Hit and run warning (GG Poker)

[thedarkman]

I got a hit and run warning playing online, that's ok, but the rules are not specific enough how to avoid this in the future.

In live poker i consider it also a bad behavior, leaving the table soon after a big win, but online??? There are enough tables available 24/7 to win your money "back". Just go to a table with a lot of deep stacks or go a blind level up!

I think it is a childish idea trying to win your money "back" from the same player you lost it to. What is your opinion on this?

If you stay at the table long enough, the rake will take all your money, so maybe it isn't such a bad idea. Better staying until you lose.

 

[Mario7]

If this whole hit and run "problem" would be really about "player protection" or "pokerettiquette" or some other "reasons", that are also not true, it would be very easy to avoid "hit an running" from the get go:

If you leave a table, you have to start with the same amount of chips at ANY other new table (like in "rush and cash").

Why dont they just do that? Think about it and try to come up with a different reason, that i already mentioned!

Not so easy. It could be abused to come "overstacked" to the preferred tables out of nowhere. Not everyone at the table could like it.

But anyway for me it's a theoretical discussion (probably mostly commented by players who do not play at GG). I play a lot of cash games on GG, I usually play 6 tables, leaving whenever I want, also just after doubling (usually I use just "leve before the BB" rule). I never cared if it was just after winning or losing, and I am not going to.

However, I do understand the author of the thread has got this warning, so I will let you know if anything like this comes to me

 

[Pete_Stew]

Not so easy. It could be abused to come "overstacked" to the preferred tables out of nowhere. Not everyone at the table could like it.

OK, but they could use a cap then. Besides: The player can just not play a table, if he thinks the opponents are to "deep"!

 

[S3mper]

Why dont they just do that? Think about it and try to come up with a different reason, that i already mentioned!

You could probably just get around that by starting a new table before leaving. and if you prevent that you might as well just have the minimum buy-in be 100bbs.

Really though there's no reason to come up with anything because GG is trying to solve a problem that is not a problem. I can see it being a problem at HU tables and that being annoying but other than that not really an issue

 

[Pete_Stew]

You could probably just get around that by starting a new table before leaving...

They could do it at the table/s you open after your current running table/s. From a technical point of view it would not be a problem to avoid "hit and running" altogether.

 

[S3mper]

They could do it at the table/s you open after your current running table/s. From a technical point of view it would not be a problem to avoid "hit and running" altogether.

So if I'm running 12 tables at differing stacks and open a new table how many bbs do I start with?

 

[Poker Orifice]

Either that or they looked at live poker etiquette and (erroneously) assumed, this can be transferred 1:1 to online poker. ACR Poker have some tables, which they call "no rathole for 7 days" or something like that, and where the point is, that whatever you left with, you have to buy in for again the next 7 days. But nobody actually play these tables, so it really seems to be the answer to a question, very few people are asking

Pretty ridiculous message. "Serious breach" and "endangering the safety and enjoyment". WTF are they talking about? Safety??? While the policy in itself is not enough for me to call for a boycott of GG Poker, the tone of this message actually is. So in all seriousness why not come over to PokerStars and try their "new" cash games with random seating, which they introduced just a few weeks ago. Or 888 Poker or ACR Poker or basically anything else

Because GG's player pool is 'different'... 'much' different and MUCH larger. And perhaps they are able to win more there (OR lose less)
Regular cash tables during peak hours, GG has 3x as many players...
and in their Z00M-style games, up to 7x
During off peak hours, the difference is even greater.

Before it was "Don't play on ACR! They are not regulated! Crazy to play there!"

Who cares where they choose to play?

 

[fundiver199]

Because GG's player pool is 'different'... 'much' different

You really want people to believe, that GG Poker is some sort of hidden secret, that no good players have discovered yet? Like seriously?

and MUCH larger.

Sure but why does it matter, if 20 or 60 tables of a particular kind are running, when you can only play 6 tables at a time?

Who cares where they choose to play?

I dont care, where people play, but I think, poker sites should be called out for completely shitty policies like this one, so that people can make good and informed choises. Thats all

 

[primrose]

As far as I can tell, the only thing, GG Poker does better than PokerStars, is a lower rake for micro and low stakes MTTs. Everything else is worse. The lobby is terrible, they have no SnGs, they have blocked external tracking sites like Sharkscope, they dont allow people to use trackers, and their security is so poor, they recently had the first known superuser scandal in online poker for more than a decade. So yeah. I definitely think, GG Poker is a very overrated site. Popular does not mean good, and I hope, both PokerStars and other sites will take back market share, so that competition is kept alive to the benefit of players.

yeah :/ and you didn't even list the reward system

Notably GGPoker does have some sit and go's: spin and gold and Battle Royale. Spin and Gold is basically an ultra fast sit and go with about 5x the normal rake relative to the structure, so it makes sense why they would have it; I imagine regular sit and go's make less money than cash, but this one probably makes more.

