I noticed that there seems to be a lot of people complaining about the top players always slumming in the bottom tables. Table maximums would solve many of those problems.

Under the elo system of kdice there were no strict table minimums. I once sat at a 0 table with Wishbone who was 2100+ at the time. He won, and still lost points. The ability to lose points even while winning a game created effectively a table maximum. It forced people to play people similar to their scores.

Under the new system people are allowed to sit with anyone (provided they are above 10 points or under 100). This has both pros and cons. While I believe that it is generally a good idea to let the “echelons” of kdice to mix, it has created problems. There seems to be a persistent thread on the forums of people complaining about the 17k player who is sitting at a 10 table hoping for an easy 100 points. Maybe they’ll reply that there aren’t enough high games to get a game going. However, table maximums would create more high-table traffic, eliminating many of the problems that the under 1k players experience.

The best competition you can find all month is on the 0 tables, at least in the two months that I’ve been playing since not having an account in the top 25. The games are great, fast-paced, and pretty ruthless. By not allowing anyone with over 100 points to sit, it creates somewhat of a bubble where better players emerge from, and the lesser players learn the skills to eventually compete on the 200 or the 1k tables.

I propose table maximums of:
0 table: 100 points
10 table: 500 points
200 table: 4k points
1k table: No maximum at this point.

I’d like to see what other people think of this idea. Table maximums would promote more games on the higher tables, would reduce the number of top 25 players trolling the lower tables, and would promote greater competition towards the end of the month. Heh, I just hope that this doesn’t force me to start worrying about my points again.

Think about it.