Texas Hold'em and Omaha/Omaha8 Poker Room - NL, Limit, Potlimit games

[tomcollins]

200/400 refers to the bet size, not the blinds, in limit poker.
NL poker does not have fixed bet sizes, so it refers to the blinds.

Oh. Now it makes more sense. I will reconfigure tables once room will be empty since I need to restart server to changes take effect.

BTW, if you want poker lessons, come to my home game, I will "teach" you.

[1714233619]

1714233619

[1714233619]

1714233619

[1714233619]

1714233619

[1714233619]

1714233619

[tanerlorn]

Bot fest infected? It is a known fact that other sites such as bodog, ub/ap, had well known botting problems that still exist, whereas stars/ftp at least had good support and eliminated bots when they first showed up on the sites, as well as having built in security now like captcha, not to mention a huge database of real player hand histories, to compare with suspected bot users.

The reason all cards must be shown at showdown is not due to when two colluders are HU in a pot, can't believe I have to explain this to you.

Its when a pot is multiway and someone is squeezed in between, and then river goes like one colluder bets the other colluder calls, and the person squeezed in between folds.....and then the callers hand is just mucked. Huge edges can be gained by making someone make incorrect folds in big bet games, such as no limit holdem. Implementing this rule we are discussing...This would be a very good situation and there is LITERALLY NO DOWNSIDE....more information is exchanged but like I said 5% of hands go to showdown anyways and the information is exchanged uniformly, it doesnt benefit anyone specifically, which is FAIR GAME.

I have tried to explain rationally why these are the rules basically everywhere, and you talk about sites that have a .0001% market share. How about you name some of the sites that have this supposed rule? I doubt you even can because they don't exist anymore. Stars/FTP had 90% of US market share for a reason, it was a pure free market, and they had the best game integrity, and customer service. Agreed, it was pretty terrible but it was the best in the industry, and as far as anyone can tell they both ran a fair game.

LITERALLY NO DOWNSIDE - except the entire table seeing what you had.

What is the upside?  The case that two colluders both call on the river?  Why wouldn't one colluder raise the other or just fold?

One I know off the top of my head is TruePoker.  You *can* see showdown hands, but you have to go through a bunch of menus and ask to have it emailed, and it takes 15-20 minutes to show up.

But hey, I know it would hurt you a lot if you are used to playing with HUDs and other "cheating" programs.  Stars/FTP had 90% of the market because they had huge advertising, had solid software, and catered to 20-tablers.  The more auto-pilot HUD-bots they had, the more rake they made as everyone passed money around.

Sigh, dude I just explained the upside. Its amazing, really it is. Here we go one more time.

Colluder 1 makes a large bet on the river with middle pair. Colluder 2 is next to act, he calls the large bet with 7 high, something he would never do if playing legitimately. Legitimate Player 1 is next to act, he was planning to call Colluder 1's bet with top pair, but after seeing Colluder 2 call, he folds his hand.

Do you really not see how its different if "one of the colluders just folds on the end"?

Do you really not see that there could be other situations like this, where showdown cards must be shown to maintain game integrity?

Hippich, if you currently don't have the skills to code this, I suggest you make it your top priority to learn them. As much as you want to call this a "play money" site, the fact is bitcoins are easily exchangable for dollars and there are people already playing for them here. .50/1.00 btc is essentially high stakes since its basically 2/4 usd now. It's easy to say "if you feel something is fishy, you don't have to play," but the fact is when it comes to gambling people don't always think rationally, and can't help themselves and will lose and continue to play in a game where they can tell something is "off" but aren't exactly sure what or are trying to get lucky and win some of their money back.

Eof, thank you for backing me up on this, I have also payed tens of thousands of dollars in rake and was getting frustrated nobody here would agree with me. I guess if you're a losing player it doesn't matter to you much, you're gonna lose anyways, what does it matter who its to? Its the winning players who are much more affected by this as colluders take money that could be won by legitimate players.

