Dear Members,

I would like to commence this topic by expressing my sincerely meant apologies. The tone of my post(s) yesterday was unnecessarily confrontational and thereby also unhelpful. (Foolme, I didn't mean to single you out intentionally, I am sorry for that.) I hope this will do.

Let's get to the to the purpose of this topic then. We do have a couple of very important matters that need a solution. We, the moderators, cannot solve them all by adding and twisting rules, for not all matters are simply black and white. We need all members of our community working together to make the atmosphere and the spirit of this site such, that everyone can enjoy the purpose and the reason of our existence: namely a place to play poker that we all love.

We need to realize as well that the very success that our site/community has had, in providing a place to play poker, means at the same time that it (the site) has grown in numbers. Think of it as a tight knit family of a few deciding to invite all members of their clan together (and wishing them all to live happily ever after). The distant cousins, aunts and uncles, in-laws and their families arrives. With the purest of intentions it is a sure thing that before the clan settles down to the new format, there will arise quite a few disputes and matters that require solutions, if this clan has any chance of survival. That is where we are at at this moment.

As far as the unruly new-comers here are concerned, we, the mods can deal with that fairly easy. Warn, muzzle and ban, depending on the transgression. We cannot, however, dictate to you all every single thing, nor should we. This is where we must, as community, to come together and think about this.

One of the greatest issues, that we struggle with, is what we call commonly the bingo-play. Why this is such a struggle is quite obvious really: this is not a black or white matter, hence opinions wary, no sensible rules can be drafted -- and most importantly; not everyone can be made happy whatever we do or say. So, it is up to us all to find a compromise that gives space for us all to belong here. In my mind it would be a tragedy if the opinion of one block would prevail over the other, resulting in the break-up of the clan. I hazard to say that most of you would agree on this with me.

Since we cannot have a one-size-fits-all solution, this is what we, the mods, have been pondering to do. Tables 1 to 4 would be bet limit tables (the amounts are yet undecided), we already have a pot limit holdem and a pot limit omaha table.

If one decides to play the said tables, then it would mean for the player, to play by the spirit of those tables. That entails not only that because one cannot go all-in that anything one does is ok. It is very simple to ruin a bet and pot limit game(s) as well by just maxing every single bet to the hilt -- hand or no hand. So, to do so, would be against the very intent of the spirit we try to create. Max bet with nuts is one thing, but you all understand the point I try to make.

The turbo tables on the other hand are a place to go and burn the chips at hearts content, as they now are as well. It certainly defeats the point of poker and makes mockery of the game in many regards, but as said, freedom to choose ones style of play cannot be dictated. It is the last remark that makes this issue so difficult to start with.

Suffice to say that there is a massive difference to limp in to a pot with a weak hand and hit on the flop -- or to go all-in with the same hand pre-flop, This distinction seems to have escaped the play(ers) at the turbos. Maybe, if we start to promote the concept and spirit of good play, even the turbo tables will modify the manner in which they operate. Yet, those are the tables where anything goes.

Alright, I hope to hear of your thoughts and ideas on this matter, so that we can keep our community pleasant and accessible for all people and all styles of play.

One final point. We, the moderators, are here to facilitate, the best we can, the smooth operating of our beloved site. We are not perfect, we are not robots. We do this in our free time, with no pay and no glory. We do this because we love this place, as do you all. Sometimes it is most welcome that we get criticized and lambasted by you, our lovable members. That makes us aware of the short-comings of ours and aware of the things we could improve.

Sometimes, however, it would be most welcome, if the response would be: I get it and I understand. No qualifications, no yes, but remarks. Just that.

I believe that was the case regarding the matter with maf and hovis. Hovis said from the start his action was done not by the book, but in the spirit of fairness, from the heart. There was no need to add or subtract a word on that. This is what I should have said from the beginning, but even I got my script mixed yesterday.

Our forum will always be a beautiful mad-house and unruly place. I love it for that very reason. I am not attempting to take that away by my remarks above. I hope you understand what I am saying here.

