Thanks everyone
Lots of food for thought.
Make it 30 hands - more standard format there.
I certainly think 40 is too long, and the ealry rounds would just be the usual min-bet, basic strategy stuff until it's time to start jockeying for position in the home straight.
One factor I neglected to mention - They use four decks and deal down to the last card. Now, if you wanted to count cards and gain the maximum benefit, presumably you'd like the shoe to be not quite exhausted going into the final hand. Four decks should give around 25 or 26 rounds, so 24 might be a good number. On the other hand, if you are not counting and want to minimise your disdvantage against any opponents who might be (particularly a bot, which could make unerring use of perfect knowledge of the deck composition) then 30 rounds should ensure that the last five or six are dealt from a new shoe.
I personally like a higher max as it keeps you in the game longer and makes for interesting play. Capping the max bet too low benefits the bots and not the players.
I also like a higher starting bankroll myself - I would suggest 5000 with a max bet of 2500. This encourages wildcats which in the LONG run benefits the skilled players as the wildcats may/can/should burn themselves out. This also allows you to get a quick lead and sit on it. Bots can't do that!
I was thinking along similar lines, but mainly on the grounds of familiarity, rather than any certainty about what benefits skilled players the most. Starting with 8 max bets (4 x 500) does seem excessive, but the familiar 2 or 1 max bets (Global 2 x 500, UBT 1 x 25K) may be too far the other way.
As far as playing the final table to 40 hands what the heck is that? You play until there is a winner!
The multi-table tournaments use the 10-round format throughout. The suggestion is to switch to the 40-round format for the final table only (presumably to make it a bit more of a spectacle). I'm not sure I like the idea; better to stick with the game that you've been playing to get you that far.
PS. My reply would be:
Dear GameAccount,
I appreciate your seeking the players input into this matter. As you can see from my track record I am one of your best customers. In fact my fan pool extends beyond the "pond" and I have the ability to reach thousands of potential customers. [...]
I thought 'Dear CASINONAME' might be a good opening.
Alas, they've now barred US customers, so my reach has shrunk somewhat.
Well to start off with, I am not very thrilled about the "bots", enough players are ready are scared to play on-line without being told they are using robot players against us.
Now playing longer rounds is something I love, it is a BIG advantage for a season tournament player. When I first started playing we use to play 60 hands and live money.
Anytime you lower the number of hands played you add a bigger degree of luck into the chances of winning the table.
I also perfer the meduim size bankroll around $500 with minimum bets of $5 to $10 and maximum bets of $200. Now you are taking away even more of the luck factor out of the event.
Most everybody on this site is an advantage player or trying to get there, so I would think that most of them would perfer as little luck involved in the events we play in as possible.
*NOTE: This is just my opinon!
The bots thing is not as bad as it sounds. We are talking about heads-up games, and the bots don't take part in tournaments, just 'Matchplay'; i.e. single table Sit & Gos. You need never play against one unless you choose to; they won't pop up at your table uninvited.
There is still the issue of trust though. As soon as you have any kind of a losing streak, it's human nature to start thinking that the game must be rigged.
When it comes to the betting limits, obviously, the absolute value of the amounts invloved is just a distraction, what matters is the ratio between them. UBT has added lots of zeros to make us all feel like high rollers, but I'd have preferred it if they had used the equivalent -
BR:1000, Max:1000, Min:20, Increment:20
rather than the inflated-
BR:25K, Max:25K, Min:500, Increment:500.
For comparison, If we keep the GameAccount $4000 BR, your preference scales to -
BR:4000, Max:1600, Min: 40 to 80. Unwieldy numbers, which is why I'd like to see a BR of 1000 used as the routine starting point for such calculations. The BR need never change, it's just a question of how you then divide it up to give all the other figures. These figures do show however, that you favour a max bet of over three times that which is being proposed, and a min bet in the region of half what is being proposed.
One peculiarity that remains from the 10-round game is the increment of $1. i.e. the smallest bet you can make is $100, and the next smallest is $101. An increment of 50 or 100 would be more usual, it seems. Over 10 rounds - and more importantly with only 10 min bets in my total BR - I've actually found this quite useful, allowing for a few unusual strategies. It probably would be less so in the new format, but couldn't do any harm I suppose.
Indeed I am seeking to minimise the luck; I just want to try and make sure that really will be the effect of whatever it is I ask for when I reply.
Too rich for my blood! I normally play at the £5 level. Hopefully they'll lower the threshold; people certainly aren't rushing to play for such high stakes.