Some Features That Need to Make It into Online Poker - Page 5

0524432 · #41 11-19-2007, 07:50 AM

Lol, it's interesting to notice you cease continuing the conversation regarding the "real world" feasibility of the "running it 2+ times" concept.

Considering you asked me a question, and I was the one who's answer including the first mention in this thread of having the RNG run the remaining cards twice....I wonder how you came to the conclusion that YOU "taught" me this idea? lol....this is getting more and more ludicrous, it's not a bad idea for a thread and I'm not trying to make personal jabs, which you clearly are, but ffs......

First, consider this....does the lost entertainment/excitement value of actually SEEING the additional card dealt out not concern you at all? (Given the scenario where the RNG does all the work and the cards aren't actually dealt out in the GUI in order to keep the game on pace)

Also, do you just refuse to answer the questions....How, without taking additional time, would the 2 all-in players decide (given each others hands) whether they want to run it twice or not? Or would the players not have this choice at all?

Again....refer to all of my question in one of my previous
posts. If you can give me a legitimate answer to each of those questions, which will cause NO delay in the time of each hand, I would be more than glad to agree with you.

MinusEV · #42 11-19-2007, 07:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]

First, consider this....does the lost entertainment/excitement value of actually SEEING the additional card dealt out not concern you at all? (Given the scenario where the RNG does all the work and the cards aren't actually dealt out in the GUI in order to keep the game on pace)

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no reason the software couldn't deliver 4 cards (if all in is on flop) in exactly the same time as it delivers 2. You shift the first two up a bit and the last two down a bit and show them at the same time. It doesn't have to be first one board, then the other.

Nick Rivers · #43 11-19-2007, 07:58 AM

Everyone else understands. Why can you not visualize cards being run out simultaneously? Picture the flop, wherein two players go all-in. Then the turn and river are dealt, for each of two runs, one above the other. Before you post again, please think. THINK. I'm not going to indulge your foolishness anymore until you get smart.

0524432 · #44 11-19-2007, 08:00 AM

Lol, maybe that is where the confusion is....I assumed that to be within the realm of obvious.....

Although, before I forget, in an AIPF scenario, with both players having the "run it twice" option chosen, do the players have no choice after they've checked the box but to run it twice? Therefor completely taking away the aspect of running it twice that is seeing your opponents cards before deciding to run it twice or not.

0524432 · #45 11-19-2007, 08:06 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone else understands. Why can you not visualize cards being run out simultaneously? Picture the flop, wherein two players go all-in. Then the turn and river are dealt, for each of two runs, one above the other. Before you post again, please think. THINK. I'm not going to indulge your foolishness anymore until you get smart.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's really nothing but comical how you pick and choose which parts of this discussion to respond to, but FYI, the nonsense useless comments like [ QUOTE ]
Before you post again, please think. THINK. I'm not going to indulge your foolishness anymore until you get smart.

[/ QUOTE ] will get your banned here on 2+2, I personally don't mind it, but if it makes you feel better, just be prepared to not be able to login when and if a Mod picks up on it....

As far as responding to the AIPF scenario which you only seem to be focusing on, that should be obvious, running the board out 2 cards at a time, one atop the other, would OBVIOUSLY not take any more time.

HOWEVER, are you honestly proposing that either....

The players are not given the option to see each others cards before deciding to run it twice or not

or

Players can ONLY run it twice if AIPF?

*Keep in mind if you choose the latter....MOST running it twice scenarios would be POST flop, where players have, for example, a pair and a flush draw against an OP. As opposed to, running the whole board twice when, for example, AA gets AIPF with KK or AKo vs JTs etc....

Unless of course you are telling me that you see no reason for both parties to know each others holdings before they make the decision to run it twice or not

btmagnetw · #46 11-19-2007, 08:11 AM

why would anyone care what the cards were in running it twice? you either want to want to reduce variance or you don't. its not like i love running it twice when its 50/50 but suddenly i don't want to run it twice when i'm 80/20.

do you understand what the phrase "SAME EV" means?

0524432 · #47 11-19-2007, 08:23 AM

IMO

Scenario 1.....

Hero KhKc
Villain 6h7c
Board Kd3d4c

Villain: Run it twice?
Hero: No Thx

Scenario 2.....

Hero KhKc
Villain 9dTd
Board KdQd2h

Villain: Twice?
Hero: Sure.

I personally, would rather run it once when I'm a huge favorite, and more than once when the equity is rather close. The 2nd run lessens the variance so if I've got a small equity edge, during the current session, I'd rather lessen the variance for certain big pots at the time....

Although in reality, poker only means anything over the long run, which makes running it twice completely pointless, it's just my opinion on running it twice in certain sized pots in a certain game

kindergartencop · #48 11-19-2007, 08:35 AM

you have like 5 seconds or whatever to act at every decision, why cant you have the exact same time frame to choose run it twice or not? its not like it would slow games down anymore than say turning off automuck on stars and being given an extra few seconds at the end of every hand.

MARK R · #49 11-19-2007, 08:40 AM

How about insurance paid by the poker site.

They would obviousily give you worse odds than you are getting by the pot.

Mark.

0524432 · #50 11-19-2007, 08:51 AM

[ QUOTE ]
How about insurance paid by the poker site.

They would obviousily give you worse odds than you are getting by the pot.

Mark.

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering the poker sites would find this especially attractive because they would be making even MORE $ than they're making already, this would be very possible to see in the future, IMO.

Although it might take some thinking to figure a way to offer players insurance without slowing down the game (ffs if they ever asked you for insurance every time you get all the $ in) although, if they're making $ off it, I wouldn't put it past the people who run these businesses to overlook the game lag, however slight it may be, to make extra $.