Tom, you're simply very, very wrong. Colluding is not much more valuable in limit poker, its in no limit, where you can force people to make huge mistakes, such as 50bb losing mistakes. Where can you force someone out of a 50bb pot in limit? Its not possible. You still have yet to name one poker room that doesn't show all hands that went to showdown. True Poker still does, as you admit yourself. I would be fine with it taking 15 minutes and an email to get the information on betcoin, as long as the information IS available. Furthermore, your assumption that I am some 20-tabling HUD user, cashgamer, looking to hustle this site could not POSSIBLY be more wrong. I am a mtter, I never used a HUD and you show a complete lack of understanding of that software, the value does not reside in seeing people's mucked hands, the value is in large amounts of data on peoples folding frequencies and aggression levels on each street. Whether or not you can see people's mucked cards literally doesn't make a bit of difference in the effectiveness of a HUD.

[tomcollins]

Bot fest infected? It is a known fact that other sites such as bodog, ub/ap, had well known botting problems that still exist, whereas stars/ftp at least had good support and eliminated bots when they first showed up on the sites, as well as having built in security now like captcha, not to mention a huge database of real player hand histories, to compare with suspected bot users.

The reason all cards must be shown at showdown is not due to when two colluders are HU in a pot, can't believe I have to explain this to you.

Its when a pot is multiway and someone is squeezed in between, and then river goes like one colluder bets the other colluder calls, and the person squeezed in between folds.....and then the callers hand is just mucked. Huge edges can be gained by making someone make incorrect folds in big bet games, such as no limit holdem. Implementing this rule we are discussing...This would be a very good situation and there is LITERALLY NO DOWNSIDE....more information is exchanged but like I said 5% of hands go to showdown anyways and the information is exchanged uniformly, it doesnt benefit anyone specifically, which is FAIR GAME.

I have tried to explain rationally why these are the rules basically everywhere, and you talk about sites that have a .0001% market share. How about you name some of the sites that have this supposed rule? I doubt you even can because they don't exist anymore. Stars/FTP had 90% of US market share for a reason, it was a pure free market, and they had the best game integrity, and customer service. Agreed, it was pretty terrible but it was the best in the industry, and as far as anyone can tell they both ran a fair game.

LITERALLY NO DOWNSIDE - except the entire table seeing what you had.

What is the upside?  The case that two colluders both call on the river?  Why wouldn't one colluder raise the other or just fold?

One I know off the top of my head is TruePoker.  You *can* see showdown hands, but you have to go through a bunch of menus and ask to have it emailed, and it takes 15-20 minutes to show up.

But hey, I know it would hurt you a lot if you are used to playing with HUDs and other "cheating" programs.  Stars/FTP had 90% of the market because they had huge advertising, had solid software, and catered to 20-tablers.  The more auto-pilot HUD-bots they had, the more rake they made as everyone passed money around.
[/quote]

Sigh, dude I just explained the upside. Its amazing, really it is. Here we go one more time.

Colluder 1 makes a large bet on the river with middle pair. Colluder 2 is next to act, he calls the large bet with 7 high, something he would never do if playing legitimately. Legitimate Player 1 is next to act, he was planning to call Colluder 1's bet with top pair, but after seeing Colluder 2 call, he folds his hand.

[/quote]

So there is one tiny case he does this.  Instead, 2nd guy could raise the river.  When the "victim" calls, he gets twice as much.  Oh noes, how awful.  The "call a bet to make a guy scared" technique.

Do you really not see how its different if "one of the colluders just folds on the end"?

Do you really not see that there could be other situations like this, where showdown cards must be shown to maintain game integrity?

Since it's so easy, show them to me.  I've played 8 years on a site that never did this, and never once did it "help maintain game integrity".

Hippich, if you currently don't have the skills to code this, I suggest you make it your top priority to learn them. As much as you want to call this a "play money" site, the fact is bitcoins are easily exchangable for dollars and there are people already playing for them here. .50/1.00 btc is essentially high stakes since its basically 2/4 usd now. It's easy to say "if you feel something is fishy, you don't have to play," but the fact is when it comes to gambling people don't always think rationally, and can't help themselves and will lose and continue to play in a game where they can tell something is "off" but aren't exactly sure what or are trying to get lucky and win some of their money back.

TOP PRIORITY I SAY!

Meanwhile, if you actually are competent at colluding, it does nothing.  He has no resources to put into people actually working together, and no time to ban people who might be.

Eof, thank you for backing me up on this, I have also payed tens of thousands of dollars in rake and was getting frustrated nobody here would agree with me. I guess if you're a losing player it doesn't matter to you much, you're gonna lose anyways, what does it matter who its to? Its the winning players who are much more affected by this as colluders take money that could be won by legitimate players.

