Changes to texas hold em poker!!

camilog

I am just wondering or after your thoughts on changes to texas holdem!!!If you could change anything regarding changes to the game or rules that you think would improve the game, what would it be???

AB0151

Live poker I'd introduce a rule to improve body hygiene and reduce needless tanking - we've seen a lot of good stuff on latter of late but is it so hard to have a wash and brush your teeth! Online then pet hate is poor chat etiquitte but again this has been addressed a lot on this forum too and is well policed here at least. In terms of rules I'm tempted to put in a variance cap facility in certain key spots but that would be changing the nature of game we all know and love. I'd suggest a run it twice option on sky cash but then again I did this on stars yesterday and lost both times all in pre my aces v his queens plus only got a draw aces v ace king. So in summary deodorant, politeness and toothpaste!

TheEdge949

For me live tournament play would certainly benefit from having an automatic clock. I'm not suggesting like a 30 second rule or anything like that but something along the lines of 15 min levels = 90 seconds, 20 min levels = 105 seconds, 25 min levels = 120 seconds etc, with maybe extra time on the final table or a one time token to double the clock.


As far as online play goes. No third party software at all. Let the grinders bum hunt and table select based on observation and old fashioned note taking. Although this isn't a problem with Sky who don't allow third party software it certainly is on other sites.


As far as etiquette and chat etc goes both live and online I'm all for rub downs and getting under an opponents skin. In poker we have to find our edge then push it to the max.


Totally agree with the hygiene thing nobody needs to present at a table smelling like a badgers mott. I personally keep some moist wipes, a toothbrush and some deodorant in a small bag which also contains hand gel coz most casinos chips are filthy. When its a break I simply go and freshen up. it takes two minutes.


Yours in poker


Mark

F_Ivanovic

90 seconds just for the first levels is ridiculously long to the point of there no point being a clock in the first place.

People act on skypoker within 15 seconds and that's when most people play multiple tables at the same time...no reason why 20 seconds live shouldn't be more than enough with the ability to somehow use extra time on occasions when needed.

TheEdge949

Ha a 20 second clock in live poker like that's ever going to work. As it stands now someone would probably have to tank for at least a minute before anyone called the clock and then they've got another minute so that's 120 seconds. At least with a definitive time scale theres no need for anyone to have to call for a clock, which trust me can lead to some pretty intense dynamics at the table.


Notwithstanding I don't think many players could be consistent winning players in live tourneys with only 20 seconds to act, in fact id be willing to wager that, with all other considerations being equal, if top pros only had 20 secs to act each time and solid club regs had the usual amount of time the regs would hold their own because its the ability to think hands through thoroughly that separates the best from the rest.


But hey its just something that I would change, you quite obviously have nothing to change so each to their own.


Yours in poker

Mark

F_Ivanovic

Your post doesn't make any sense. Why can't the 20 seconds be a definitive? There is no calling the clock at 20 seconds, a players hand is automatically mucked. I'm pretty sure there are already some tournaments with a 30 second clock in place with the only slight problem being there are some players that see they have 30 seconds to act and will make use of it on every single hand.

Your 2nd paragraph is also nonsense because more time to make a decision favours the weaker players. This is because the stronger/online players have played way more hands lifetime such that there are so many decisions that are trivial based on their previous experiences of similar hands. Yet weaker players encounter way more spots that are unique to them or that haven't happened often enough and in these spots they need more time to make a correct decision.

markycash

Make it NLO8 and have a low pot

TheEdge949

F_Ivanovic said:

Your post doesn't make any sense. Why can't the 20 seconds be a definitive? There is no calling the clock at 20 seconds, a players hand is automatically mucked. I'm pretty sure there are already some tournaments with a 30 second clock in place with the only slight problem being there are some players that see they have 30 seconds to act and will make use of it on every single hand.

Your 2nd paragraph is also nonsense because more time to make a decision favours the weaker players. This is because the stronger/online players have played way more hands lifetime such that there are so many decisions that are trivial based on their previous experiences of similar hands. Yet weaker players encounter way more spots that are unique to them or that haven't happened often enough and in these spots they need more time to make a correct decision.

