F
fundiver199
Legend
Loyaler
I guess, the idea is, that when someone is all in, its a very important moment, so nobody should be disturbed by the chat? But in tournaments that is just nonsense, since people are all in constantly, and sometimes its for a completely meaningless small amount of chips. So I dont like this either. Its not often, that I chat, but when I do, I really dont see, why it needs to be interrupted, just because someone has moved all in 
F
fundiver199
Legend
Loyaler
B
benitwapasu
Visionary
Silver Level
I think they should change it so that after you type something in and hit return before you realize there is an all in that you do not have to retype it. That is very annoying and I think we all have done it.
R
Ron112355
Legend
Loyaler
I am in favour of chat being muted during all ins, stops people from trying to influence play. But I as well have wasted time typing something in chat to have it disappear because someone was all in before I hit enter.
Also can’t remember what site (think it was full tilt poker) Observers couldn’t chat in tournaments if they didn’t have the bankroll to play that tournament, that way it cut down on all the beggars asking for money in chat.
Also can’t remember what site (think it was full tilt poker) Observers couldn’t chat in tournaments if they didn’t have the bankroll to play that tournament, that way it cut down on all the beggars asking for money in chat.
Johnny78B
Legend
Platinum Level
You are right, that's only the reason of chat blocking. I really do not want too when go all in, somebody starts to say cards or comment something.
etouu79
Enthusiast
Silver Level
I think it's like trying to generate a moment of tension or concentrate everything in that moment or that leaves someone who is in a situation of possible elimination without people writing that sometimes makes too much noise
F
fundiver199
Legend
Loyaler
A lot of people keep saying, that its to avoid collusion by someone telling their dead cards in the chat. But this makes no sense, since information about dead cards is equally valuable, weather someone is all in or not. Lets say for instance, that player A has open raised, and player B selects to 3-bet. Player A have 1.500 chips, player B have 10.000 chips. Player B wants to move player A all-in, so he 3-bets to 1.500 chips. He dont move all in, because he still have players left to act, who also have around 10.000 chips.
It folds around to player A, and the chat is not disabled, because nobody are all in. But player A still need to make a decision for his entire stack, so its just the same as if, player B had 2.000 chips and had moved all in. If player A call however, THEN the chat is disabled, even though nobody have another decision to make in the hand. So clearly this has absolutely nothing to do with preventing collusion. Most likely the real reason is, that poker sites think, people should sit and watch board runouts with excitement and not be distracted by the chat. Which is just kind of silly really
It folds around to player A, and the chat is not disabled, because nobody are all in. But player A still need to make a decision for his entire stack, so its just the same as if, player B had 2.000 chips and had moved all in. If player A call however, THEN the chat is disabled, even though nobody have another decision to make in the hand. So clearly this has absolutely nothing to do with preventing collusion. Most likely the real reason is, that poker sites think, people should sit and watch board runouts with excitement and not be distracted by the chat. Which is just kind of silly really
A
Axmanace
Rock Star
Silver Level
A lot of people keep saying, that its to avoid collusion by someone telling their dead cards in the chat. But this makes no sense, since information about dead cards is equally valuable, weather someone is all in or not. Lets say for instance, that player A has open raised, and player B selects to 3-bet. Player A have 1.500 chips, player B have 10.000 chips. Player B wants to move player A all-in, so he 3-bets to 1.500 chips. He dont move all in, because he still have players left to act, who also have around 10.000 chips.
It folds around to player A, and the chat is not disabled, because nobody are all in. But player A still need to make a decision for his entire stack, so its just the same as if, player B had 2.000 chips and had moved all in. If player A call however, THEN the chat is disabled, even though nobody have another decision to make in the hand. So clearly this has absolutely nothing to do with preventing collusion. Most likely the real reason is, that poker sites think, people should sit and watch board runouts with excitement and not be distracted by the chat. Which is just kind of silly really
The situation you described though would happen far less often, at least on the later stages of a tournament or SNG.
Pokerpoet2
Legend
Loyaler
I suppose there is some reasoning behind it and the site's feel it is important to disable chat when a player is all-in? I like many, feel annoyed that you took the time to type a message and then it disappears when you hit the Enter Button, but it's a small price to pay.
When the fun Stops, STOP!
When the fun Stops, STOP!
milka1605
Legend
Loyaler
This was done due to the non-disclosure of the cards thrown by the players. So that there are no tips for the calling player. The fact that what was written in the chat disappears and it is required to re-type it and it is really bad.
mkdrummey
Visionary
Silver Level
I don't remember a time when chat was allowed when a player was all in. Maybe in the early days of online poker some sites might have allowed it but it's better the way it is now. I do miss losing chat once you get knocked out though or just observer chat for some games.