Yes, losing players are never affected, since all losses are equal.  Another idiotic statement by you.  Winning players are actually be affected, since they don't run out of money.

Tom, you're simply very, very wrong. Colluding is not much more valuable in limit poker, its in no limit, where you can force people to make huge mistakes, such as 50bb losing mistakes. Where can you force someone out of a 50bb pot in limit? Its not possible. You still have yet to name one poker room that doesn't show all hands that went to showdown. True Poker still does, as you admit yourself. I would be fine with it taking 15 minutes and an email to get the information on betcoin, as long as the information IS available. Furthermore, your assumption that I am some 20-tabling HUD user, cashgamer, looking to hustle this site could not POSSIBLY be more wrong. I am a mtter, I never used a HUD and you show a complete lack of understanding of that software, the value does not reside in seeing people's mucked hands, the value is in large amounts of data on peoples folding frequencies and aggression levels on each street. Whether or not you can see people's mucked cards literally doesn't make a bit of difference in the effectiveness of a HUD.

How can you *force* someone to make a 50BB mistake,  by scaring them by calling?  Have you ever played limit poker?  Limit poker is a game of very small edges.  Every time you double an edge, you make a HUGE difference.  In NL poker, skill level makes up a much larger portion, and you can control your bet size.  If I cannot see-saw an opponent (see-sawing is extremely rare to begin with), I don't lose as much as I do in limit poker.  Sure I can scare them by calling, as you insist is a serious problem.  I'm not saying you are looking to hustle the site, but you are looking to instill the same attitude that has made online poker unplayable for the casual user.  "just do whatever ftp and ps did".  I couldn't disagree more from a user's perspective.  Those sites catered to the biggest rake generators, tried to make a game where people paid as much rake as possible while losing as little/winning as little as possible, so that they were the big winners.  This includes catering and allowing HUDs, sites that analyzed play, making it easy to data mine tables you weren't at, allowing way too many tables, and rewarding players who played ridiculous amounts of hands only possible from severe multitabling with huge incentives.  For a grinder, it was perfect.  For a casual player, it's one of the most boring games to play.

I already named one.  You cannot easily get the result of the hand.  You have to jump through a million hoops, then check your email 20 minutes later.  This is FAR different than your require.  Never once did I check due to collusion, but to see what someone had.  If someone was smart enough to collude, and this was actually going to detect them, they just collude better.  Maybe request it if you were in the hand on the river.  Plus, online poker allows for the management to see EVERY hand at any point in time.  If you suspect collusion, notify the operator.  They can check suspicious behavior of 100s of hands easily, and if some guy keeps calling with 7 high, you can catch him very easily looking at hand histories.  My guess is hippich has none of this infrastructure in place yet, so it would be difficult for him.

BTW- I do agree that all showdowns should be shown in a tournament where chip dumping would actually affect the game (unlike in cash game play).

But calling this top priority is laughable.  This site is still in the stone age (no offense hippich, I love what you are doing, it's just super primitive still- which you would expect since this is a spare time type project).  It freezes up, it's slow, there are only one table of any limit, no players, etc...  Hell, it was getting robbed not long ago.  Even if this was important, there are a ton of things even more important to worry about.

[tomcollins]

BTW, if you really are concerned about collusion, just play heads up.

But the blinds being backwards are TOP PRIORITY in my opinion. It changes the game tremendously.

[tanerlorn]

Plus, online poker allows for the management to see EVERY hand at any point in time.  If you suspect collusion, notify the operator.  They can check suspicious behavior of 100s of hands easily, and if some guy keeps calling with 7 high, you can catch him very easily looking at hand histories.  My guess is hippich has none of this infrastructure in place yet, so it would be difficult for him.

BTW- I do agree that all showdowns should be shown in a tournament where chip dumping would actually affect the game (unlike in cash game play).

But calling this top priority is laughable.  This site is still in the stone age (no offense hippich, I love what you are doing, it's just super primitive still- which you would expect since this is a spare time type project).  It freezes up, it's slow, there are only one table of any limit, no players, etc...  Hell, it was getting robbed not long ago.  Even if this was important, there are a ton of things even more important to worry about.

