ACR Constantly Moving Tables

L

LotharMcDowner

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Total posts
229
Awards
1
Chips
1
Hey ACR perhaps you should look at your table creation and breaking algorithm. I'm constantly playing one or two hands and then moving to another table... sometimes no hands at the new table before I'm moved. Something in your algorithm is screwed up, because this would never happen IRL. Generally poker rooms break highest (numerically) tables first, and work their way down. Opening a new table usually requires 5-6 players moved from existing tables. The way you guys seem to do it, if a few people get busted from one table, you break it. If one player starts crushing chips, you move him or break the table. This is wrong... and it actually affects the game in unintended ways. Mostly by creating table with little chip variance... Bunch of big guys at same table, or bunch of little guys at same table. Not always, but too often for it to be truly random. To be clear chip stack should NEVER impact movement in any way, whether to move or not, what table to move to, etc.


Certainly during the registration rush you can start new tables with recently registered players fast enough to not necessitate moving players, and if there is a delay, so what, the players registered late in the first place, no advantage or disadvantage to them waiting 30 seconds for the table to fill with also new players. But as those tables are the most recently made, they would also be higher numerically, and thus quickest in the breaking order.

It's not that I have a huge problem with moving, or playing random opponents without any point of reference, as I generally play many low limit tables at once. It does concern me should I want to play a significant buy in tournament.

Just FYI the standard for most rooms is;
if moving one player, ALWAYS move the next BB (that way no matter what they do not lose potential positional advantage)
if breaking table, break last table to open first (though there would be probably be a modification of last 5 tables so you arent constantly breaking new tables during late reg).

Sorry so long, congrats if you read the whole thing :)
 
A

ACR Rep

AmericasCardroom Rep
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 22, 2012
Total posts
5,660
Awards
1
Chips
0
Hey ACR perhaps you should look at your table creation and breaking algorithm. I'm constantly playing one or two hands and then moving to another table... sometimes no hands at the new table before I'm moved. Something in your algorithm is screwed up, because this would never happen IRL. Generally poker rooms break highest (numerically) tables first, and work their way down. Opening a new table usually requires 5-6 players moved from existing tables. The way you guys seem to do it, if a few people get busted from one table, you break it. If one player starts crushing chips, you move him or break the table. This is wrong... and it actually affects the game in unintended ways. Mostly by creating table with little chip variance... Bunch of big guys at same table, or bunch of little guys at same table. Not always, but too often for it to be truly random. To be clear chip stack should NEVER impact movement in any way, whether to move or not, what table to move to, etc.


Certainly during the registration rush you can start new tables with recently registered players fast enough to not necessitate moving players, and if there is a delay, so what, the players registered late in the first place, no advantage or disadvantage to them waiting 30 seconds for the table to fill with also new players. But as those tables are the most recently made, they would also be higher numerically, and thus quickest in the breaking order.

It's not that I have a huge problem with moving, or playing random opponents without any point of reference, as I generally play many low limit tables at once. It does concern me should I want to play a significant buy in tournament.

Just FYI the standard for most rooms is;
if moving one player, ALWAYS move the next BB (that way no matter what they do not lose potential positional advantage)
if breaking table, break last table to open first (though there would be probably be a modification of last 5 tables so you arent constantly breaking new tables during late reg).

Sorry so long, congrats if you read the whole thing :)

Hi, I am the ACR Rep. Thanks for this thoughtful post, I just sent this ideas to the team in charge so they can analyze it and take it in consideration. In case you have any doubt or problem, just let me know so I can go ahead and take care of it.
 
playinggameswithu

playinggameswithu

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Total posts
2,250
Chips
0
yeah in KO ACR tournament I get switched after I win a big hand and then the opponet has like 1 BB left. I'v been switched 4 times in less than 1 minute many times.
 
Tbone461

Tbone461

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 3, 2018
Total posts
343
Chips
0
I agree, it’s hard enough to get a feel for your opponents online without switching tables seemingly way to often.
 
J

jadestem

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 4, 2019
Total posts
66
Chips
0
This has been my biggest complaint about ACR so far. I feel like the pop-up message needs to be changed to read "Please hold on, we are moving you to yet ANOTHER table where you will be required to sit out hands until the button passes."
 
B

benitwapasu

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 4, 2018
Total posts
646
Awards
1
Chips
24
I think it would help an awful lot if they did away with late registration.
 
P

praevus

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 25, 2018
Total posts
254
Chips
0
This happens a lot to me, I play in oher rooms and I move table much more times in ACR. That way is more difficult to read the other players.
 
ScooperNova

ScooperNova

Hair in a Biscuit
Loyaler
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Total posts
2,401
Awards
3
US
Chips
386
I recall posting a BB 4 out of 6 consecutive hands before.
 
sedlacekj

sedlacekj

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 6, 2019
Total posts
201
Chips
0
Maybe, but that aint going to happen.


Maybe they could run both types of tourneys. One with late reg, and the next without it. just an idea. Or even at less frequency, like 3 with late reg, and 1 without.
 
Top