Sorry but youre talking out of your hole cards. Its the stronger players who think out each streets action and all the variations of poss holdings when faced with a tough river or turn decision. The weaker players cant see past their own holdings and don't seem too concerned about board texture, position, betting patterns etc. Even in my local £20 comp a player will take at least a minute every 2 /3 hands because there are things to be considered.


If a reg wants to play every hand in under 20 seconds then please let me sit at the same table because I guarantee that Ill take chips off them.


Yours in poker.

Mark

Jac35

TheEdge949 said:

F_Ivanovic said:

Your post doesn't make any sense. Why can't the 20 seconds be a definitive? There is no calling the clock at 20 seconds, a players hand is automatically mucked. I'm pretty sure there are already some tournaments with a 30 second clock in place with the only slight problem being there are some players that see they have 30 seconds to act and will make use of it on every single hand.

Your 2nd paragraph is also nonsense because more time to make a decision favours the weaker players. This is because the stronger/online players have played way more hands lifetime such that there are so many decisions that are trivial based on their previous experiences of similar hands. Yet weaker players encounter way more spots that are unique to them or that haven't happened often enough and in these spots they need more time to make a correct decision.

Sorry but youre talking out of your hole cards. Its the stronger players who think out each streets action and all the variations of poss holdings when faced with a tough river or turn decision. The weaker players cant see past their own holdings and don't seem too concerned about board texture, position, betting patterns etc. Even in my local £20 comp a player will take at least a minute every 2 /3 hands because there are things to be considered.


If a reg wants to play every hand in under 20 seconds then please let me sit at the same table because I guarantee that Ill take chips off them.


Yours in poker.

Mark

I’m a reg
Challenge accepted

F_Ivanovic

TheEdge949 said:

Sorry but youre talking out of your hole cards. Its the stronger players who think out each streets action and all the variations of poss holdings when faced with a tough river or turn decision. The weaker players cant see past their own holdings and don't seem too concerned about board texture, position, betting patterns etc. Even in my local £20 comp a player will take at least a minute every 2 /3 hands because there are things to be considered.


If a reg wants to play every hand in under 20 seconds then please let me sit at the same table because I guarantee that Ill take chips off them.


Yours in poker.

Mark

I'm a reg too... what do you think I do when I play on sky everyday? Every decision is under 20 seconds - many decisions happen 5 secs or less. It's really not that difficult to make decisions quickly when you've played the similar spot many times over.

TheEdge949

Remember we are talking live tourney poker guys, not button clicking a £5 bh.

I fully accept that online a good reg who beats the level they play at will have an automatic style of play for calling / raising and folding etc which means that the 10 secs required is fine and you can play almost on autopilot. Online I struggle to final table 50 /60 runner comps because of the short time to act. Live however I would (with my game where it is at the moment ) back myself to final table 30% of the time with similar fields

The original Idea to have a set amount of time in live play would actually speed up the game eradicate the needless tanking (end of day at the Goliath or GPT or GPS etc) that blights the live game and make it more appealing to the hyperturbo action junkies of the online poker world. Although watching these guys play a 3 day 40 minute level comp like a sng always makes me chuckle inwardly.

However, I still maintain that if you take players of comparable abilities and put them in a live tournament giving 50% a very short space of time to act each hand and the others a longer period of time the money would be made up of largely those with the greater time to act.

Hmmm, a SPT event maybe lol.

Yours in poker

Mark

hhyftrftdr

TheEdge949 said:

Remember we are talking live tourney poker guys, not button clicking a £5 bh.

I fully accept that online a good reg who beats the level they play at will have an automatic style of play for calling / raising and folding etc which means that the 10 secs required is fine and you can play almost on autopilot. Online I struggle to final table 50 /60 runner comps because of the short time to act. Live however I would (with my game where it is at the moment ) back myself to final table 30% of the time with similar fields

The original Idea to have a set amount of time in live play would actually speed up the game eradicate the needless tanking (end of day at the Goliath or GPT or GPS etc) that blights the live game and make it more appealing to the hyperturbo action junkies of the online poker world. Although watching these guys play a 3 day 40 minute level comp like a sng always makes me chuckle inwardly.

