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

[ShaneP]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if I am having weird connection issues in a $1k and timing out here and there I better still have my full 15 seconds to act when I reconnect. In essence, there is no real solution that punishes offenders adequately while in the breath allows those who need the time to continue to use it as they are afforded.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not a Windows software pro by any means, but it seems to me like it's relatively easy for software program like PokerStars to tell the difference between disconnect/network problems and slowness to act. If someone shows no signs of disconnection or network issues AND they do it repeatedly, then I think we have a problem that needs to be addressed. Sure, sometimes you have an emergency and you need to run back and forth so you might use up the full time a bunch of times in a row. But if you're going down to the point RIGHT before the timeback fires up for many hands in a row over a series of tournaments, then that is 99%+ not legitimate (ie, the person is not slow for a valid outside reason) in my opinion and is intentional stalling. Regardless of the current rule allowing this type of behavior, I think that it is against the spirit of the game and a rule should be put in place to disallow it or discourage it. If I worked at PokerStars and could consult with the software people, I would be working on wording to define such a violation so it is clear and fair.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know how reliable this is, but I thought PS already had something like this--when you mouse over someone's name, it gives some %age for their internet connection. It's not apparent to me how robust this is (it seems to only give other people at the table an indication of connection status and if it's not used for anything else, probably isn't that critical to be absolutely correct) but it seems to do what you're suggesting software wise.

And yeah, I think everyone here things that something should be done going forward. Only question is figuring what should be allowed (bubble?) and how to implement it.

[degenrat]

imo it's not enforcable. it's [censored]. you are given x seconds to act on every single decision. that's the rule. that's every players right, to use the time alloted to them.

[N 82 50 24]

The amount of time they give to you assumes that everyone needs to run away from the table every now and then. No one really needs that much time all of the time IMO. If you're in a 1K and you're "thinking" about what to do with T3o UTG, then you're out of line and ruining the gaming experience for others. The real key here is how to word the rule so it's fair for people who think and are methodical in a legitimate fashion while also punishing those who are waiting just to slow the game down and annoy others. I don't have a problem with people using up their entire time to act after the flop. Thinking about how much to bet, how the hand will play out, etc, etc is very important. But preflop? C'mon, it just isn't that hard most of the time and consistent slow action is a bad thing for the game. That's just my opinion though...

[Silent A]

The client software itself should be able to handle this issue automatically (rather than, say, have the PokerStars server figure it out).

My suggestion is that the client should watch for the average time used in the last, say, 10 decisions (not including any use of the time bank). If at any point the average decision time goes above 10 seconds, the player's time allotment before the time bank triggers is reduced to 10 seconds. And it stays at 10 seconds until the average for the last 10 decisions falls back below 5 seconds, at which point it returns to 15 seconds.

[N 82 50 24]

I don't have a problem with automated rules like that (ie, of that type, not those exact rules) as long as it excludes post-flop slow decision makers. Pre-flop times are what should count here...

[Silent A]

Yes, automated rules like what I was thinking about would probably work better if they only considered pre-flop decisions where none of the player's money (other than blinds an antes) were in the pot.

Additionally, they might only consider those pre-flop decisions where the player folded without voluntarily putting in any chips.

[degenrat]

what if the staller is doing it to tilt another player? again within the scope of the rules and for a legitimate end result. again, i am not advocating it, just sayign it's within the rules to do so, and i believe the rules shoudl stand as is.

if they alter the rules in any way you WILL 1000% see posts of peopel getting f'ed out of huge pots for monumental dollars because of the revised time allotment rules. guaranteed.


that's not cool and i think the spirit of the current rules protects players. kinda like our justice system. it sucks to see ssomeone walk away on a technicality, but you recognize everyone is entitled to equal rights under the laws eyes.

that's my view and i am sticking to it.

[N 82 50 24]

I think stalling to tilt someone is outside of the spirit of the game. That's just how I feel and how most people feel...

Also, the rules should be set up such that no one would get [censored] out of a guaranteed huge pot (ie, nuts on the river, other guy shoves, you get autofolded) because it would only affect pre-flop decision-making. So the worst that happens is your aces get folded. But if the rules are set up correctly, no one who's acting in a reasonable time frame (to be defined obv) should see any difference from the current rules.

[0evg0]

[ QUOTE ]
Also in terms of live poker, I had people in the WSOP take 45-60 seconds every hand before acting, a full 45 no matter what the hand was. This was annoying as [censored] and I couldnt fire up more tables, but it is a part of the game. Frankly, I think this thread is simply a result of someone who is pissed off because they lost a seat and this staller had now become one of the reasons for said loss, while it all together might not have had an effect one way or another.
~J

[/ QUOTE ]

Ryan started this thread/sent the e-mails while he was still in the tournament.

[SumZero]

[ QUOTE ]
The client software itself should be able to handle this issue automatically (rather than, say, have the PokerStars server figure it out).

My suggestion is that the client should watch for the average time used in the last, say, 10 decisions (not including any use of the time bank). If at any point the average decision time goes above 10 seconds, the player's time allotment before the time bank triggers is reduced to 10 seconds. And it stays at 10 seconds until the average for the last 10 decisions falls back below 5 seconds, at which point it returns to 15 seconds.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this type of rule makes sense. In live tournaments you can prevent stallers by calling the clock on them and having the TD reduce the player's clock if they are chronic stallers each time the clock is called. I think something like you get 15 seconds per preflop decision pre-time bank but you only get some smaller amount of time over your last 10 hands (say 90 seconds per 10 hands) and if you are over that amount you only get 5 seconds per hand pre-timebank. I also do not think you should get extra time if you reconnect from a bad connection.

The other thing one could do (in addition or instead of the above) is have a larger "recharging" timebank with shorter pre-timebank time. Like if you had a timebank that was 120 seconds and recharged an extra 5 seconds per orbit (but never had more than 120 seconds in it) and you had 5 seconds less to act pre-timebank at each decision. That way people who only occasionally need lots of time for a tough decision or to run to the phone/door can do it while stallers can stall once but then get stuck.