Duplicate Poker?

[McCutter]

Anyone try it yet?

[Ron Burgundy]

Yes. Here's a quick review:

- you can only single table, you can't even observe other tables if you have one open.

- the rules are ridiculously long and complicated, it's like reading the frickin tax code. I would be shocked if any casual players would take the time to figure how all the different tournaments work.

- the software is the slowest I've ever seen, and it freezes up quite often. I played about 20 hands per hour. This was about 4-5 months ago, so it's possible they've improved since then.

- the vig was about twice as much as normal tourneys on other sites.

[JustCuz]

Yeah...this form of poker is being touted as a game of skill that removes all "luck" from the game of poker. My opinion on that after this quick explanation of gameplay:

In a duplicate poker tourney with, say, 48 players, you might find yourself in seat #2 at one of eight tables with six players each.

The cards dealt at all eight tables are identical; all eight players in seat one at each table gets the same hand, the eight players in seat two get the same hand, etc...

Everyone starts with the same number of chips EVERY HAND. In other words, if you start hand #1 with 5600 chips and go broke, you start with 5600 chips at the beginning of the next hand, as does everyone else at all tables no matter how much they won in the previous hand(s).

Your success at your table means little, as you are only trying to out-perform other players in the same seat(s) at other table(s).

The tourneys I played consisted of two "sessions," where the lowest-scoring half of players in each seat position were eliminated after the first session. A session -- and, get this -- consists of around 8-14 HANDS depending on the speed of the game. So, yeah...in our scenario, you have 12 hands or so to be in the top four out of the eight players in seat #2.

So, the claim is that since your success in the game is rated by comparing your performance to that of other players with identical hands in identical positions, the player with the highest level of skill will outperform the player(s) with the lesser level(s) of skill.

My take, after several hours of play (and REALLY TRYING to like the format) is this: The game promotes the biggest crap shoot type of "lotto poker" I've ever seen. Here's a scenario to demostrate why:

Say you're under the gun with pocket aces. You raise the 200 big blind and make it 800 to go. A player behind you raises to 2000 total, there is a call behind him, you move all-in for 5600, and both other players call. Your aces are up against 7-2 off in seat #4 and 8-3 off in seat #6. The flop comes 7-7-2, turn is 8, and river is 3. The donkey in seat #4 triples up.

At this point you can see the following cumulative scores for seat #2 players:

You: -5600
???: -2400
???: -800
???: +300
???: +300
???: +1200
???: +2000
???: +3500

Obviously, the seat #2 players who came out ahead were at tables where the 7-2 off in seat #4 folded.

My question is this: How much skill does it take to be seated at the right table? Ok...let's not even think about that for now, but instead let's think about how the game progresses from there.

We, in seat #2, have our work cut out for us if we want to make the cut before the end of the first session. We have very few hands left, and, as it stands, we have to double up AND win at least one other big hand to be in the top four. We're basically in the "red zone" already, so our play is going to be very different from that of the $3500 winner in seat #2 at another table.

All of the players in seat #4 have a similar situation where they are now forced to compete for ranking against donkeys who made out playing 7-2 in hand #1.

Now that the seat #2's and the seat #4's at the six tables are in a mad run for chip position, their play will undoubtedly affect that of all the players at their tables.

The point is that very little of the situation from table to table is actually "duplicated" after the first hand or two of a duplicate poker tourney. Moreover, the "sessions" are so short that there's no time to play winning poker by being selective, observing your opponents for tells and/or betting patterns, or by practicing any other aspects of the game that make skilled poker players into winners over lesser-skilled players over time.

This game being represented as a LEGAL game of Skill is a complete joke. Skill means little if anything -- it's jackpot poker, plain and simple.

I've stated and explained my opinion about this format. I'd love to hear defenders of duplicate poker explain what they see as mistakes in my analysis.

[Burdzthewurd]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah...this form of poker is being touted as a game of skill that removes all "luck" from the game of poker. My opinion on that after this quick explanation of gameplay:

In a duplicate poker tourney with, say, 48 players, you might find yourself in seat #2 at one of eight tables with six players each.

The cards dealt at all eight tables are identical; all eight players in seat one at each table gets the same hand, the eight players in seat two get the same hand, etc...

Everyone starts with the same number of chips EVERY HAND. In other words, if you start hand #1 with 5600 chips and go broke, you start with 5600 chips at the beginning of the next hand, as does everyone else at all tables no matter how much they won in the previous hand(s).