This is the whole point. The rule needs to be put in so that the players can police themselves, for the time being, till the project dies or Hippich expands it to include reviewing hand histories. But guess what? The more sure you are, the better, if "if you suspect collusion" well you're gonna be a lot more sure if you're able to see what hands people are going to showdown with. Furthermore, every hand isnt gonna be like the one I described, there is a lot more subtle ways to collude...I used a very obvious way as an example.

I for one cannot simply believe you are arguing that colluding is more profitable in limit games. How can that be possible? You say in one breath that limit games are games of very small edges. THIS PROVES MY POINT. Edges can be very big in no limit games and ffs you can gain these big edges by colluding. I just explained how you can force someone to make a 50bb mistake, if someone has a plan to fold river if someone else calls but call river if everyone else folds. Its really not all that "rare" a situation, and is just one of a million ways that colluders could gain an edge if cards aren't shown.

I understand Hippich has no resources to put into people working together right now and no time to ban people. That is why I suggested in an earlier post that he start charging rake and even went so far as to suggest a structure for it. Once he is making a small profit from it, he can decide if he wants to expand from there.

You clearly have some deep hatred for full tilt and stars, and its easy to guess why. I just cannot believe that your trying to claim that the sites were full of 20 tabling HUD users. Sure, there were a few there, but anytime you have a huge pool of fish, you're gonna attract the sharks. Its part of the game and there were 300k users on stars on an average Sunday. I guess none of them were "casual users" eh? Yeah all 20 tabling pros I'm sure. Haha, the stars tourneys were so filled with casual players it blows my mind that you would say stuff like this. Sunday million got an average of what, 9000 players all putting up $215.....how many of them were professional mtt players? I can give you an estimate since I have some knowledge...around 500.....thats 8500 "casual users" not affected at all by the "rampant HUD use" or "bot like multitablers". and thats just their flagship tourney....11 dollar tourneys would see 30,000 players regularly. All of these players were unaffected by and played despite the fact that their hole card information was available at showdown! Oh noes!

Also blinds being "backwards" changes nothing. It doesn't give advantage to any one player, all players must adjust to it accordingly.

[hippich]

Another user submitted patch for reversed blinds, but, as others says, current code base I leverage is a mess. So I might start building the whole thing from the ground. (Hell, if I will not be able to monetize betco.in, I can sell engine itself for a bunch of bucks =)).

As for enforced showdown.. I see a lot of opinions on this. I think it will make more sense to implement it by table instead of at the whole room level. That's been said, current software will not support this for sure in any way.

[tomcollins]

This is the whole point. The rule needs to be put in so that the players can police themselves, for the time being, till the project dies or Hippich expands it to include reviewing hand histories. But guess what? The more sure you are, the better, if "if you suspect collusion" well you're gonna be a lot more sure if you're able to see what hands people are going to showdown with. Furthermore, every hand isnt gonna be like the one I described, there is a lot more subtle ways to collude...I used a very obvious way as an example.

You keep saying "there are a lot of ways", but show me how having a forced showdown actually helps catch the problem?  Why not show every hand at showdown, whether you folded or not?  Then you couldn't get away with ANY funny business!

I for one cannot simply believe you are arguing that colluding is more profitable in limit games. How can that be possible? You say in one breath that limit games are games of very small edges. THIS PROVES MY POINT. Edges can be very big in no limit games and ffs you can gain these big edges by colluding. I just explained how you can force someone to make a 50bb mistake, if someone has a plan to fold river if someone else calls but call river if everyone else folds. Its really not all that "rare" a situation, and is just one of a million ways that colluders could gain an edge if cards aren't shown.

You clearly have little limit experience.  The edge you gain is by the power you have that your opponents do not have.

A million ways, yet you cannot name any more of them.  And of all the ways you can collude, this solves one tiny subset of them (and not that well, since colluders will adjust).  In the "call to scare" case, why not raise to REALLY scare?  And if you suspect it, you call and make twice as much money on the last bet.

I understand Hippich has no resources to put into people working together right now and no time to ban people. That is why I suggested in an earlier post that he start charging rake and even went so far as to suggest a structure for it. Once he is making a small profit from it, he can decide if he wants to expand from there.

