|
View Poll Results: Who is the worst team in the NFL? | |||
Tampa Bay | 0 | 0% | |
Arizona | 2 | 1.13% | |
Cleveland | 0 | 0% | |
Tennessee | 8 | 4.52% | |
Houston | 4 | 2.26% | |
Oakland | 146 | 82.49% | |
Detroit | 14 | 7.91% | |
Miami | 2 | 1.13% | |
Green Bay | 1 | 0.56% | |
Voters: 177. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
fast tables only
Would you like to remove normal tables and only keep fast ones on PS ?
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: fast tables only
this is a tough call.... Refering to Pokerstars?
More hands per hour ++++ Can get timed out -- And the main concern... if you ever have a problem with your connection, you are very limited on your decisions throughout the rest of your session. --- probably good for the long run... .but it could drive some players away... I don't know which way to vote.... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: fast tables only
im on a wireless network, so are many of my friends who play.... the connection to PS is dodgy and always lagging so if there were only turbo tables i would definitely go play elsewhere, and so would my friends. The only time i play turbo tables is if i fancy a turbo sng for half an hour of automatic decision making.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: fast tables only
Or a compromise and make the slow tables a little faster (for instance I can see no reason why cards should be dealt at different speeds on each table.)
Perhaps a fast table with more of a timeout period? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: fast tables only
I'm not on PS, but my answer would be surely "no-no". Connection problems can cost you that way.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: fast tables only
in my highly scientifical observations on a busy night.
these numbers are typical of an avg lineup of NL100 PS normal tables avg= 60 hands/hr PS Fast tables avg= 100 hands/hr FTP Tables avg= 75 hands/hr for some reason people take longer at NL200, so lower all numbers by about 12-15%. but there are more fast tables anyways at nl200. I would not move all tables to fast. I think the way its setup now is fast and efficient. If someone wants to only play fast tables then they have that option. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: fast tables only
[ QUOTE ]
in my highly scientifical observations on a busy night. these numbers are typical of an avg lineup of NL100 PS normal tables avg= 60 hands/hr PS Fast tables avg= 100 hands/hr FTP Tables avg= 75 hands/hr for some reason people take longer at NL200, so lower all numbers by about 12-15%. but there are more fast tables anyways at nl200. I would not move all tables to fast. I think the way its setup now is fast and efficient. If someone wants to only play fast tables then they have that option. [/ QUOTE ] that's totally wrong, your numbers for fast tables are way off. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: fast tables only
Have you ever noticed that the fast tables play significantly tighter than the regular ones? Getting rid of the "slow" tables is -EV.
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: fast tables only
I don't understand the problem between connection and fast cash game table
if you have a network problem you are sitout until you come back ... |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: fast tables only
and by the way, I think PS have the slowest table if we compare to other pokerroom
|
|
|