Two Plus Two Newer Archives

Two Plus Two Newer Archives (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/index.php)
-   Brick and Mortar (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=29)
-   -   Horrible Time Pot Rule at Commerce (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=557013)

psandman 11-29-2007 01:41 PM

Re: Horrible Time Pot Rule at Commerce
 
[ QUOTE ]
Psandman-

Obviously you think the player should give his $12 time refund to Player A who won the pot. What would you say should happen if UTG wins the pot, pays time, and leaves after one hand? Should every other player at the table pay him $12 each for the time he just paid for them?

(I actually believe it's the right thing to do to give Player A the $12, but I also believe it's the right thing to do for every other player to give him $12 if he wins and leaves the next hand)

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I don't think its the right thing for the player to give the money back to the player. I think the right thing to do is change the rule. The reason i don't like the rule is itr actually encourages a player to stay with no intnetion of playing just to get the $12.

I would say a better rule would be this: If a player is going to be allowed to play to his blinds and get the collection back, then a player who wishes to take advantage of that rule should not be permitted to participate in the time pot. Now there is no concern. And this doesn't encourage a player to stay unless he is actually intending to play those hands.

dizzle98 11-29-2007 01:45 PM

Re: Horrible Time Pot Rule at Commerce
 
Well I would say open folding AA would be ridiculous even if you just wanted the $12. If a player is that set on skimming a few extra bucks they would open-push AA and get called as a major favorite or pick up the extra $60 in blinds in this case, no time pot, then leave.

I agree that I think it's an unfair situation, I just happen to think it's equally unfair for a player to play their last hand UTG, win a big pot and have to pay everyone's time for the next 30 mins. I just think a lot of people who think it's unfair to sit one hand and collect the $12 when you leave would have no problem with the same situation if UTG paid everyone's time by winning the pot.

dizzle98 11-29-2007 01:47 PM

Re: Horrible Time Pot Rule at Commerce
 
[ QUOTE ]

I would say a better rule would be this: If a player is going to be allowed to play to his blinds and get the collection back, then a player who wishes to take advantage of that rule should not be permitted to participate in the time pot. Now there is no concern. And this doesn't encourage a player to stay unless he is actually intending to play those hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

100% agree with this.

dizzle98 11-29-2007 01:49 PM

Re: Horrible Time Pot Rule at Commerce
 
My new question would be this: In order to get your time charge back, do you have to announce you are only playing until the blinds? Assume I have decided to do just that but do not announce it. Time pot is won when I'm UTG...under the current rule would I still be entitled to get my $12 refund? If you don't have to announce it to get the refund what would make anyone announce it? If I care enough to get that $12 I'm just gonna keep my mouth shut till after I've played the hand. Though I admittedly don't know how it works...if you get the refund for leaving period, or only if you've announced that you are playing till your blind.

psandman 11-29-2007 02:31 PM

Re: Horrible Time Pot Rule at Commerce
 
[ QUOTE ]
My new question would be this: In order to get your time charge back, do you have to announce you are only playing until the blinds? Assume I have decided to do just that but do not announce it. Time pot is won when I'm UTG...under the current rule would I still be entitled to get my $12 refund? If you don't have to announce it to get the refund what would make anyone announce it? If I care enough to get that $12 I'm just gonna keep my mouth shut till after I've played the hand. Though I admittedly don't know how it works...if you get the refund for leaving period, or only if you've announced that you are playing till your blind.

[/ QUOTE ]

If your asking me what i think the rule should be...I would say that a player who wants to be able to get their time back should have to announce it before the first hand of the new down is dealt, it is this announcement that would make them them ineligible for the time pot. If a player did not announce it he would be eligible to participate in the time pot, but could not get a refund if he left. This way if a player wishes to particpate in the time pot he may, but he can't do it simply to get paid a free $12.

Its seems silly that anyone playing $20 $40 NL would care much about this $12, but apparently some do, or the OP wouldn't have posted. Presumably this rule applies at smaller games.

52s 11-29-2007 03:15 PM

Re: Horrible Time Pot Rule at Commerce
 
[ QUOTE ]
Its seems silly that anyone playing $20 $40 NL would care much about this $12, but apparently some do, or the OP wouldn't have posted. Presumably this rule applies at smaller games.

[/ QUOTE ]

You'd be surprised (or not so much) at how many players are nitty over paying time and over timepots in the bigger games.

LAgambol 11-29-2007 03:39 PM

Re: Horrible Time Pot Rule at Commerce
 
the time pot is super bogus, i ended up paying over $800 in time collection pots in one damn session, it seemed like a curse

andyfox 11-29-2007 03:51 PM

Re: Horrible Time Pot Rule at Commerce
 
I've seen more arguments over this issue than any other in collection pot games. And it's not close.

Ray Zee 11-30-2007 01:44 PM

Re: Horrible Time Pot Rule at Commerce
 
the time pots always are a bone of contention but that is what the players want. any player can be out of them and has an advantage doing so if he alters his play, but most play as its a player courtesy to be involved or feel that playing tight during them gives them an edge. the higher stakes players arent as nitty but always are trying to get the best of it.

but what no one has memtioned is that the player taking that free shot at 12 bucks has paid his blinds in advance already for that round and is entitled to get that hand. and that is what time pots hurt is that when you leave on a time collection you lose hands you paid for in advance. so in effect if he folds in the dark he gets 12$ but loses that hands value.
i think he is supposed to get his 12$ as he was in the time pot. if he wanted to not be he could say so. all other players have the same rules to be exploited.

psandman 11-30-2007 01:54 PM

Re: Horrible Time Pot Rule at Commerce
 
[ QUOTE ]
the time pots always are a bone of contention but that is what the players want. any player can be out of them and has an advantage doing so if he alters his play, but most play as its a player courtesy to be involved or feel that playing tight during them gives them an edge. the higher stakes players arent as nitty but always are trying to get the best of it.

but what no one has memtioned is that the player taking that free shot at 12 bucks has paid his blinds in advance already for that round and is entitled to get that hand. and that is what time pots hurt is that when you leave on a time collection you lose hands you paid for in advance. so in effect if he folds in the dark he gets 12$ but loses that hands value.
i think he is supposed to get his 12$ as he was in the time pot. if he wanted to not be he could say so. all other players have the same rules to be exploited.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are missing something here. The player could have elected to not particpate in the time pot, played to his blinds get full vale and not pay the time collection.

So why would he elect to participate in the time pot? there is no other reason but for the chance to get paid $12 when he leaves.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:21 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.