Battle Royale was okay though last time I played, actually a surprisingly playable game.

 

[fundiver199]

Notably GGPoker does have some sit and go's: spin and gold and Battle Royale.

I should have specified, that I meant traditional SnGs without a lottery element (spin and gold) or a phase of forced all-in play (Battle Royale). All sites have Spins under various names, but they are always hyperturbo games and difficult to beat due to the rake and bad structure, plus it gets pretty tiring to never play with more than 25BB at most. At least thats my opinion.

Traditional SnGs typically start with 50-100 BB and allow for much more postflop play, at least until the blinds have gone up. Regular speed 8-mans on ACR Poker start with 100BB, and with blinds only going up every 10 minutes they are essentially like a regular speed MTT, except for the fact that only 8 players participate. Right until the end you rarely see average stacks of much less than 30BB.

 

[primrose]

Yeah. And that kind of format doesn't make a lot of money for the site (playing 40 min and only paying 10% rake once), so it falls squarely in the category of things that you can scrap if you're solely interested in profit maximization. I definitely agree that this is another point against GGPoker.

 

[fundiver199]

Yeah. And that kind of format doesn't make a lot of money for the site (playing 40 min and only paying 10% rake once)

Its actually more like 90 minutes on average. But why is that a problem, when a regular MTT takes many hours to complete, and there people also only pay the same 10% rake once? But of course sites would rather turn poker into casino games or slot machines, where the house is the only long term winner. It is not only GG Poker, who thinks this way, but they are clearly one of the bigger offenders.

 

[primrose]

Its actually more like 90 minutes on average. But why is that a problem, when a regular MTT takes many hours to complete, and there people also only pay the same 10% rake once? But of course sites would rather turn poker into casino games or slot machines, where the house is the only long term winner. It is not only GG Poker, who thinks this way, but they are clearly one of the bigger offenders.

I think the key difference is that sit&go's are more likely to be played as an alternative to/replacement of cash, whereas regular tournaments with tons of players feel quite different. Big MTTs have the "you can win 1000x your buyin omg!!" factor. One way to look at it is, it would be better if all tournament players played cash instead, but that's probably not something the platform can get away with; they probably wouldn't be the #1 poker site if they didn't offer MTTs. Every review would coplain about it. But they clearly can get away with not offering sit&go's.

Also regular MTT's also all have rebuy phases nowadays, and if you take a closer look at GGPoker's structures, they actually do tend to be somewhat fast and shallow compared to what I would consider a classical slow tournament.

 

[fundiver199]

I think the key difference is that sit&go's are more likely to be played as an alternative to/replacement of cash, whereas regular tournaments with tons of players feel quite different. Big MTTs have the "you can win 1000x your buyin omg!!" factor. One way to look at it is, it would be better if all tournament players played cash instead, but that's probably not something the platform can get away with; they probably wouldn't be the #1 poker site if they didn't offer MTTs. Every review would coplain about it. But they clearly can get away with not offering sit&go's.

Very much agree with this. Poker sites need to offer MTTs, since they are important for the advertisement of the site, especially the flagship MTTs, that can make some lucky player rich. Phil Galfonds Run It Once only offered cash games, and that is likely part of the reason for its quick demise. SnGs were already declining in popularity, when GG Poker gained traction, so they could get away with not offering them.

Also regular MTT's also all have rebuy phases nowadays, and if you take a closer look at GGPoker's structures, they actually do tend to be somewhat fast and shallow compared to what I would consider a classical slow tournament.

This is pretty much happening on all sites, and if we are honest, its also driven by player demand. Personally I find it more and more rare, that I want to commit 6-8 hours to a slow MTT. But maybe I still have time for a turbo or hyper turbo, or at least something with 8-10 minute blind intervals rather than 12-15 minute intervals. I cant even remember the last time I played the "Daily Marathon" on pokerstars, and if I occationally play one of ACR Pokers few remaining games with 4+ hours of late registration, then I dont enter it, until it has already run for at least 2 hours.

 

[bowserdon]

imho it shud be up to the player

 

[primrose]

When I played it was a different format, 30 players with three distinct phases, didn't have an allin or fold phase. New format sounds worse

Old one was Zoom until half of all players are eliminated -> 5 3player winner-take-all sit&go's -> a final table with the remaining five players.

