To Clock or not to Clock?

[A2345Razz]

Here's the card room link: https://www.crownpoker.com.au/cash-games

It's the $1/$3 game, they advertise it as "turbo" so you know it's got the shot clock. Been a few years since I've played there, they were doing it then (in a $2/$3 game before they changed it to $1/$3) so it's been going for quite some time, it's not just some short time promo or trial period or anything. And they don't offer a non-turbo alternative at those stakes.

You can buy an extra 30 seconds of thinking time for $1, goes straight into the pot.

They don't use special tables for it or anything, the dealers just have an ordinary kitchen timer.

Here's the thing too: I'm saying it's 30 seconds because that's what I remember and I'm 99% sure I'm right about that. It's possible it might only be 20 seconds, because they regularly run tournaments where that's the time allowed (many, but not all, are satellites but still: http://www.crownpoker.com.au/tournament-schedule and put 'shot clock' into the search bar, you'll see them)

Ya, that's obviously not what I was talking about bc they do have tonnes of options with no clock and one option with a clock....but whatever, it is still interesting.

You simply aren't going to see wide acceptance of clock usage as a meaningful portion of cash tables across different rooms, etc. imho.

Also, it's a little bit disingenuous to pretend like the 1/3 is a full stake level when they have 1/2 and 2/4 tables galore according to the site and it's pretty obvious its an OPTION, not the way they do cash for the vast majority of their tables.

Interesting nonetheless.

 

[OzExorcist]

*shrugs*

You'll notice it's the first one they offer that allows even close to a full buyin ($1-$2 is capped at $80 LOL).

They're probably a special case because they're the only legal card room in town and they can basically do whatever they want in terms of implementing clocks or stupid-high rakes (which they also have). They're also the geniuses that came up with a blackjack variant where blackjack only pays 6/5 and if the dealer gets a 22 it's a standoff, not a bust. It's starting to get pretty clear why I rarely play there...

I agree that somewhere like Vegas where there's actual competition among rooms a shot clock (especially one that's 30 seconds or less) would have a hard time gaining traction, as people would just move to the next casino down if they didn't like the policy.

FWIW though having played in the cash games that have it, it's not been an issue. Nobody complained about it, the games using it definitely still run (at higher numbers than, say, the lower buyins that don't have it) and very few people end up timing out on their decisions. And I think if you're going to have one, you may as well limit it to 30 seconds. If it's going to be a minute or more then it doesn't really do anything to speed the game up outside of one or two tanks per session.

 

[A2345Razz]

I guess a better ? would be how many tables of the turbo variant run on a regular basis versus how many standard tables are there?

I have no doubt a game like that would be marketable as a one off or promo or special case, but to offer that without an option at comparable or close to comparable stakes (popular levels) of standard play wouldn't survive in the US, I don't think without exceptional circumstances...

As far as people not complaining to timing out often...well ofc they like it, they CHOSE to play that form with other option available.

 

[OzExorcist]

They have multiple tables of that turbo game running on a regular basis, about comparable with the regular speed $2/$4 game. In terms of having the most number of tables running, I believe it'd be between those two games.

To the best of my knowledge the $5/$5 and above games don't get many tables up at all (though higher stakes obviously run from time to time, particularly during Aussie Millions and other big tournaments).

The turbo game prob runs more tables than the $1/$1 and $1/$2 games too, but I couldn't say for sure because last time I was there they hid the tables running those games out in the drunk punters area with $1 roulette and $5 blackjack Those games are raked so heavily that most punters don't stay in them long anyway.

 

[BiliousBetil]

Time

"Ticking away the moments that make up a dull day
Fritter and waste the hours in an off-hand way." -Pink Floyd

As someone who has sat in a game watching someone stall just to annoy their opponents, it's my opinion that life is too short. In a home game one can use peer pressure. At a public tournament you need a clock.


Cheers!

 

[TeUnit]

really not a fan of the clock, just dont think it should come into play-if its a home game and somebody cant keep up ...just dont invite them again

 

[BobGrayling]

There was a TV show for a while where they did have a clock. "Speed Poker" or something like that. The table actually had lights that "ticked" up to your spot on the table. If the light reached your hand before you acted, you were automatically folded. Doesn't seem like it lasted long (one or two seasons?) so guess the excitement of "speed" wasn't enough for ratings.

 

[BiliousBetil]

Poker Dumb

There was a TV show for a while where they did have a clock. "Speed Poker" or something like that.

I suspect you are referring to the dreadful "Poker Dome Challenge." There was a lot more wrong with this show than having a clock. Introduced at the height of the poker boom when almost any show with poker in the name could get on the air, it was flat out awful. To my mind, only "Hip-Hop Hold'em" was a worse show.


Cheers!

 

[11012015]

Time is money.