You clearly have some deep hatred for full tilt and stars, and its easy to guess why. I just cannot believe that your trying to claim that the sites were full of 20 tabling HUD users. Sure, there were a few there, but anytime you have a huge pool of fish, you're gonna attract the sharks. Its part of the game and there were 300k users on stars on an average Sunday. I guess none of them were "casual users" eh? Yeah all 20 tabling pros I'm sure. Haha, the stars tourneys were so filled with casual players it blows my mind that you would say stuff like this. Sunday million got an average of what, 9000 players all putting up $215.....how many of them were professional mtt players? I can give you an estimate since I have some knowledge...around 500.....thats 8500 "casual users" not affected at all by the "rampant HUD use" or "bot like multitablers". and thats just their flagship tourney....11 dollar tourneys would see 30,000 players regularly. All of these players were unaffected by and played despite the fact that their hole card information was available at showdown! Oh noes!

Also blinds being "backwards" changes nothing. It doesn't give advantage to any one player, all players must adjust to it accordingly.

It changes NOTHING?  Are you kidding?  The player with the button has the advantage in the hand.  I'm not sure if this is news to you based on your complete ignorance of everything else poker related.  By having him act second, the small blind now folds FAR more often in correct play.  This makes a much more boring game.

What do tournaments have to do with cash games?  Why is that an argument?  Tournaments were the one thing that the multi-tablers could not game (unless they started entering multiple entries).  I am only talking about cash games.  Sunday Tournament is small potatoes for their revenue.  It was simply a promotion to get people to play other games.  And yes, the tournament grew so large, you pretty much had to give up an entire day to be able to play it.

I'm primarily talking about cash games (which hippich only supports).  If you have 800 casual users and 200 "for profit" players, you end up with a pretty nice balance at the tables and a fairly good game.  If the casual players play 1 table, and the 200 "for profit" players play 4 tables each on average, that means we move to a 50% solid player ratio rather than 20%.  If they 8-table, it means you have 75% solid player ratio.  It crushes games.  I've been around a long time, probably playing since you were in diapers.  I've seen the evolution of the game go from where you couldn't even multi-table, to 4-table max, to the expansion.  You end up with an army of nit-bots (who may not be huge in numbers, but play 20 tables) that make the game a rake-fest.  It's absolutely horrible.

But if you want to start talking about tournaments when I'm talking exclusively about cash games, go for it.  In the smaller tournaments, you still see some of the same problems (especially Sit-N-Gos, where serious players will play tons at a time, and casual players won't, making the ratio worse).  But comparing it to a 1-time special event like the Sunday tourney is of course silly.  I will give Stars and Full Tilt credit, they did a great job making that tournament huge.  Unfortunately it did become so big that it became a huge time drain to play for a lot of people (myself included).

If collusion really is a problem, maybe the site should just be heads up games.  Or if you really want, just play people heads up.  Collusion could very well be a serious problem.  But if you put in simplistic and ineffective measures to stop it, colluders will just avoid that small part of detection and move on.

How do you feel about my suggestion of showing EVERYONE's hand after it is over?  That way no one can collude no matter what without being obvious.

[tanerlorn]

There are a lot of ways. I'm not gonna sit here and type of examples here for you so people can read them and start thinking of ideas. Use your brain. Heres one last one:

On the turn its 3 ways. Legit player checks, villian 1 bets large, villian 2 raises large....legit player decides to call this time, so hes winning money....river goes check, check, check....legit player shows the best hand and takes the pot....BUT DOESNT GET TO SEE WHAT THE OTHER TWO PLAYERS HAD. IF YOU CAN GET THIS THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULL, THAT IS SOME NECCESSARY INFORMATION TO FIND OUT IF THEY WERE COLLUDING.

As for showing every hand at every showdown? I'd be fine with that.

Little limit experience hahahahaha thanks for making me laugh! I've played more limit hands than you in my lifetime old man, and that is a god damn guarantee. Unless you've played over 2 million which I sincerely doubt. Stop saying that this rule would solve "one tiny subset" of colluding, this rule would allow players to police them GOD DAMNED SELVES and solve virtually the entire problem of colluding

Enough moving the goalposts with regards to tournaments. First of all, I was just using that as an example to show that people will play regardless. I said right there in writing that 9.000 players played it, while 300.000 users were on the site. I am acknowledging that cashgames are the bigger game, and cashgames are all that is available on this site anyways.

