Potential solution to disconnect abuse

[N 82 50 24]

[ QUOTE ]
having No DP is the only solution

[/ QUOTE ]

Most of these other ideas, while interesting, would never work and/or happen in practice.

You can't make people call bets -- like someone said, you'd be screwed against someone like Mahatma if you actually did it for a technical reason.

People would still DP even if their share of the pot was cut in half, although I do agree it would cut down on people sitting down with this intention as the potential edge gained from DP would be much lower. I just can't see a site implementing it though.

[luckychewy]

[ QUOTE ]
I think if there's a pattern of DP abuse, for anyone that complains, they should forfeit the entire pot over to the other person including the bet that they SHOULD'VE called had they not cheated.

EG.
pot 1k, opponent bluffs 1k on river, DP CHUMP times out and DP's. Opponent wins 1k pot, his 1k bet back, and the 1k bet the DP CHUMP should've called, even though he was bluffing. Just some sort of extra penalty to dissuade DP assholes from abuse.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure you're joking but for the times people actually lose connection that won't be cool. Either way I don't see why they just don't offer like 2 DP's a week, or even a month, or none at all.

[bogey]

[ QUOTE ]

People would still DP even if their share of the pot was cut in half, although I do agree it would cut down on people sitting down with this intention as the potential edge gained from DP would be much lower. I just can't see a site implementing it though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeh, but why not? Some sites offer No DP and some don't, why wouldn't any want to go half way? It strikes a good compromise between people who legitimately disconnect getting screwed out of their money and lowering the EV of cheaters.

I didn't think Zeebo's idea made sense at first, but now I kind of do. For instance, I just got an e-mail that rqlpoker's disconnect protection was removed based on
this thread, http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...rue#Post5559171

It would make sense in this sort of case to implement something like this against him. Then, granted they probably would lose his business or he would have to make a new account, but it would inconvenience him a lot more and knowing if he gets caught cheating multiple times this would happen would discourage it even more.

[N 82 50 24]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

People would still DP even if their share of the pot was cut in half, although I do agree it would cut down on people sitting down with this intention as the potential edge gained from DP would be much lower. I just can't see a site implementing it though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeh, but why not? Some sites offer No DP and some don't, why wouldn't any want to go half way? It strikes a good compromise between people who legitimately disconnect getting screwed out of their money and lowering the EV of cheaters.

I didn't think Zeebo's idea made sense at first, but now I kind of do. For instance, I just got an e-mail that rqlpoker's disconnect protection was removed based on
this thread, http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...rue#Post5559171

It would make sense in this sort of case to implement something like this against him. Then, granted they probably would lose his business or he would have to make a new account, but it would inconvenience him a lot more and knowing if he gets caught cheating multiple times this would happen would discourage it even more.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do think sites should take away disconnect protect from those who abuse it... and tie it to the IP, Neteller and machine ID as well as the account. Then they'd have to get a new Neteller, IP and computer, along with a new account. That would make it diffcult to continually abuse it.

I just don't see the half pot idea getting anywhere, but I really can't articulate why. It just doesn't seem like the type of rule that a poker site would implement.

[john voight]

iv play maybe 100k hands in micro limits and can only recall 1 or 2 dps. yet I railbird high games and i see it a lot more.

my question to Zeebo or anyone else who plays high (and short handed like 6max or HU); if a natorious dp player sits down do you continue to play?

[terp]

a possible solution would be that someone's equity in the pot would be preserved but he would have a certain amount of time to reconnect and the option of calling any bet made and continuing the hand.

this would obviously be complicated though if play continued on other hands and stack sizes for opponents changed.