 

[fundiver199]

Battle Royale was okay though last time I played, actually a surprisingly playable game.

I watched a few videos on YouTube, which someone posted of himself playing these games. They are basically 18-man hyperturbo games. The starting stack is 50BB, but this is kind of deceptive, because already after 2 minutes blinds dubble, so now a starting stack is only 25BB. And the whole game is over in 25-30 minutes, whereas an 18-man on PokerStars (turbo speed) takes around 60 minutes to complete.

The all-in shoot out phase does not matter much, since its only 1 out of 9 seats on the final table, which is determined this way. In one of his games this phase was not even needed, and in the other it was only 2 players taking part in it. So that is kind of whatever. However the mystery bounties is a lottery element very similar to that in Spins, where the big prices essentially works like an extra rake, because you are so unlikely to ever win them.

So as something to play now and then for fun, and when you are short in time, this is probably a fine game, and I would prefer it over a traditional 3-handed Spin n Go. But as something to play for profit, it seems very unsuitable, and with 8% rake I dougth these games are even beatable. So definitely not something, I am going to start playing as an alternative to SnGs on PokerStars or ACR Poker.

 

[Pete_Stew]

So if I'm running 12 tables at differing stacks and open a new table how many bbs do I start with?

Lets asume you close one of these 12 tables with 66,66 $, then a new 13. table would have also a minimum buy in of 66,66 $ (if that's a win, of course.)

Playing 12 tables, you could of course just close the winning tables and never open a new one. That's why they dont do it: They want you to play as long as possible.

 

[S3mper]

Lets asume you close one of these 12 tables with 66,66 $, then a new 13. table would have also a minimum buy in of 66,66 $ (if that's a win, of course.)

Playing 12 tables, you could of course just close the winning tables and never open a new one. That's why they dont do it: They want you to play as long as possible.

Right the way around this unless I'm misunderstanding. Let's say you're playing 12 tables and open a 13th and then after you begin playing close the $66.66 table after already having bought in for $50

 

[Pete_Stew]

Right the way around this unless I'm misunderstanding. Let's say you're playing 12 tables and open a 13th and then after you begin playing close the $66.66 table after already having bought in for $50

It goes without saying: If you did not cash out at all before, you cant have a case of "hit and run".

Please dont make me overexplain these simple things.

 

[S3mper]

It goes without saying: If you did not cash out at all before, you cant have a case of "hit and run".

Please dont make me overexplain these simple things.

If I stack you and open up another table right after I stack you, I can then close the table I stacked you at bypassing the rule in which you want to implement. It's not as if this process would take more than 5 seconds.

Again, none of this even needs to be a conversation in the first place because the rule should not exist. We don't need rules to fix problems that don't exist

 

[Pete_Stew]

If I stack you and open up another table right after I stack you, I can then close the table I stacked you at bypassing the rule...

Right! While sitting out (not leaving) from that winning table, you could even open more than one new tables, but they could change that also and only allow to open a new table, after you CLOSED the old one, if they realy WANTED to stop "Hit and running" altogether.

The bottom line is:
They dont want this at all! They want both letting you easily open new tables AND no (supposedly) "Hit and Running". GG just wants you to play as long as possible, as every other poker room (online or offline) does.

 

[fundiver199]

The bottom line is:
They dont want this at all! They want both letting you easily open new tables AND no (supposedly) "Hit and Running". GG just wants you to play as long as possible, as every other poker room (online or offline) does.

I think, this horse has been beaten pretty much to death now. Nobody have come up with any kind of reason, why this policy is reasonable or makes sense. So my strong advice is to just ignore it as well as the email, they send you. Dont implement a policy of systematic "hit and run", but simply play in a normal way, as you would on any other site.

And if they really want to kick you out for that, then just give your business to another site. As I said already, its not like, GG Poker offer anything special, that you can not find on a lot of other sites. If you are a full time professional player and depend totally on poker to make a living, ok then you dont want to burn any bridges. But for everyone else there is no reason to let GG Poker or any other site intimidate you to stay at cash tables, that you want to leave.

 

[Fallenglory]

Interesting, never knew about this real. Their penalty system seems very fair about it, and honestly it would be kind of annoying if players were to join and leave constantly.

GGpoker is really on point with their warning system. I got warned for having Equilabs open the other day. Wasn't even playing when I used it.

 

[Pete_Stew]

...So my strong advice is to just ignore it as well as the email, they send you. Dont implement a policy of systematic "hit and run", but simply play in a normal way, as you would on any other site...

That is probably good advice. I guess it was just a streak of luck, when i could leave several winning tables in a short period of time, which is rare anyways.