Your success at your table means little, as you are only trying to out-perform other players in the same seat(s) at other table(s).

The tourneys I played consisted of two "sessions," where the lowest-scoring half of players in each seat position were eliminated after the first session. A session -- and, get this -- consists of around 8-14 HANDS depending on the speed of the game. So, yeah...in our scenario, you have 12 hands or so to be in the top four out of the eight players in seat #2.

So, the claim is that since your success in the game is rated by comparing your performance to that of other players with identical hands in identical positions, the player with the highest level of skill will outperform the player(s) with the lesser level(s) of skill.

My take, after several hours of play (and REALLY TRYING to like the format) is this: The game promotes the biggest crap shoot type of "lotto poker" I've ever seen. Here's a scenario to demostrate why:

Say you're under the gun with pocket aces. You raise the 200 big blind and make it 800 to go. A player behind you raises to 2000 total, there is a call behind him, you move all-in for 5600, and both other players call. Your aces are up against 7-2 off in seat #4 and 8-3 off in seat #6. The flop comes 7-7-2, turn is 8, and river is 3. The donkey in seat #4 triples up.

At this point you can see the following cumulative scores for seat #2 players:

You: -5600
???: -2400
???: -800
???: +300
???: +300
???: +1200
???: +2000
???: +3500

Obviously, the seat #2 players who came out ahead were at tables where the 7-2 off in seat #4 folded.

My question is this: How much skill does it take to be seated at the right table? Ok...let's not even think about that for now, but instead let's think about how the game progresses from there.

We, in seat #2, have our work cut out for us if we want to make the cut before the end of the first session. We have very few hands left, and, as it stands, we have to double up AND win at least one other big hand to be in the top four. We're basically in the "red zone" already, so our play is going to be very different from that of the $3500 winner in seat #2 at another table.

All of the players in seat #4 have a similar situation where they are now forced to compete for ranking against donkeys who made out playing 7-2 in hand #1.

Now that the seat #2's and the seat #4's at the six tables are in a mad run for chip position, their play will undoubtedly affect that of all the players at their tables.

The point is that very little of the situation from table to table is actually "duplicated" after the first hand or two of a duplicate poker tourney. Moreover, the "sessions" are so short that there's no time to play winning poker by being selective, observing your opponents for tells and/or betting patterns, or by practicing any other aspects of the game that make skilled poker players into winners over lesser-skilled players over time.

This game being represented as a LEGAL game of Skill is a complete joke. Skill means little if anything -- it's jackpot poker, plain and simple.

I've stated and explained my opinion about this format. I'd love to hear defenders of duplicate poker explain what they see as mistakes in my analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed - I find it rather silly how PokerNews is having satellites to their Australia tournament on this joke of a site, I can only imagine how juicy the tournament will be with handfuls of people qualifying from Duplicate..

[99killed]

lame. try regular poker. its fun.

[tangled]

What if the sessions were longer? Would that make the game more skill based do you think? Is the problem with the whole idea or just in the execution of the idea?

[indianaV8]

Problem is
1. collusion is very easy and much more powerful
2. it doesn't eliminate any luck ...
3. it's stupid

[TobyClarke]

I completely agree with JustCuz. In response to tangled and indianaV8:
- longer sessions would indeed make the game less dependent on luck but it certainly doesn't eliminate it; that's simply because you are still forced to play all your hands at the same table with the same people throughout a session.
- probably our friend indianaV8 hasn't yet tried out Duplicate Poker, otherwise he would know that collusion is not much bigger issue in Duplicate than it is in normal poker. That's because each part of the hand (hole cards, flop, turn, river) are dealt simultaneously at all tables. That leads me to another point:
- Duplicate Poker games are VERY slow. If there are six tables then almost every hand takes at least 2 minutes to complete. Imagine playing every hand of of a tournament hand-for-hand and then multiply this by at least two (because the play is stopped four times during a hand).

[edfurlong]

[ QUOTE ]

- probably our friend indianaV8 hasn't yet tried out Duplicate Poker, otherwise he would know that collusion is not much bigger issue in Duplicate than it is in normal poker. That's because each part of the hand (hole cards, flop, turn, river) are dealt simultaneously at all tables. That leads me to another point:


[/ QUOTE ]

You really can't grasp how this could be exploited?

[mbpoker]

collusion is deadly in duplicate poker. You sit on seat 2 at table 1, and your colluder friend sits on seat 3 on table 2. He tells you his hand and now you know what your opponent on seat 3 is holding.