However, I still maintain that if you take players of comparable abilities and put them in a live tournament giving 50% a very short space of time to act each hand and the others a longer period of time the money would be made up of largely those with the greater time to act.

Hmmm, a SPT event maybe lol.

Yours in poker

Mark

Yours in optimism?

TheEdge949

hhyftrftdr said:

TheEdge949 said:

Remember we are talking live tourney poker guys, not button clicking a £5 bh.

I fully accept that online a good reg who beats the level they play at will have an automatic style of play for calling / raising and folding etc which means that the 10 secs required is fine and you can play almost on autopilot. Online I struggle to final table 50 /60 runner comps because of the short time to act. Live however I would (with my game where it is at the moment ) back myself to final table 30% of the time with similar fields

The original Idea to have a set amount of time in live play would actually speed up the game eradicate the needless tanking (end of day at the Goliath or GPT or GPS etc) that blights the live game and make it more appealing to the hyperturbo action junkies of the online poker world. Although watching these guys play a 3 day 40 minute level comp like a sng always makes me chuckle inwardly.

However, I still maintain that if you take players of comparable abilities and put them in a live tournament giving 50% a very short space of time to act each hand and the others a longer period of time the money would be made up of largely those with the greater time to act.

Hmmm, a SPT event maybe lol.

Yours in poker

Mark

Yours in optimism?

When I play my local Genting or Grosvenor tourneys I final table 3 in 10. Now even my rudimentary maths can calculate equations into percentages 3/10 = 30%.

As usual you troll my posts trying to stick the boot in but as your foots usually found in your mouth you fail miserably.


Yours in poker

Mark

hhyftrftdr

TheEdge949 said:

hhyftrftdr said:

TheEdge949 said:

Remember we are talking live tourney poker guys, not button clicking a £5 bh.

I fully accept that online a good reg who beats the level they play at will have an automatic style of play for calling / raising and folding etc which means that the 10 secs required is fine and you can play almost on autopilot. Online I struggle to final table 50 /60 runner comps because of the short time to act. Live however I would (with my game where it is at the moment ) back myself to final table 30% of the time with similar fields

The original Idea to have a set amount of time in live play would actually speed up the game eradicate the needless tanking (end of day at the Goliath or GPT or GPS etc) that blights the live game and make it more appealing to the hyperturbo action junkies of the online poker world. Although watching these guys play a 3 day 40 minute level comp like a sng always makes me chuckle inwardly.

However, I still maintain that if you take players of comparable abilities and put them in a live tournament giving 50% a very short space of time to act each hand and the others a longer period of time the money would be made up of largely those with the greater time to act.

Hmmm, a SPT event maybe lol.

Yours in poker

Mark

Yours in optimism?

When I play my local Genting or Grosvenor tourneys I final table 3 in 10. Now even my rudimentary maths can calculate equations into percentages 3/10 = 30%.

As usual you troll my posts trying to stick the boot in but as your foots usually found in your mouth you fail miserably.


Yours in poker

Mark

What's the sample size?

EvilPingu

hhyftrftdr said:

Yours in optimism?

Isn't unreasonable live with joke field sizes in most weeknight comps, and almost everyone who is competent finding something better to do with their time by avoiding the crazy rake in a £20+£7 hyper turbo freezeout with like £350 up top.

Factor in the people that aren't going to have multiple bullets or won't take the add on where applicable (most midweek stuff is addon/re-entry just so they can hit their 1.5k guarantee or w/e) and I can defo see 3/10 FTs.

For anyone decent there's probs more value in sitting at 1/1 cash in any case.

----

Re: Original discussion - Don't think it's a huge difference. Yeah, there's a couple of spots where it'd be nice to have more time online to think things through where I might make a different decision live, but I think 99%+ of the decisions I make would be the same in any case.

hhyftrftdr

EvilPingu said:

hhyftrftdr said:

Yours in optimism?

Isn't unreasonable live with joke field sizes in most weeknight comps, and almost everyone who is competent finding something better to do with their time by avoiding the crazy rake in a £20+£7 hyper turbo freezeout with like £350 up top.

