TomM\'s suggestion of sitting out on 6-max tables
 

I wanted to start a serious discussion about this simple but elegant solution:

[ QUOTE ]
It seems like the only solution is for all 2ers to use their worthless non-rakeback original Party accounts to sit out on 4 tables at once while multi-tabling on Empire and Euro as normal. If everyone did it I'm sure we could turn Party into 5-max.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm going to start doing this. I'm not going to go out of my way, but just when I have a chance I will open up a couple of tables and sit out. If we all did this we could increase the number of 5-max tables. This wont overcome the rake increase, but it will ameliorate the effects.

It does rely on everyone helping each other. However, every player benifits - both winning and losing players. It will do no harm to educate other players about this problem when sitting at the table. Suprisingly, many bad players are actually intelligent and will understand the problem when it is explained to them.

Alternatively, we could set up a co-ordinated "5-max" service. This could perhaps use a software or co-ordinated solution. The net gain for all players would be worthwhile.

Anyway, I just wanted to start a serious discussion about the idea and see if we could go anywhere with it. If we achieved something, it could be worth perhaps 0.1bb/100 to ALL players -- something not to be scoffed at.

Re: TomM\'s suggestion of sitting out on 6-max tables
 

So what was the rake increase? Up to $3 in 6 player game? That's standard in every other site...

Re: TomM\'s suggestion of sitting out on 6-max tables
 

[ QUOTE ]
So what was the rake increase? Up to $3 in 6 player game? That's standard in every other site...

[/ QUOTE ]

There's a whole other thread on that [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] Yes it is in line with other sites. 5-max is a simple way to increas $, that's all...

Re: TomM\'s suggestion of sitting out on 6-max tables
 

I think it's a good idea, and I'd cooperate. I prefer 5max to 6max anyway.

Edit: And if we want to educate others, it'd be easier if we gave them an idea of how much up to $1/hand in rake adds up. How much would your average fish lose per hour from this increase? Keep in mind they see more showdowns than we do.

Re: TomM\'s suggestion of sitting out on 6-max tables
 

I'm in. Good idea. I bet guys like Krishanleong and Sthief who already have some serious datamining infrastructure could make a pretty significant dent if they felt like it.

Re: TomM\'s suggestion of sitting out on 6-max tables
 

Yeah, I was thinking the automated datamining type stuff could be adapted for something like this. I imagine Party might get pissed off though if it is to obvious or co-ordinated. They could ban the account of a serial "sit outer", or worse, just increase the rake for 5 and less players.

If we did manage to ever approach 100% coverage, then they might notice it do something about it. Although I would be suprised if they actually noticed....

Furthermore, I think that people will be willing to do something about it now, whilst still "enraged" by the changes, but over time people will just not be bothered. I am also guilty of this crime [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]. On further reflection, I just don't know if we can make enough long-term impact to make this worthwhile....

The other problem is that tables with somebody sitting out tend to break quicker, and when the fish leave the table, you lose the edge you gain from the reduced rake.

Re: TomM\'s suggestion of sitting out on 6-max tables
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm in. Good idea. I bet guys like Krishanleong and Sthief who already have some serious datamining infrastructure could make a pretty significant dent if they felt like it.

[/ QUOTE ]

They actually can't, because you need $$ to sit at the tables, and most of the datamining accounts are 'dummy' accounts that we don't keep any money on.

Rob

Re: TomM\'s suggestion of sitting out on 6-max tables
 

[ QUOTE ]
And if we want to educate others, it'd be easier if we gave them an idea of how much up to $1/hand in rake adds up.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is also educating them more about the fact that they are losing a ton of money to rake in the first place.
Telling people about how much money they are losing is practically like trying to encourage them that they shouldn't be playing in the first place.

I'm not saying this is a bad idea because I'm honestly not sure yet.
But the idea of telling the less knowledgeable opponents about how much rake they are already paying isn't necessarily a great move.

Re: TomM\'s suggestion of sitting out on 6-max tables
 

Does this rake increase affect the 15/30 6max tables? Sitting out on these tables because there are only 3 of them, will be something!

Re: TomM\'s suggestion of sitting out on 6-max tables
 

2 things

first, is it 100% positive that if you sit out at a 6max talbe, it will count it as 5 handed in terms of rake? (yes, I know, prolly a stupid question, but I dont know for 100% do you?)

and second, if people are seriously going to do this, someone needs to set up a website explaining what we are doing, and maybe providing a little math (dunno if that would be good or not) but at the very least explaining what it is we are doing, and why. That way when we get asked, we can just paste a URL, instead of typing the same [censored] over and over and over again