Stars response on a chronic staller, with no reason to stall.

[ryanghall]

Oh, by the way, his name is arxigos.

If anyone is still in the tournament and has a big chip lead at the end and basically gets to decide who makes it in, please consider this. Slowrolling him is an added bonus.

Ryan

[Soulman]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, by the way, his name is arxigos.

If anyone is still in the tournament and has a big chip lead at the end and basically gets to decide who makes it in, please consider this. Slowrolling him is an added bonus.

Ryan

[/ QUOTE ]
lol bitteraments [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[McMelchior]

Wow, ryan, I think YOU are completely out of line here.

There's a rule there's a rule. There's no rule, well a rule can be made, but it shouldn NEVER be made DURING a tournament, and there's no way it should be made by a low level customer support person.

Unless Stars' has a rule saying "Players are required to observe tournament etiquette by not using all available time for each and every decission" there's no way it would be appropriate or correct for a customer support person to come to the table and hurry a player.

You - as anybody else - has the option of emailing Stars with a suggestion for an introduction of such a rule. Optimally such a suggestions will be considered by Stars management, and if deemed beneficial for the gaming experience and not detrimental to Stars' interests it should be introduced and announced.

But continuously emailing support DURING a tournament trying to persuade them to enforce what you think is tournament etiquette - after clearly having been told that Stars do not share this view - is just inappropriate.

I see absolutely nothing derogatory or belitteling with Stars' support emails to you.

The way decission time is dished out for one player is clearly not optimal ... but arguing that "more disconnects should lead to shorter decission time" just doesn't add up; the character of the medium (the internet) necessitates a certain amount of time to be available for each decission, since conditions not within the individual players control effectively can reduce the "informed" decission time unreasonably for some players. "Punishing" players connected via a laggy internet backbone (and this happens from time to time for many different reasons all over the world) by reducing their available time has no merit and doesn't add any higher justice to the game.

What I like when playing in a B & M tournament is that there is time to make tough decission. Online you effectively have 35 second to make any decission, nobrainer or for tens of thousands of dollars.

If a player feels the need to spend the full 35 seconds making each and every decission it's obv. annoying to the rest, but that doesn't change the fact that he or she is entitled to do so.

You taking your steam out on Stars support is just immature.

EDIT: And you naming the player here is real childish.

[BryanSPokerStars]

[ QUOTE ]
So I'm playing in the $1050 Barcelona satellite, and on my table is a chronic staller.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, I don't know why I posted this, I guess to come up with a viable solution for situations like this cause Stars sure doesn't seem interested in doing so.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is frustrating, no doubt, to be at a table where someone is taking what you feel to be too long to make a decision... particularly when they're doing it on most (or all) hands. To alleviate this problem, we (and every other site) have a maximum amount of time for decision-making allocated to each player.

When we review the rules and settings in place, we take things such as this thread (and others like it), email feedback, etc. into account. From time to time, changes are made, always with an eye toward improving the playing experience of everyone involved.

The player you mention was not actually violating the rules of the game. We can (and have) emailed players in the past asking them to consider the frustration of others, however such mails are requests, not demands. We do remind players that we review time limits on occasion and that it would be unfortunate if we were compelled to shorten the decision-making time.

This is the extent of what we can do. It's not justifiable to in any way cajole or threaten a player with punitive action when there's not a rule being broken. Whether the other player is having connection troubles or simply trying to tilt you, we have systems in place to make sure that you're not waiting an eternity (though it may seem like it sometimes!) for play to go on.

The simple fact is that players who choose to use the full time allocated to them are not in violation of the rules. It would be entirely inappropriate for someone from staff to appear at the table to badger a player who is not in fact violating the rules in place.

All the best,

Bryan S.
Tournaments Administrator
PokerStars Poker Room Management Team

[ryanghall]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, ryan, I think YOU are completely out of line here.

There's a rule there's a rule. There's no rule, well a rule can be made, but it shouldn NEVER be made DURING a tournament, and there's no way it should be made by a low level customer support person.

Unless Stars' has a rule saying "Players are required to observe tournament etiquette by not using all available time for each and every decission" there's no way it would be appropriate or correct for a customer support person to come to the table and hurry a player.