Factor in the people that aren't going to have multiple bullets or won't take the add on where applicable (most midweek stuff is addon/re-entry just so they can hit their 1.5k guarantee or w/e) and I can defo see 3/10 FTs.

For anyone decent there's probs more value in sitting at 1/1 cash in any case.

----

Re: Original discussion - Don't think it's a huge difference. Yeah, there's a couple of spots where it'd be nice to have more time online to think things through where I might make a different decision live, but I think 99%+ of the decisions I make would be the same in any case.

You still need a decent sample size to say confidently that you make the FT 30% of the time.

I'm not saying its not possible, mainly for the reasons you list, but it's a claim that would need a solid sample size to back it up and make it meaningful.

TheEdge949

Lets see Ive played live for about 12 years playing 2 or 3 comps a week so take the average 2.5 multiply it by 45 coz theres 7 weeks a year I don't play then multiply that by 12 years and that's your sample size of local comps. That doesn't include anything like Goliaths GPT, GPS, SPT, etc but I don't claim a final table % for them coz I haven't final tabled one of those. Yet.

Agree that the numbers and standard aren't good which is why final tabling isn't that hard. However its always regs at the final and that's why I need to improve my game and understanding of why players do what they do when they do.

As for the cash that's the same 12 / 15 cash players just passing the money round and whenever a new face sits its like watching a feeding frenzy on Animal Planet. I can occassionaly hold my own and turn a profit but I'm not at all comfortable sitting in and if someone does go on a heater they all change and play "lets keep the money between ourselves". Sorry I mean Dealers Choice.

Yours in poker

Mark

hhyftrftdr

So you've played 2 or 3 comps a week, for 45 weeks a year, for the past 12 years.

Strange then that someone with so much experience and so many final tables would be unsure how to play QQ 4handed.

Edit....forgot to say congrats. By those figures that's 405 FTs. Very impressive.

TheEdge949

I never said I was unsure how to play it. I stated that I was happy with my play and would probably do the same thing again. What I was asking was if there was any reason not to play it the way I did.

Your calculations for my FTs seems about right but its the need to improve from here that's the crux of my constant enquiries. You see I should be cashing more than I do, these comps typically have between 20 and 40 runners and after the rebuy and add on usually generate between £850 and £1200 prize pool.

Making the final isn't rocket science, like I've already said ABC poker usually gets you there however of those final tables I fail to cash 2 in 3 with the real stupid thing being that when I do cash its usually either the win or second. Now it doesn't take a maths genius to figure that if I improve my cash ratio to 1 in 2 that's a massive boost to my bottom line and that's what Im trying to improve.

Yours in poker

hhyftrftdr

TheEdge949 said:

I never said I was unsure how to play it. I stated that I was happy with my play and would probably do the same thing again. What I was asking was if there was any reason not to play it the way I did.

Your calculations for my FTs seems about right but its the need to improve from here that's the crux of my constant enquiries. You see I should be cashing more than I do, these comps typically have between 20 and 40 runners and after the rebuy and add on usually generate between £850 and £1200 prize pool.

Making the final isn't rocket science, like I've already said ABC poker usually gets you there however of those final tables I fail to cash 2 in 3 with the real stupid thing being that when I do cash its usually either the win or second. Now it doesn't take a maths genius to figure that if I improve my cash ratio to 1 in 2 that's a massive boost to my bottom line and that's what Im trying to improve.

Yours in poker

I don't understand....there is no alternative way to play it.

You are in the blinds, yet to act and facing an all in that covers you. So your options are call all in or fold. This wasn't a multi street hand with various decisions and ways to play it. It's a very simple call all in or fold, and from that there is absolutely no decision whatsoever when you have QQ playing 4 handed.

As I said in that thread, you don't lose on the river and that hand doesn't get posted.

Here's to the next 405 FTs. Good luck.

F_Ivanovic

TheEdge949 said:

with the real stupid thing being that when I do cash its usually either the win or second.

Yours in poker

You do realise that coming first or 2nd when you cash is exactly what you want to be doing? You make way more ev in general doing that then getting several more min-cashes.