PokerStars wants your opinion [hand for hand in MTTs]

[McMelchior]

[ QUOTE ]
If you are worried about it affecting total play why not pause the blind clock during H4H or slow it down a lot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Love this idea. H4H where the clock progresses for instance no more than 60 seconds for each hand.

[XXXNoahXXX]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you are worried about it affecting total play why not pause the blind clock during H4H or slow it down a lot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Love this idea. H4H where the clock progresses for instance no more than 60 seconds for each hand.

[/ QUOTE ]


This sounds good.

Another alternative would be to have the popup read


"The tournament is now being played Hand for Hand. The next hand will not begin until the hand at all tables is complete. So, morons, there is no point in stalling because we wait for all tables to be done, get it? Now just fold or push and you'll get your bubble money soon enough."


I think first bubble and FT bubble only is fine.

[MikeJPokerStars]

Let's assume for the sake of arguement here that we can't pause the blind clock, returning the question to whether or not you are in favor of fewer H4H points.

[odellthurman]

I think cash bubble and final table bubble would be ideal.

[Best@2p2]

MikeJPokerStars, I agree with what you first said.

Keep hand for hand on the first bubble, and the final two tables bubble and final table bubble.

And please add $39 and $39 rebuy turbo sats to Sunday Million and $4.40 rebuy turbo sats into the $39's.

[ianisakson]

I think cash bubble and final table bubble would be ideal.

[kutuz_off]

In tournaments where a lot of players qualify through smaller buy-ins (read: Sunday Million), even small relative increases in prizes represent significant changes for such players who would have quite a bit of insentive to stall. Please recall stall-fests in Pokerroom and Partypoker. Keep H4H as it is for all increases.

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
In tournaments where a lot of players qualify through smaller buy-ins (read: Sunday Million), even small relative increases in prizes represent significant changes for such players who would have quite a bit of insentive to stall. Please recall stall-fests in Pokerroom and Partypoker. Keep H4H as it is for all increases.

[/ QUOTE ]This is a good point - maybe keep as is for the larger buy ins, but just cash and FT bubbles for buy in < 100 (whatever amount) or rebuy tourneys 1/3 or so of the first figure? I'd think you could bifurcate in this way, right Mike?

[Oberonn]

[ QUOTE ]
Hello 2+2,
PokerStars is interested in your opinions on the subject of ‘hand for hand’ play in MTTs.


[/ QUOTE ]
If you eliminate the H4H as indicated then please decrease the time that players have to delay the game. It is so frustrating when players just wait until time out and fold every single hand.

Also, if you implemented the faster deal of cards in tournaments, and the faster display of the turn and river cards when all-in, play would be improved.

[Jurollo]

[ QUOTE ]
In tournaments where a lot of players qualify through smaller buy-ins (read: Sunday Million), even small relative increases in prizes represent significant changes for such players who would have quite a bit of insentive to stall. Please recall stall-fests in Pokerroom and Partypoker. Keep H4H as it is for all increases.

[/ QUOTE ]
I believe the general thrust of Mike's post was that if you compare rooms with lots of H4H (Party) and those with very few H4H (FTP) you will see less stalling with less H4H, even though it may seem counter-intuitive. Players aren't as aware of said increases happening.