|
|
#36
09-25-2007, 10:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 25-50 6 max deep stacks on Stars
[ QUOTE ]
DN- A post like this is certainly not spam. Something that almost all of us would like to see is a solution to the short-stackers that are ruining the games. As you know, there is a flurry of players buying in for 20bb and playing the short-stack strategy which takes advantage of the looser players, who aren't necessarily playing bad because normally they have potentially big implied odds (against the non short-stackers). This causes the games to tighten up, which isn't really good for anybody, including the site. At the same time, I don't think anybody wants to discourage players who are taking a shot at a higher limit. I think an adequate solution is either a 30-40bb minimum buy-in across the board OR increase the amount of time that a player must sit-out without returning to the table with the amount that he left with (ratholing). [/ QUOTE ] +1 
|
|
#37
09-25-2007, 10:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 25-50 6 max deep stacks on Stars
[ QUOTE ]
Deepstacked games with an ante [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] live stradle option ... yay [/ QUOTE ] Nice, would like both of these. A couple more suggestions: * A "Fold and Show" button in addition to the ordinary fold button when only two players are left in the pot. (Is it Ultimate Bet that has this already?) * An option to have your cards face down on the (virtual) table, until it's your turn. (Alternatively, face down until you click on the back of the cards.) I pay better attention to the table when I haven't looked at my cards yet, and I'm getting tired of the old black-tape-on-screen trick... [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]
|
|
#38
09-25-2007, 10:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 25-50 6 max deep stacks on Stars
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I think it would be great if they had lower limit HU tables. Preferably .02/.05 or .05/.10 I know .25/.50 is considered lower limits, but it would really be great to get heads up experience without having to play $50 buyins every time. [/ QUOTE ] You realise you would go broke because of the rake right? [/ QUOTE ] If the man's adequately rolled for heads up .25/.50, I'd be surprised if the rake at .02/.05 would break him. I too would like to see this. My wife wanted to play me heads up the other day, for fun mostly, as she's still basically a beginner. I didn't particularly want to mess around with all that shuffling heads up, so I logged onto pokerstars hoping to see some 1cent/2cent or 2cent/4cent heads up tables, or even some play money heads up tables we could play on. I don't mind losing out a bit on the rake to be able to have a little micro-stakes fun - although I don't understand why the rake can't be proportionate to the stakes. --Zetack
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
