I like Ggrl's red line . So if I dont go , he has my vote.

What are they doing for 25/50 and 50/100 and then also for 100/200+? For 5k and 10k it will be zoom and table starters? And for 20k+ will just be table starters?

Can people play HU for table starters?

Unfortunately I don't know the answer to any of those questions. All I know is when we brought up seating scripts in the last meetings, Stars plan was to prevent their use by changing non-zoom tables to table-starter only, and they were pretty adamant about it being the best solution.

The only thing I do know about the roll-out of the system is that it will be tried at high stakes first. I would imagine that 5k and 10k PLO will have tablestarters too, but that's just an educated guess.

I wouldnt mind having the table starters if you can also play HU on them. I know nothing about them though. If it limits you to 3h+ I wouldnt support them

http://www.pokerstars.com/poker/room...able-starters/

Customize your preferences in the client at ‘Options’ > ‘Table Starter Preferences...’



I dont have this in my client?

options > auto seating (ring games) > table starter preferences

I think ggarj has done a really good job , as usual (except when playing) but now is time for someone new to go there.
This persons need to be smart , aggro , and play plo midstakes+.
Are there any volunteers besides ggarj ?

I remember having to bump the last thread many many times over the span of a couple weeks just to get you to address anything, and post a little TR. you did not respond in a timely fashion at all.

I just have a general sense that you are far too passive to represent the community for something like this again, no disrespect intended, but these players meetings are about REPRESENTING players, and not sit there and nod your head, sign NDA's, and then report nothing of any real relevance back.

Im not saying this as a bad thing, u are a well liked person GGrJ, and obviously a really super dude and a good man in general, but i do think someone else has to stand up and "take the bull by the horns", and rep the players aggressively and intelligently so that stars cant just ignore and prolong these issues like they have.

but then again, i dont see anyone else putting their hand up, so maybe im a ******

i still think sending no one is optimal line here tho

Seems as though we're voting on who to send why not have an option for "send nobody" and let people vote for that as well.

sending no one is the worst option
agreeing on boycotting the tables for a week or 2 weeks or w/e is something but doubt thats gonna ever happen

You think Stars would sign off on a rep that's not middle of the road 'yay nice vacation I'll sign whatever NDA they present as long as me and my GF get to go to the Stars HQ yaaay'?

I don't think so

+1

at least it make a stand! nothing happened after the last meetings, we got literally no infos cause of this ****ty nda and instead let us prostitute for stars own sake "we listen and work together with the poker-community"!

and tappi its nothing personal, but last meeting where u went was bs for the community, may u did a great job, but we didn't got anything to hear except a TR after weeks(cause Steve had to post first^^) which basically said nothing, neither we saw any changes. imo stars gives a *** about us, they look whats best for them and don't care what we want cause they know we´ll let us treat anyway like this, cause there are not much choices for a professional besides stars left on the market(just look f.e. the issue with the "add Table btn" - KotH is implemented since month, still they didn't got this small software-fix done. And you know why? cause they give a ****! sad but its the truth, this meetings are just charade!

So yeah if you wanna represent us, then let us vote and accept the most popular choice, if its "send nobody" then accept it(even if you don't agree with) and write them a short message with the link to the vote!

Ok, SRP, since we're speculating on my personality (based on your "general sense") would you tell me what kind of a person - in your opion - volunteers to represent thousands of people knowing in doing so he'll be participating in 3 days of meetings with strangers.

Would you characterize that person as passive? lacking in confidence? uncomfortable in debates?

Glad to hear I'm a "super dude and a good man in general" though, thanks

This is not true. It's one thing to say you're disappointed with the outcome of the meetings, but claiming that no changes resulted from them and that I reported nothing relevant back to the community is simply false.

I've already given my blessing to the "send nobody" option in the poll, it's being discussed in the zoo-thread if you're interested.

well but what happened as result of the meeting?!

tbh i doubt koth or the "plo-promotions" were results of the meeting, just judging by the time they happened compared to the time it takes the ps-guys to show up.
Ofc we got a TR and ofc you tried to give us as much as u could but just reread the old thread, how many users asked questions where you had to answer "sry, can´t go in detail" "im not allowed to say" "can't tell this" "nda" etc...?
So all the relevant questions wasn't answered cause you wasn't allowed to talk about and the "changes" which was made was pretty sure weeks before decided and the main issue which was on the agenda comparing rake and in regards to this work on a model to make it more fair for everyone didn't maked any move forward!

p.s. as i said, i know you don't get paid for this or have any big benefits from it, so im thankful that u do this as volunteer-so rly don't take this as personal attack!

