All-Inner solution...????

DO CONSTANT & PERPETUAL "ALL-INNERS" BOTHER THE HELL OUT OF YOU..... ESPECIALY EARLY ON IN A TOURNAMENT. WHAT FOLLOWS IS AN INTERESTING CONCEPT THAT ONE FORUM ADMINISTRATOR IS TRYING TO USE TO GET RID OF THOSE ANNOYING "CONSTANT ALL-INNERS". WHAT DO YOU THINK OF IT? - QUINT


All-inners
"We are here to help improve you game. This site will do its best to remove all-inners. Repeated all-ins with bad hands will not be tolerated. If you wish to play that style in our freerolls you will be removed from this forum. I am not talking about trying to steal some blinds, being short stacked and trying to catch. You all have seen at the start of a tourney one player raise the blinds 20 times the big blind. The second player pushes all-in and the first calls turns AA and the all-in players shows 28 and catches a Str8 8 high. Next 5 hands he pushes all-in pre-flop and catches cards with rags."
"If you like that style of play this forum is not for you there are many other forums you can join which just want to make money off of you. I would rather help players improve their game. I don't need the money."
"If you notice a player with this style of play post the username in the All-inners section of the forum. After three posts by different members the player will be watched by a moderator of the forum. If the moderator determines the player is violating our forum policy the player will be removed."

Very interesting idea, I wonder how well it does? Is it difficult to implement and track? I think this should be posted every Sunday before our freeroll on the home page and tried out. We could edit it also to say (sit-outs) will be treated the same way.

Why ? Is it illegal or something. All-in every is a very valid stragegy employed by certain players. Let them at it, let the sitters sit, and let the decent players win.

tenbob said:

Why ? Is it illegal or something. All-in every is a very valid stragegy employed by certain players. Let them at it, let the sitters sit, and let the decent players win.

Click to expand...

If it only happened that way......but let's not start that topic again...

Well, we shouldn't ban players because of their playing style despite how bad it is. Usually, all-inners don't last long anyway. There are not doing anything illegal. If you don't agree with their playing style, you shouldn't ban them. Sure, this particular playing style is horrible. What's next? Ban players that play crap hands? Ban players who play too loose? I think there are bigger problems to deal with than all-inners.

I agree that banning is harsh ...I guess I was attributing this particular problem to the forum "fly by nighters" who jump from forum freeroll to forum freeroll and never contribute to any of them. We have ALL complained about this style of play but it is a "style" and there is nothing you could really do about it. I also attribute this "style" of play to 16 yr.old kids who really don't want to learn and don't really care about "forums" or what "forums" are trying to accomplish. It's hard to improve your game when you are to busy dodging bullets from Johnny the pre-pubecent dorkwad and I think "Forum" freerolls are different from "site" freerolls.

For a small forum that may be feasible, but with 10k members it would be absolutely impossible to enforce here.

What t1riel said too.

Here is the problem with it, even though it sounds nice to get rid of this style of play. IT IS CALLED NO LIMIT FOR A REASON. Go sit in a pot limit or limit game if you don't want to make hard decisions.

The whole point of having NL is that you can have to make very hard decisions at any given point of time when someone else decides to go all-in or vice versa.

I have given up on two things in poker, reason and anger (for them most part). If someone pays the entry fee or signs up for a freeroll, they have every right to play crap hands and bomb all day. Eventually they go away before the money.

Poker has no guarantee, AA can get cracked, runner runner flushes happen to the best of us. There were alot of hands I wish I had taken down after the flop and not let the next card be seen. All-in is the biggest weapon in NL and some forum just put restrictions on it. That is a game I don't want to play at.

I love those guys. I just hate it when someones else ends up getting the monster hand before me and takes them out 1st. How can you not like playing with someone that will go all in with a 5,9 offsuit? Sometimes he'll catch. More often he'll double you up. Bad play is good for me. Then my "not as bad play" can win.

tenbob said:

Why ? Is it illegal or something. All-in every is a very valid stragegy employed by certain players. Let them at it, let the sitters sit, and let the decent players win.

Click to expand...

This would make sense if it wasn't a freeroll. As for "every right" that is absolute foolishness. This is a private site, and the owners can do whatever they want including banning players.

The point I'm trying to make is that you can't really make much money off of a freeroll, the only reason to do it is for fun or to learn poker skills. With constant all inners both of these things are ruined, so I think it makes sense to ban them.

In cash games I do change my stance though. Go all in every hand, I'd love to play you.

Hmmm...sounds like a witch-hunt in the making to me. Or perhaps poker forum Gestapo? I really think it's way over-the-top.

He says his goal is to improve your play. That's very noble and thoughtful. But what better way to improve your play than to learn how to deal with these "all-inners" with patience and control with your temper held tightly in check? Just learning when and how to pick and choose the spot to take these guys out is another essential part of the game, and being able to not fly off on tilt when they suck-out is valuable as well. These guys are everywhere, not just freerolls, why not learn to deal with them effectively?

I for one love to have these types at my table. I know all too well that soon enough either myself or someone else with half a brain will be taking care of them soon enough.

kill em all

Off with their heads!!!!!!

lol

well usually this style of play seems to go hand in hand with being a freeroll leech and i think thats where they get the harshness of the penalty for.
not a bad idea to tag them and write down their names but i don't know about a boot from the forum

for me it comes down to this:
why on earth would i want to ban people who pad my bankroll? bad players abound, and sometimes you will lose with a great hand to their idiocy, but over time, they are the ones who pay your bills, so why would you not have them at your table?

looking at it from another perspective:
i dont think you can ban bad players simply for being bad players. how would you police that? where would the cutoff for "bad play" be? how many all-ins would you be allowed? what if i am a normally decent player, but just want to goof around and go all in every hand for a little while? the logistics of police-ing something like a "bad player ban" would be nuts, and would likely cause more problems than it'd solve.

Quintass, keep us informed how this other site gets on with this wont you. I agree with everyone else here - once i've registered for a tournament, i'll play my cards how I want. If you don't like all-in'ers you'll probably better off not playing freerolls really.

Shoot yourself.You won't have to worry about those bastards anymore!

How about a pre registration multiple choice form that needs to be passed before being allowed as a member.
Nothing to taxing on the brain but enough to weed out the completely insane.
If that seems like discrimination, those that fail the test can be allowed into an absolute beginners freeroll and can graduate to better tourns on the basis of there results.
That way, even the insane can learn to be a better player, and those that dont, can enjoy there all-in every hand powerplays together.

Just a thought.

zinzan1000 be lucky

not a bad idea
what kind of mc questions would you have that would actually effectively weed out the maniacs? they could just lie on the form of course too.

ChuckTs said:

not a bad idea
what kind of mc questions would you have that would actually effectively weed out the maniacs? they could just lie on the form of course too.

Click to expand...

Yes lol, its true that they might lie on the form.
At least that way we already know they are a good bluffer, almost worthy of passing on that basis alone lol.