You - as anybody else - has the option of emailing Stars with a suggestion for an introduction of such a rule. Optimally such a suggestions will be considered by Stars management, and if deemed beneficial for the gaming experience and not detrimental to Stars' interests it should be introduced and announced.

But continuously emailing support DURING a tournament trying to persuade them to enforce what you think is tournament etiquette - after clearly having been told that Stars do not share this view - is just inappropriate.

I see absolutely nothing derogatory or belitteling with Stars' support emails to you.

The way decission time is dished out for one player is clearly not optimal ... but arguing that "more disconnects should lead to shorter decission time" just doesn't add up; the character of the medium (the internet) necessitates a certain amount of time to be available for each decission, since conditions not within the individual players control effectively can reduce the "informed" decission time unreasonably for some players. "Punishing" players connected via a laggy internet backbone (and this happens from time to time for many different reasons all over the world) by reducing their available time has no merit and doesn't add any higher justice to the game.

What I like when playing in a B & M tournament is that there is time to make tough decission. Online you effectively have 35 second to make any decission, nobrainer or for tens of thousands of dollars.

If a player feels the need to spend the full 35 seconds making each and every decission it's obv. annoying to the rest, but that doesn't change the fact that he or she is entitled to do so.

You taking your steam out on Stars support is just immature.

EDIT: And you naming the player here is real childish.

[/ QUOTE ]

I stopped reading this after about 4 lines but I can assure you that you'd be singing a different tune if it was your thousand bucks getting pissed away.

I believe posting his name is standard. He needs to be outed for his douchebaggery. Stars needs to change their rule, bottom line. It would appear as though most people agree.

Ryan

[Soulman]

[ QUOTE ]
If a player feels the need to spend the full 35 seconds making each and every decission it's obv. annoying to the rest, but that doesn't change the fact that he or she is entitled to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes he obviously needs tons of time to consider folding 27o from UTG+1!

[ryanghall]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So I'm playing in the $1050 Barcelona satellite, and on my table is a chronic staller.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, I don't know why I posted this, I guess to come up with a viable solution for situations like this cause Stars sure doesn't seem interested in doing so.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is frustrating, no doubt, to be at a table where someone is taking what you feel to be too long to make a decision... particularly when they're doing it on most (or all) hands. To alleviate this problem, we (and every other site) have a maximum amount of time for decision-making allocated to each player.

When we review the rules and settings in place, we take things such as this thread (and others like it), email feedback, etc. into account. From time to time, changes are made, always with an eye toward improving the playing experience of everyone involved.

The player you mention was not actually violating the rules of the game. We can (and have) emailed players in the past asking them to consider the frustration of others, however such mails are requests, not demands. We do remind players that we review time limits on occasion and that it would be unfortunate if we were compelled to shorten the decision-making time.

This is the extent of what we can do. It's not justifiable to in any way cajole or threaten a player with punitive action when there's not a rule being broken. Whether the other player is having connection troubles or simply trying to tilt you, we have systems in place to make sure that you're not waiting an eternity (though it may seem like it sometimes!) for play to go on.

The simple fact is that players who choose to use the full time allocated to them are not in violation of the rules. It would be entirely inappropriate for someone from staff to appear at the table to badger a player who is not in fact violating the rules in place.

All the best,

Bryan S.
Tournaments Administrator
PokerStars Poker Room Management Team

[/ QUOTE ]

Bryan, please consider implementing the suggestion that was made earlier in the thread. Many posters seem to agree that it is a good idea.

Ryan

[McMelchior]

[ QUOTE ]
I stopped reading this after about 4 lines

[/ QUOTE ]
So basically you're just posting here to jerk off, not because you're interested in debate.

[ QUOTE ]
[...] but I can assure you that you'd be singing a different tune if it was your thousand bucks getting pissed away.

[/ QUOTE ]
Just because you don't understand the basis of rules and how they're applied to regulate our game doesn't mean everybody else has the same deficit.

[ QUOTE ]
I believe posting his name is standard. He needs to be outed for his douchebaggery.

[/ QUOTE ]
So now you're the police, the jury and the executioner all in one. Maybe you need to back off and stop abusing this board for your own private vengeance projects.

[ryanghall]

I'm not interested in debating with "high on their horse" [censored] like you.

The rule is obviously terrible. You seem to be one of the select few who can't see that.

So get lost.

Ryan

[McMelchior]

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]