Lovingly as always,

FF/Jyri

P.S.: Ron bro, you do not make any sense in any language, that's why I love you....;-))


(Truly kidding only..please, do not shoot me)

how do we keep it accessible , leave it as simple as possible , let the bingo boys do their thing , if your a good poker player rise above it , why create false rules on tfpr just cos some dont like it, i hate bingo but its here , but i dont want false rules just cos some who chat constantly on the forum get their way to change rules. MODS work to the rules and worry about the issues of multi table playing , swearing , racism, sexism and other issues far more worrying for a family site than bingo . apart from that it aint half bad on here . jyri, hovis, ron love your comments keep them coming dont agree with many but thats why this site is a democracy ,even bloke gets his inane say on here (personnal view, he is actually a m8 ,lol i have at least one ).

just enjoy poker its a GAME ,its for FREE CHIPS , drama drama who needs it .

me not understand...I dont speaka so good english finny so may be translate me this in the dutchie langage, causa my sentences not are put correctly my view in....:-))))

I am there with you m8, I understand what you are saying and my respect for all the mods...

Respect for all the Moderators its the EMOTIONAL ABUSERS who needs sorting out!!
Thats all I got to say......(*_*)


http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_does_an_emotional_abuser_get_out_of_the_abuse


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_abuse

Agreed 88888888888888888

i get it and i understand

i personally think the mods on this site do a fantastic job, and coming from a site where there wasnt any mods, poker is much better with them here, and we should stand behind them and support them for their efforts, and thank them

Note: The software supports four betting structures:
0=FL (Fixed Limit)
1=SL (Spread Limit)
2=PL (Pot Limit)
3=NL (No Limit)

As far as I know, SL (Spread Limit structure) was never tested on TFPR.

apologie accpeted

Fixed limit must be the same as bet limit, correct me if I am wrong.....pot limit and no limit are as well pretty clear to me....but without sorting to googling....what a hell is a spread limit?

LMFAO fool.....now that is funny. OK, I guess I had that coming. Well said, we all good now?

;-)))

yes

Great, I appreciate that.

With spread limit, the bets and raises are in a range of a low limit and a high limit
(say between 10$ and 200$).
The big blind is always the low limit (10$) and small blind half the BB.
UTG can then raise from 10$ to 200$ (for a total of 20$ to 210$).

Let's say he raises by 90$ (for a total of 100$).
Then next player can raise from 90$ to 200$ (for a total of 190$ to 300$).
Here, same rule as PL and NL applies in SL for min-raise, that is,
you cannot raise by less than the previous bet or raise.

With NL, there's no higher limit.
With PL, the higher limit is variable with current pot size.
With SL, the higher limit is constant.

In PL you cannot bet heavy preflop if you are not in late position behind
many limpers or raisers (because no big pot has been built when your turn comes).
in SL, you can bet heavy preflop and out of position, in the limit of the spread.

However, post-flop you are still limited by the spread in SL,
while in PL, you can use all the power of the pot to forbid calls.

Hence, just as PL, SL allow more hands to see flops than NL,
but without the technicalities of PL (because you don't have to care about pot building).

Got it, thx bat.

heres a idea i thought about but not sure if its possible, what about on the bingo rooms having a maximun time that you can buy in ie 3 times then once all your chips are lost after these times you dont get removed from the site or get any backlash just wont be able to play that certain room again for that day, and to make it against the rules to play bingo on the other tables that arent bingo tables.

OK i,m not sure if this is possible but cant we just put on tables that we dont want bingo play on "no preflob allins" or something to that effect if someone wants to go all in after the flop then we all have the option of folding or taking there chippies. it sounds kind of simple to me but i,m sure there must be problems with it or it would have already been done,, any way if its a rule then you can enforce it . i believe that the attention seekers are going to it any way they can so no amount of rules or mods to watch them will ever make a diff,, just a thought..

||||:-} Buddy

The only practical way to put a time penalty after elimination
is either to decrease the number of ring tables so that the waiting queue lengths increase,
or to make all tables tourney tables: you then have to wait another tourney begins to play.

One of the ill of bingo comes from the "reset to 1000" button.
In fact, this button should not be available, and you should go into negative when u lose further.
Within this setting, you would start with 0$,
and you should be allowed to borrow any 1500$ buyin when starting or when in red.
To sit with a superior buyin, you should be in positive.

