.

[CallCallCall]

1. Live straddle tables would be fun

2. Run it twice? Please move down a couple of levels

3. staking feature sounds good - who wants to stake me for the sunday milllion? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

4. min. buyin to 50bb or min. buyin to 100bb and max to 2-300bb