Jump to content

New tables in tournaments being "heads up"


Pickleman
 Share

Recommended Posts

This isn't exactly a bug - I mean, I'm sure the developers are aware of the issue, but I'd just like to highlight the following:

Sometimes in tournaments (typically at the beginning, when more runners are being added), you can get moved to a new table with only one other player at it. This can happen even in a 9-seater. New players don't get added until the other tables have finished playing their hand, and given that there might be 9 of them, that can take a minute or two. In the mean time those 2 players can play maybe 4 or 5 hands heads up. Not exactly 9-seater play.

I don't know what the solution is, but I know I've never experienced it on another site - or indeed with Unibet when it was on microgaming; so obviously it's a software issue and there's a way to fix it. But I do think it needs to be fixed. It basically makes the software look a bit bad and it's not a good look branding-wise. I mean, if I was a new or inexperienced player, I'd wonder what the hell is going on.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Main reason you experience it here is due to much smaller fields. If we had just 20% of the MTT numbers of the biggest sites, this would never really be an issue here either, even with the current code 🙂

Not saying the code is perfect; but as you say yourself, there isn't an obvious solution (nor an easy one). I believe the tournament monitor (table balancing etc.) works reasonably okay, and it's not a top prio at the moment (there's still some H4H things to be reviewed, but outside of that, it's low prio). Something we can definitely look into in the future, just not the very near future due to other projects 🙂

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Check the latest poker release notes. Have a look at our poker promotions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very true @Pickleman.

And when it does start balancing the tables, it happens one player at a time. So basically if we only have one full table of 9 players running on the tournament, and a new player joins the tournament, it will take 4 played hands on the original table before you have 2 tables of 5 players. That's just too long.

Balancing and breaking up tables could be optimized on few other ways also... It doesn't work very logically currently.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I agree it's about small MTT fields. @Purps the one player at a time phenomenon might shed light on what's happening. When this happens to me now, I time out on my clock and at the end of the hand, there's usually 3 or 4 players who sit down simultaneously.

My guess from this is that the table balancing algorithm works as follows: when player A registers, wait for only one (other) table to complete a hand and use the high-blinding algorithm; BUT if all the other tables have completed a hand [within a certain time frame], use the table breaking algorithm (i.e. break tables and rebalance all of them).

My further guess is that there isn't really a dedicated algorithm for how to rebalance tables as number of tables *increases* - the software just adapts the table *decrease* balancing algorithm, i.e. high blind unless you're lucky enough that all tables have completed a hand within a given time window.

If the above is true, how about the following fix: 

Instead of waiting for one table to complete a hand, wait until two tables complete a hand - if "two" is the number of existing tables in the whole tournament, invoke the table breaking algorithm; if there are more than two tables (and not all of them have finished a hand), high blind x number players from x different tables, where x is the number of other tables that have completed a hand. Iterate the above until tables are balanced.

It's a fudge but it would work better than the existing, no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious to hear how you'd deal with the previously described situation. 9 handed tournament. 9 players registered, late reg still open. 10th player registers. 

Instantly breaking to 2 tables of 5 sounds like a bad idea on paper to me, unless the goal is as many table switches per player as possible. 

I guess the problem is there isn't a one-size-fits-all, when we're talking so many  - but still very different - small size MTT's. For some, one model would work well, while it for other would be terrible - especially when we mix together rebuy and addon with freezeout. 

Check the latest poker release notes. Have a look at our poker promotions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Stubbe-Unibet said:

Instantly breaking to 2 tables of 5 sounds like a bad idea on paper to me, unless the goal is as many table switches per player as possible. 

Split to 3? If more reg, easy to add between tables, if two or more players drop from one table back to one table. 

To bet or not to bet, that is the question.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Stubbe-Unibet said:

Curious to hear how you'd deal with the previously described situation. 9 handed tournament. 9 players registered, late reg still open. 10th player registers. 

Instantly breaking to 2 tables of 5 sounds like a bad idea on paper to me, unless the goal is as many table switches per player as possible. 

I guess the problem is there isn't a one-size-fits-all, when we're talking so many  - but still very different - small size MTT's. For some, one model would work well, while it for other would be terrible - especially when we mix together rebuy and addon with freezeout. 

I think if you asked most tournament directors they'd say "yep, that's how you do it". Yes, that can mean that you split 1 x 9-seat into 2 x 5-seat, then a player busts, then you go back to 1 x 9-seat again, but that's the way it works, and I'm pretty sure I've seen exactly that happen online. 

It could also happen live, of course, and that's a blinking nightmare. I think TDs do use their discretion in that case to wait - either for more players to reg or for someone to bust. But online it's really not a hassle, is it? What else are you supposed to do if a 9-seater goes from 9 runners to 10?

Unibet's algorithm means you play heads up in a tournament that you shouldn't be heads up until there are two people left. That violates a more fundamental rule than moving people about a lot, and it's certainly against the spirit of rule 11.D of the TDA rules:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/mg0oc5e9higwvul/AACvSfnLPt73dy_Tg3azpflea?dl=0&preview=2019+Poker+TDA+Rules+DOC+Longform+Redlines+from+2017+Version+1.0.docx

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pickleman said:

I think if you asked most tournament directors they'd say "yep, that's how you do it". Yes, that can mean that you split 1 x 9-seat into 2 x 5-seat, then a player busts, then you go back to 1 x 9-seat again, but that's the way it works, and I'm pretty sure I've seen exactly that happen online. 

 

Not only that. If you then a few hands later have 19 players (not uncommon), then you'd need to move the players again to split equally on 3 tables?

While I agree the current balancing isn't perfect, I think the above is worse. Given the timebank and TTA in MTT's, as well as the average duration of 9 handed hands early stage, the majority of cases you shouldn't play more than 1 hand either, if both players make use of their time bank - and this is only an issue with really small fields where you don't have further players register in the meantime/you only have the one table going.

There'd need to be some really detailed logic behind it (with a projection aspect being a key part), if we really want to improve it, and it's a part of the code that got immense potential in terms of breaking things/making stuff worse. These are the main reasons - along with the impact being very limited/solely for small field MTT's - why I don't think it can be prioritized anytime soon, even if I agree it's worth looking into.

Check the latest poker release notes. Have a look at our poker promotions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, comanimal said:

It's especially super bad during the limbo level in R/A's as obviously shorthanded tables make all-ins much more likely which means extra money spent on unnecessary rebuys before the add-on.

Built-in mechanic to even out the edge from max late reg 😉 But this is a separate discussion in a way, and I believe RA are living on borrowed time anyway.

Check the latest poker release notes. Have a look at our poker promotions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...
  • 1 month later...
On 10/8/2021 at 4:26 PM, Purps said:

Very true @Pickleman.

And when it does start balancing the tables, it happens one player at a time. So basically if we only have one full table of 9 players running on the tournament, and a new player joins the tournament, it will take 4 played hands on the original table before you have 2 tables of 5 players. That's just too long.

Balancing and breaking up tables could be optimized on few other ways also... It doesn't work very logically currently.

888 used to have this fault. It now pauses the smaller table till they are both even in players it's not that hard. GG has the same dumb issue. The rest are fine. You never see that on Stars.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...