You really have a hatred for multitablers. Do you realize its only possible to 2 table on this site currently? Anyways, the stars games you are describing, do you not see how its not all advantage to the 20 tablers? They have to put up 20 times the money, first of all, and second of all they have to think about a lot more stuff whereas someone focusing on 1 table can be concentrating a lot more on decisions on that table.

Anyways, its all smoke and mirrors anyways, just because theres some people playing 20 tables, you act like online cash was so tough. It wasn't, get over it, there were still plenty of fish till it got shutdown.

Anyways, stop putting words in my mouth. I've continuously said that collusion isn't a problem, it just could arise in the future, especially since Hippich is currently accepting deposits and everything is motherfucking anonymous. This doesn't concern you in the least though eh?

Having the site be heads up games only would be a terrible idea. Almost no people like heads up and the variance is much higher, among other reasons. The bad players also go broke more quickly heads up which is bad for the site and bad for everyone except the person they're playing.

And again, I would be fine with everyone's cards being shown.

[hippich]

I've updated code with submitted HU game patch. Please try it and let me know if it works correctly.

Also, I've added bunch of HU tables. Not sure if we need that much, so comments are welcome.

[tomcollins]

There are a lot of ways. I'm not gonna sit here and type of examples here for you so people can read them and start thinking of ideas. Use your brain. Heres one last one:

On the turn its 3 ways. Legit player checks, villian 1 bets large, villian 2 raises large....legit player decides to call this time, so hes winning money....river goes check, check, check....legit player shows the best hand and takes the pot....BUT DOESNT GET TO SEE WHAT THE OTHER TWO PLAYERS HAD. IF YOU CAN GET THIS THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULL, THAT IS SOME NECCESSARY INFORMATION TO FIND OUT IF THEY WERE COLLUDING.

As for showing every hand at every showdown? I'd be fine with that.

Little limit experience hahahahaha thanks for making me laugh! I've played more limit hands than you in my lifetime old man, and that is a god damn guarantee. Unless you've played over 2 million which I sincerely doubt. Stop saying that this rule would solve "one tiny subset" of colluding, this rule would allow players to police them GOD DAMNED SELVES and solve virtually the entire problem of colluding

Well, for someone who's supposedly very experienced, it's amazing you were able to profit without understanding the game.

Why do you need someone to collude in your example?  In Big Bet, first guy can just bet big if he wants, he doesn't need his buddy to see-saw.  Sure, a raise might be scarier.  But if you suspect collusion, you can absolutely destroy the team.  If you do in limit, you can't do crap.  You pay double or more when a villain has a hand, you get paid only the smallest amount when they don't.

Enough moving the goalposts with regards to tournaments. First of all, I was just using that as an example to show that people will play regardless. I said right there in writing that 9.000 players played it, while 300.000 users were on the site. I am acknowledging that cashgames are the bigger game, and cashgames are all that is available on this site anyways.

You are the one who brought up tournaments, NOT ME.

You really have a hatred for multitablers. Do you realize its only possible to 2 table on this site currently? Anyways, the stars games you are describing, do you not see how its not all advantage to the 20 tablers? They have to put up 20 times the money, first of all, and second of all they have to think about a lot more stuff whereas someone focusing on 1 table can be concentrating a lot more on decisions on that table.

And this is a good thing.  Although sitting out at a lot of tables trying to get games going is probably a good thing since there aren't many players.

Sure, a 20-tabler isn't able to think as much.  Which is why they don't, they just play super nitty, at worst lose money to rake, and just follow whatever their HUD tells them to do.  A 1-tabler gets bored folding, plays hands they shouldn't, and keeps games interesting.  Rake will always win in a table of nits.

Anyways, its all smoke and mirrors anyways, just because theres some people playing 20 tables, you act like online cash was so tough. It wasn't, get over it, there were still plenty of fish till it got shutdown.

20-tablers have more risk?  Another hilariously wrong argument.  There is no more money on the line, it just means they get 20-times as many hands in. This reduces variance.  Poker moved from a game where you think to a game where you look at your HUD, then make a decision and move on to the next table.  It favors the Starcraft internet nerds more than poker players.  But I can see why you favor that style.

