I received a response from Poker Stars today. I want to make sure it's ok to post here (I'm sure it is) so once I hear back, I'll copy it here. Hopefully everyone can give their thoughts on what they've said.

Ok here's their response. I won't be around too much the next couple days but hopefully you guys can discuss.

Hello Tony,

PokerStars will always be happy to see the games running, and in games that have a limited player pool, the responsibility for this will always fall on the regulars.

However, after reading the thread, I feel that most of you are missing important points when it comes to how to keep the games liquid. If you are focusing on one player to build the game around, I can promise you that sooner or later the game will die. Instead, you should focus on how to get new players to join the games, and the only way of doing that is to have games running continuously. To have regulars playing against each other for fifteen minutes or four orbits is just not going to be enough.

One of the things that every poker player eventually learns is to take a long view on your results, and I think you guys need to take a similarly long-term approach to this situation. Your results in the regs-only game will probably not be great, but it is an investment you should choose to make if you want recreational players to eventually join your ranks. I am sure that your long term earnings will increase even if you will be playing some pretty tough line-ups for much of the time.

Another aspect of the way the games are going now is that once a recreational player is sitting down, all the other seats will be occupied in no-time, due to the tracking software many of the regulars are using. I ask you, how are new recreational players supposed to get into the game? I understand wanting to play with a non-pro, and it would be silly for you to pass up that opportunity. But I suggest that you also open a second table in these situations, so casual players have the opportunity to sit down.

As for what PokerStars can do in this situation, there is not really a whole lot to be done at the tables. It might come as a surprise to some, but when it comes down to it, if you want a particular game to run, you will just have to sit down and start playing. What we can do, is to help you schedule games at certain times of the week. For example, if it is agreed that you will always have a high-stakes game on Mondays and Thursdays at 1900 CET, we can put up banners in the Fixed Limit Lobby to inform about these games. If the regulars can then agree to keep these games going, there is a good chance that recreational players will eventually pick up on this and join you at the tables more often.

Best Regards
Baard
Poker Room Management

What you propose in the OP isn't against PokerStars rules. However, PokerStars can't participate in any agreement that differentiates between players based on assigned skill level or desirability of that player as an opponent. Players must make their own determinations about which players they prefer to play against.

Some of you may have received emails asking if you'd be interested in participating in scheduled high stakes games. This is how we'd be happy to help build regular games. Scheduled games treat all players equally. They also give a time when all players know they can get action and allow PokerStars to help build buzz about the games. New players may come play as a result.

Building such scheduled games will require players being willing to invest time to start the games, even sometimes playing in situations that they'd otherwise avoid. The benefit is in having a regular, sustainable game in the long run that is pleasurable and clearly non-discriminatory. In the past it's been common for high stakes live games to be organized in this way. I don't see why scheduled online games couldn't be just as successful.

It may be hard to look past the initial challenge of playing 4 handed with 3 regulars to see the potential of a regularly scheduled night of poker that is advertised by PokerStars in the lobby and via email, mentioned in online poker news sites, and railed in poker forums by fans. I can't guarantee that such games will succeed but do believe in the concept and want to work with players with similar thoughts.

Bingo,

Start learning new games

scheduled games are an interesting idea.

How exactly would scheduled games work?

Do you just set a scheduled time for a game to run?

If this was the case then I don't see that it would hurt the games and maybe more non regs would show up and the games could be better

But if all regs show up then they would all prob just sit out

how would scheduled games help the situation at all?

Unless im missing something im pretty sure they would only run with at least one seat open right? And then how long would other regs let it stay open?

unless i guess we are talking about 500/1k+ games, where the number of regs willing to play is somewhat limited

Wow, I am shocked at the email Pokerstars sent you. I think they are spot on. It was worded perfectly. If they would of took this approach earlier I am sure these games would of never dried up.


Its funny how Pstars welcomed tracking software in the beginning because it helped them generate more rake(and kept the forum regs happy), but are now paying for it in the long run because no one wants to play against each other. That really made me lol and it brightened my day.


Good job Pstars, now look into some of these players accounts and see who has been colluding and ban them from your site. I believe the games will be live again and in return you will generate more rake.