I hope that people don't blame GGARJ for any of the lack luster results of these meetings. This is not his fault or any other reps fault. All we can ask of reps is to bring our concerns to the table and if Stars decides to act on them then they will. If they don't and you're unsatisfied then the blame should go to Stars. I thought GGARJ put a strong effort into campaigning prior to the trip and I felt he made a strong effort after the trip to answer questions as best as he could. I don't think for a second that he didn't put in a strong effort in any regard.

I believe focusing on issues like rake is a waste of time. Stars can see the data. They can monitor players volume. They can track how long people stick with the game. They can see the percentage of deposits that go to rake vs withdrawing players and they can compare that to NL... which I'm convinced is the formula that they use when deciding on rake. No amount of opinions on here will be nearly as accurate as the data that they have. If Stars chooses to reduce rake it won't be because of these meetings. It will be due to a business decision that they believe will increase their bottom line, both long term and short. At this time I honestly don't believe they think that it will be a good business move so please don't blame GGARJ when he comes back without results in this area.

Things that could very easily change for PLO due to these meetings are things like the tournament schedule. Tourneys are based pretty much on player demand. If Stars was convinced that 1.5k players would show up every week for a PLO $215 then there'd be a weekly 250k. Since PLO tourneys on the bigger scale is still in it's infancy I think GGARJ should be well equipped with community feedback to offer suggestions to improve the current lineup.

I change my mind.

Why don't we give Joey a bunch of Adderall and send him? Probably the most in line with understanding a balance of what MS/HS and SSPLO guys all need, since he's played so much of both.

Joey would livestream them meetings.

No, I don't take it personally, I'm just incredibly frustrated with the arguments used in this debate

And yes, there was no progress on rake which was a key issue for PLO going to the last meeting. I reported back that according to Stars numbers PLO is growing and in very healthy shape, excluding a few player groups on specific stakes.

Capping of the midstakes HU lobby and the new 82$ PSKO on Sundays (which has been a success) are some tangible changes that are easy for players to notice. It's very unfortunate if you believe they were predetermined.

I also gave player feedback on a number of issues such as seating scripts and reported how the discussion went. We found out what Stars plans to do with them (table-starters) and why they feel that's the best option. I believe having a player rep sitting in these discussions is extremely valuable to the community.

The PLO MTT schedule is indeed very much open to suggestions by the community. It's clear that HSPLOers would like to see a high stakes Sunday MTT as well, maybe 320+r or 530FO.

As far as rake is concerned, we obviously can't presume to educate Stars on any data, but given recent player studies on Zoom PLO50 winrates for example, we def need to look at how the ecology is doing. Last few times reps have reported problems with NLO8, Stars has made no changes, but at least the O8 community knows where things stand.

If we find small stakes zoom-ecology in dreadful shape, there's certainly an argument for extra VPPs, for example. Hyper SNGs have lower rake than turbos for a good reason, a good analogy Skjervoy described to me. If no changes result from such a discussion, at least The community will know they should not be playing Zoom.

We shouldn't expect any change related to rake though.
Doesn't matter whether we actually send a Rep or not.
When a company has monopoly, it can do as it wants.
Stars is the only big player advertising enough to get new fun players to join the games.
The change will come whenever another big player pops up.
Unfortunately I don't see it happening.
PLO200+ is fine but SS gets raked to death.

I can't even say that i'd be mad.

* But seriously. I think Joey is the perfect candidate. He's doing enough for Stars on his own (livestreaming) bringing attention to them. They are definitely gaining free exposure from that, and ofc they're aware. Not that that has anything to do with the rep.

But he's also played both range of stakes fairly recently. He's in touch with what the players need. He thinks in terms of catering to fun players, but also has the mass grinders at heart. He also knows the biggest problems in the HS games, who the seat script scum are etc.

Receiving a nomination and snap accepting it without a vote is kinda meh.

While this might be the right approach and expectations shouldn't be too high, I'm sure you share my curiosity as to how achievable winrates are evolving, for zoom in particular?

imo it's worth looking into, even if Stars is unlikely to change anything until they see a significant drop in volume.

Yes I think looking into data is of course interesting and allow the reps to have a pretty good idea of the situation. I would be very interested in having a look and ask questions.
Nevertheless we as 2+2ers don't get that information and that kinda sucks.
The NDA should be for sensitive information only, the ones that could lead to a personal gain if sold for example.
You should be at least able to write here afterwards whether this or that limit is alive or dead...