Then there would be low fixed-buyin ring tables for beginners,
and various higher min-buyin ring tables, and probably higher blinds,
just like there are different tourney buyins.

Higher stakes ring tables will be protected from bingo play because losers
will lose a high min-buyins and will have to go back to lower buyin table that their bank balance can afford.

In the current state of affair, what I can see is also a 50,000$ fixed-buyin No-Limit ring table with 250$/500$ blinds.

I actually thought hovis' action was very reasonable. I don't go to tables 4 or 5 unless I want to play bingo...which is never. I don't appreciate a single bingo player coming to another table and forcing the entire table to either bingo or leave the table. It's very frustrating, especially when you had a good game going. It's gotten so bad now even the tourney tables are not safe from this (though in that format they tend to take themselves out).
Would it be complicated to implement something like what chef suggested? Post a "no bingo" notice on the other tables.
I realize in theory there is a lot of grey area, but when you're at the table, it's usually pretty cut and dry. People know bingo when they see it. I think it's more about a pattern of behavior than about any limit. It's forcing other players to go all in over and over.
If you need a concrete guideline, maybe it's something like no more than $500 (since you can refresh to $1000 and that would leave you half you chips to play past the flop with).

Interesting, but that's not very "new player" friendly (i mean, new poker players, who are trying to learn the game)
When I first started on this site, the reset button was my best frenemy, I called her Buttons.

Why ? Losing at start just force you to play the 1000$ and 1500$ buyin ring games.
If you bingo play at this step, and without the security net of reset button,
you just go deeper in red, which will force you to correct your game if you want to play higher buyin tables one day under this screenname.

Only problem is, if already wealthy players use the low buyin tables to bingo play.

then we need some serious neon sign postage, pointing them away from troublemaker tables

Finn

I did read it and you're welcome.

That's all you got to say ye murky fish? -- Thanks a bunch...;-)

ok guys
i might be blonde and all that.....BUT

this is a really fun site , and i think that everyone needs to remember
that we are all friends and everyone plays their own way.
please please lets not let silly things get out of hand
luv u guys xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I was literally coming in here to discuss a spread limit game....
That's so cool.

Saves me tons of typing, lol.
=)

Bingo players will eventually be sorted out by players with patience. Don't think the site/mods/bingo player haters should dictate how people play...i find bingo players tedious and boring BTW.
However, i think the limits (a remedy to bingo players?) placed on table 2 are too restrictive and don't reward good hands/play. I like the rule about one raise pre-flop, even if some (bingo) players use that to go all in. Just fold if you don't like the odds. People who want to play know how to use the pre-flop in a way that will aid a good game. Sometimes going all in may be necessary for some (low pockets, perhaps). Again, to dictate how people bet is not poker (as far as banning 'bingo' goes at any table), in my opinion. Cheers. Al.

Funniest thing I've read all week...lol.
=)

Again, it's not the allin bettor who is the problem there,
it's the certitude that even if the whole table reads him with that hand,
he will have 9 callers, while only two hands can enter in this pot
with some decent odds if they manage to be heads-up on flop:
- overpair (80% vs 20%)
- two overcards (45% vs 55%, or 50% vs 50% if suited)

In particular, any overcard+undercard being 30% vs 70%,
Ace rags should not call. But no, we can be sure the whole spectrum
of hands will be there at flop in a 10-way pot.

Oh my. Its amazing how history repeats itself. Have you learned anything? This has happened so many times with you. You cant deny that. When are you going to realize maybe the problem is not us but you? Like you said there is a time when enough is enough. How much are you willing to lose? Yourself? When are you going to give this job up? Is it really worth it? This is my honest opinion banning aside, this kind of job is not meant for you. You get to emotionally invovled. Dedication is one thing, but this is something totally different. Its not healthy.

I am big enough to admit when I am wrong -- and I do address the matter straight. When apologies are needed I do offer them. The way it works.

Now, you do not seem to have that ability -- hence your lot is what it is.

None of this will help you Perry.