Also make tracking software illegal again.

Pokerstars Steve, could you comment on the sitout limitation idea suggested earlier in this thread?

Hi Steve,

This is certainly a good suggestion, however, you may not be aware of common behavior that actually is occurring on your site in similar situations. For example, let's assume 5 regular players are willing to start a 6 max table hoping to accomplish what you propose. I have observed that many other regular players in that situation would rather fill the last seat and choose to sit out of the game as long as the software allows, rather than risk the other 5 players being "rewarded" with that final seat filled by the so-called 'recreational player'.

Another example occurs when a new game starts among regulars, some unscrupulous people will choose to play only if they do not randomly end up starting in the small blind or big blind position, and then quit immediately when the big blind comes to them, thus receiving free hands by virtue of the features of the software. This behavior is both financially rewarding, and eminently repeatable with the software working as it does, and to avoid being taken advantage of in this way, other regulars who would not themselves engage in such behavior may choose to avoid starting these games at all.

So while you are certainly correct that the onus is on the regular players to create a hospitable environment and start games, there are flaws in the software design that many people take advantage of and which force these same regulars to be defensive about giving up repeated and measurable advantages to people who do not have the same ethical practices as they do.

See ring game rules 10 and 11 that were added earlier this year:

http://www.pokerstars.com/poker/room/policies/ring/

We have been more actively monitoring NLHE and PLO games. If this is a problem for limit too, we can review these games as well. Email highstakes@pokerstars.com to report any violations. If you include your skype name and are a player in these games, our ring games managers Nick and Baard will add you to Skype so that you can report violations more effectively in real time.

I need to set realistic expectations here: Nick and Baard are human and they do sleep, eat, attend meetings, and even recreate so sometimes people get away with breaking the rules. Players aren't given suspensions for first offenses either; our primary mission is to educate as we find that most rules violators are only doing it to stay even with others and would prefer a properly regulated environment with these rules enforced.

We have issued a good number of 'time outs' to players for this behavior, however, including at least one week long ban. The NLHE and PLO games are much better off as a result.

This is also a violation of our rules. A single incident isn't going to spur action but if a player repeatedly does this at your tables please email highstakes@pokerstars.com to let us know. We can run reports on the % of hands players have played at each position and take appropriate action. Again, first action is to educate/warn but repeated violators will find that there are real consequences.

Yes, we'd just set a scheduled time for a game to run, but only with the input of at least a few regulars who'd be willing to commit to sit and start the game at that time for at least a few weeks to give it a chance to work.

I wouldn't expect that your 5 favorite opponents would show up the first week at the scheduled time to join your table. You might get one such player the first week or you might not. In time, as players started to realize that there's a reliable game at this time, more such players might show up. It certainly would be a unique situation at high stakes these days to show up and see 3 or 4 regulars battling it out. Some opponents might appreciate that.


I don't see this as being a problem given the playing habits being exhibited by most regulars. If it did happen, certainly one of the six would leave the table fairly quickly.

Which specific idea is that?

At this point, I can't imagine anything being worse than the status quo so I'd certainly be willing to give scheduled games, up to 100-200, a shot. How would the scheduled games work exactly? Would a certain number of regulars sign up and then be required to play? How long would they play if no one else showed up and how many would play at a time? And then if the game does fill with a non-reg, would the regs start another table?

If the original proposal is not violating any rules, I think we should still go ahead and implement that asap. I realize it's not a long term solution but I do think it helps. In the short time after this thread was started, I noticed most of the regs playing at least a couple orbits after a non-reg left the table and in a few instances another non-reg sat and the game continued. This is one of the benefits along with removing the misconception that we're a group that's teaming up against one person.

I am back in the US so I unfortunately can't participate in the original proposal or scheduled games until January. But once I'm back on, you can include me in any scheduled game as long as the hours are within my schedule (roughly 10 AM EST- 9 PM EST)

To the Stars regs:

If anyone on the initial list no longer wants to participate or anyone else wants to be added, please let me know. I think we should go ahead with the original plan and determine whether it's feasible and worthwhile long-term.

Maybe 100% rakeback or some other similar incentive might help get the scheduled games off the ground initially?