The very nature of the mixed games seems to require that you have to play all the games. This is a situation where a higher level of commitment to play is both a requirement and a common expectation. Playing tight is an option, but being excused from a phase/game of the mix should not be an option.

********
Perhaps if 2 table types are offered, one no-sit-outs and one as-is, the players will ultimately decide what type they want to play, the same as choosing a speed or normal table. Private tables would have no restriction.
********

How would an implicit (explicit?) agreement pop-up when a player sits down at a mixed game that they will pay all ante and bring-ins whether they are sitting in or not (their choice to leave). Just how bad is it if you’re not allowed sitting out in a mixed game (software already knows difference between timing out and disconnected, so I’m not sure how you could circumvent it if so desired)?

Enforce a limit on how many hands per hour sat out? (allows for break. too many hands out => boot from the table). Requires a software change.

Unless you can show me it is a clear violation of policy, I can’t see banning.

If a player habitually sits out a round as his strategy so be it. It is a disadvantage to do so. If you think it is an advantage then do it yourself.

I am strongest with stud and weakest with hld’em omhilo.

In general I play these super-tight. In fact often no hand at all esp. in a turbo but I would never sit out and blow the chance to play monster and near monster hands.

If someone wants to sit out, antes are there and my player equity is up for that round.

sitting out a round habitually is as dumb as the player who builds a big stack and then sits out to ride the tide to a money finish.

I guess Matusow & yourself are doing others a favor by highlighting the case but realistically i dont think anything can be done other than leave the player to play heads-up with himself.

I dont think it will be an issue at the high stakes because most know what they are facing but it could be a problem at the lower stakes. The only other way around it I can think of is a small anti whether you are sitting out or not, for all players.

I bet a solid Holdem player could really clean up at the HORSE tables if he only played the Holdem rotation. I guess it all boils down to sportsman-like conduct. I doubt they have ever banned anyone for this and it would take quite a few complaints to get them to take action and even then I’m sure they would only do so if it was an extreme case like a Holdem player only playing Holdem. If everyone started doing this though it would defeat the whole purpose of mixed games which would suck for me lol. I’m rambling on and on now but I don’t often get to respond to comments lol. BTW, Nicole says hello.

???

That seems a crazy response from FullTilt. Im assuming it’s cash games as tournies deal with that sort of thing via blinds.

I would take the blinds approach to ring games too if this is an issue, just a put them on a forced blind on re-entry after sitting out a certain number of hands.

The banning approach is nuts. Every player has the option to up and leave if they dont like how the game is panning out.

If a up and coming boxer is known for having a big punch it makes it very difficult for him to find a fight. He ends up fighting monkeys until his all round skill is exposed, then he is finished.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=HWX2CVv-CEw

Above? Amir Khan had one weakness, his chin. All he had to do was avoid the puncher. His opponent is good but his all round skill is questionable.

In the same light, if a poker player decides to only play certain games because the overall standard in certain games is below the standard, other players have the option to avoid him. soon enough he will have to move back to holdem or find somewhere else to play.

Yes, with the MC, lol