 

[DonSifu]

Excellent responses from all of you. While I agree that collectively we should all be calling the clock more often to avoid this tanking epidemic, as suggested by Daniel Negreanu. However, because of the ever growing online poker market, i think to keep live action competitive, a shot clock must be introduced.
Have you seen the Shark Tank? The clock seems to work well for that show, and I could see something like that becoming the norm.

 

[A2345Razz]

Excellent responses from all of you. While I agree that collectively we should all be calling the clock more often to avoid this tanking epidemic, as suggested by Daniel Negreanu. However, because of the ever growing online poker market, i think to keep live action competitive, a shot clock must be introduced.
Have you seen the Shark Tank? The clock seems to work well for that show, and I could see something like that becoming the norm.

Online poker isn't growing as an industry, and I still cannot detect an argument for putting shotclocks in live play here...

Shot clocks aren't coming in any great numbers to North American play, that's for certain this decade.

I don't think they'll ever come en masse in cash games at all, and they shouldn't ofc. Now, in tournaments, I can see something happening bc it's really degrading the experience for everyone else when these buffoons fake tank and/or take 15 sec to make a fold preflop.


FKN MUCK YOU FKN HAND FISH.

 

[MPaz_87]

In a live tournament yes, 5 minutes , online only in big tournaments, if it's short then only 30 seconds, not more not less, that's enough.

 

[SnowedIn]

Dusk Till Dawn (one of Europe's biggest cardrooms) has a shotclock of 20s now. Think it is a good move in the long term. Makes it more enjoyable for recreational players, which means they come more, which means those who fancy themselves as "pros" can get more money off them in the long term.

 

[OzExorcist]

In a live tournament yes, 5 minutes

Erm... if you're going to have a five minute shot clock then there's absolutely no point in having one IMO.

 

[teepack]

I have never had a live experience with a slow player. Play generally moves along pretty quickly. The only time you ever see guys taking forever to make decisions is on the finals of the wsop, and those guys are just milking the clock so they can get more TV time most of the time. I thought a player could call clock on another player if he felt he was taking too long any way.

 

[CAMurray]

If your talking about tournament play, most of my local games have 30-120min levels and unless the player is being unanimously ridiculous, I prefer no standardized clock. In the local daily $40-$120 games with 20-30min levels, a standardized clock might not be a bad idea.

As for any of the local cash games, 1/2NL-20/40LH, its totally unnecessary. The games move quick and anybody unduely holding up the game is usually punished forthwith.

 

[VizziVizo]

Yes I hate it too, but sometimes I use it, for e.q. at the bubble when I understand that I will never zan win it tournament this time but I need to get into prizes for staying in +

 

[w8888]

Maybe some type of clock that allows some kind of time bank, but I don't think a stand clock would be that good.

 

[loismitchell17]

I'd like to hear your opinions on the idea of introducing a shot clock into poker. Good idea? Bad idea? How would you implement it? How long is good? How much time bank should you get?

Let the discussion begin!

The bottom line is that the idea behind implementing a shot clock is correct; however the plan which is to put into motion needs to be different. The problem is only going to be solved if and when industry personnel and the players start acting in accordance to fixing the problem.

 

[Animylgamer]

Clocks don't bother me much anymore if it's a reasonable clock. If a game has one implemented, I'll either have to adapt or get my butt handed to me. I have found that usually a majority of players that are afraid of clocks during play are the ones that haven't disciplined themselves at hiding their tells very well.

:albertein #Make_Them_SQUIRM!:ahhhhh:

 

[MaxDamage]

Calling the clock on someone is bad poker etiquette. However, if a person takes really long thinking about a decision (like over 5min or so) or is just stalling because the bubble is getting close I think its reasonable to call the clock on that person.

 

[Karozi615]

shot clock pros

-good players have more of an edge, can interpret situations faster. New players will suffer.

shot clock cons

-its going to make the game less attractive to new players IMO


I can see both sides of the argument.

 

[Zin]

Calling the clock on someone is bad poker etiquette. However, if a person takes really long thinking about a decision (like over 5min or so) or is just stalling because the bubble is getting close I think its reasonable to call the clock on that person.

Taking all day to fold 34s is bad poker etiquette...30 seconds is more than enough time to make a decision...leave the gadgets at home and play poker.

 

[OzExorcist]

shot clock cons

-its going to make the game less attractive to new players IMO

Here's the thing though: if they're new players then they won't know any different. That's just how the game is played, they'll think.

It's the old guard who would have the biggest problem with it IMO, the players who have been used to playing without a shot clock for years.

 

[chloebrand]

I do not see what the hurry is. Poker is supposed to be a skill, when played properly looks like an art. I don't think that rushing the game would be to our benefit. I understand the reason that we would want to rush the game, to be able to see more hands, but what about the rare times when we flop the nuts, and our opposition is carelessly betting into us. How many times does that happen. Hardly ever. On the other hand, how do you maximize pots, without being able to take your time. Not necessarily to make a decision, but just to make it look like we are making a decision.