The games changed tremendously in the last 8 years, and multi-tabling HUD players are the reason why.  There are armies of solid low limit players.  I was shocked at how low stakes some of the serious players play (because they just grind out 20 tables).  Sure, they make decent money because they are playing 20 tables and grind a ton.  It wasn't always like that.  It's fantastic for the sites.  They make 20x as much rake.  Games are nitfests, and unless you are willing to just play a super nit style, wait until you have the nuts, then hope you are with the 1 fish, or constantly change tables until you find the fish and bumhunt.

But right now, the .5/1 games are harder than 5/10 NL was 5 years ago.  It's not even close. 

But you being a winning player without having a clue about anything shows you are probably right that it still isn't that hard to win.

Anyways, stop putting words in my mouth. I've continuously said that collusion isn't a problem, it just could arise in the future, especially since Hippich is currently accepting deposits and everything is motherfucking anonymous. This doesn't concern you in the least though eh?

Having the site be heads up games only would be a terrible idea. Almost no people like heads up and the variance is much higher, among other reasons. The bad players also go broke more quickly heads up which is bad for the site and bad for everyone except the person they're playing.

And again, I would be fine with everyone's cards being shown.

I'm actually a bit shocked you are fine with showing down hands at the end, but at least it's a position that isn't retarded.  It actually would help catch collusion other than your half-brained ideas that would catch only the most moronic of colluders (who probably would be losing money and exploited for their stupid collusion).  For a site that cannot actively monitor colluders, it actually is probably the best idea.  But there's no recourse now anyway, other than just not playing when those players are in.

Betco.in in it's current form is a great casual diversion but not anything I'd want to play for serious stakes.  And that actually is a good thing, I've actually enjoyed the social experience of it much more than Stars or FTP, where you might as well have been playing against robots.

[luv2drnkbr]

How do you feel about my suggestion of showing EVERYONE's hand after it is over?  That way no one can collude no matter what without being obvious.

OMG that would be sick.  I wonder how I'd change my game to balance my preflop selection if I knew everybody would get to see them.  Theoretically, if they watch me for billions of hands, then can reasonably deduce it, but having them be able to deduce it within a few hundred hands is something else entirely.  Fuck, I'd just have to play GTO I guess.  Gross.

[anisoptera]

Heads-up is definitely fixed, I watched a few people playing HU and everything looks good.

More changes coming soon once we get rake implemented.

[hippich]

BTW, anisoptera started to work on back-end. And HU blinds were fixed by her!

[marcus_of_augustus]

Good work hippich and anisoptera, bitcoin poker has good potential imo ... limited downside due to it being legal in many countries.

It is great example of how bitcoin community can make s/ware (web) projects happen very quickly because there is huge surplus of competent coding potential from all over the globe, just sitting out there watching bitcoin marketplace and etc for work to come up paying in BTC. Some good entrepreneurs/managers to organise the work and run businesses will do well.

Any future plans on implementing some BlackJack tables? .... I might have a dabble at that

[hippich]

moa, this is completely different beast. I would like to implement it all, but I do not have enough time for poker... But I bet if you post it in marketplace section, someone will come with it.

[marcus_of_augustus]

But I bet if you post it in marketplace section, someone will come with it.

I won't bet against that one ... I will post it though, thanks again.

[hippich]

anisoptera fixed rake code. so room take rake now.

We do not charge rake if the hand ends on the first betting round - before the flop.

Heads-Up: we collect 1% rake with x5 BB cap and 0.5 BTC absolute cap.

Round: we collect 1% rake with x10 BB cap and 2 BTC absolute cap.

This should help us to develop it faster since we have incentive now =)

[ColdHardMetal]

Sounds fair enough to me.

[tomcollins]

anisoptera fixed rake code. so room take rake now.

We do not charge rake if the hand ends on the first betting round - before the flop.

Heads-Up: we collect 1% rake with x5 BB cap and 0.5 BTC absolute cap.

Round: we collect 1% rake with x10 BB cap and 2 BTC absolute cap.

This should help us to develop it faster since we have incentive now =)

Good luck.

[Cusipzzz]

No idea why anyone would play non-heads up at any stakes other than micros. Collusion is way too easy. Even showing all cards at showdown is not enough. You need skilled people reviewing full hand histories, tracking user IDs, IP addresses, etc. This stuff isn't easy and is why large poker sites have huge Security departments.

But hey, it's a start, keep at it.