Hello 2+2,

My PokerStars screenname is currrr14.

After many hours of discussions between the leaders of the $60s and the $100s PokerStars HU Hyper Divisions, we decided to do a large amount of research into what could be a more “fair” system for everyone involved.

With the number of games it was taking players to earn the necessary votes, and the much lower number of games that was necessary to get a very high percentage of confidence intervals (thanks Coffeeyay!), we realized it was time to make some major changes.

Effective immediately, there will be a new way to join the $100s. Although this will be in addition to the current voting system, we expect most new players who join will have done so via this method rather than earning their spot through a vote. This new system allows a player to work their way into the $100s Hyper Group purely by their EV results. We realize this system still isn’t *perfect*, but it is far better than what we were doing before.

Below are the numbers a player needs to hit:

4k games, -0.8% ev
6k games, -1% ev
8k games, -1.13% ev
10k games, -1.23% ev

If a player produces those numbers against the group, they will be given a spot to join once cuts have been made so the cap stays the same.

Over the next 48 hours we’ll be announcing more details such as removing players, checking of results, and other misc information that is important to making this run smoothly.

We feel confident that with this program there will no longer be cause for concern that the $100 Hyper Group is unfair or unattainable in a reasonable amount of time by a deserving player.

Can someone for example from 30s skip the 60s and fight their way to join the 100s group?

of course they can

Did u win a caption contest by PS?

Sitlisters need to play at least two tables if they want their games to count.

Great job guys!
I'm interested in how the cutting process will work, so far it seems to be a much better system.

What's the rule on members having to give action? I.e. if I want to play 1 specific player, how many games does he have to play before he can decline?

30 mins

This is kind of silly...

I play alot of 1-tabling, simply because I am addicted to smoking and want to smoke outside of my house, so every 45 mins +- I take a 5 min break.

Because of that when action isnt very fast, I cant ever really get many tables going, before having to decline them again and go smoke.

If only two tables count, then half my sessions dont count?

^it's fine if you are trying to setup 2 tables, it's not that only when 2 tables are up your games will count. just that when you deny 2nd table in general, it won't count. i'm not sure how you would even filter out the games once you want to make a checkup

yeah me neither it just seems like a cluster**** lol

Isnt there some way to angleshoot there tho? Like if u start running bad with coolers you can just deny 2nd table and later claim the games don't count?

Just saying because I understand its also in my best interest if cartels are optimal.

Sounds like a reason to quit smoking.

"Group Poker: Saving Lives."

"Group Poker: Making you quite since 2014"

Sounds more like too many fish feeling entitled to receive x amount of action on their preferred amount of tables, for their preferred amount of time while they are opensitting.

I thought one of the biggest appeals of HU was to be more able than in other formats to play short sessions and take many small breaks

I'm getting pretty fed up with all the ******ed **** going on so I'm going to start posting relevant stuff ITT.


Hall Of Shame

1v@x; Played 24 games lifetime vs him over the course of 2 sessions.

1st session; He says he couldn't 2 table right then, I let it slide and didnt mind much.

after his rungood ends he declines as soon as he gets close to losing real $.

2nd session, I see him in lobby passing by multiple times, go for a sigarette, come back and snap him up.

=>









I don't mind having to grind vs regs, I don't mind fighting over lobbies, but I do mind having to deal with children.

After above chat I just stayed silent and played the game, when it was over he declined.

Some players are really cool in 100s and giving lots of action, but these weak kinda guys I especially want to play, and I need volume to get 4K games, like this I'll never get there. I guess it's their way to decline action secretly.





Obv graph says nothing, just adding it for completionist sake.

EDIT:* Session 1 and 2 are about a week apart fwiw, not same day.

fastcolt, i'm pretty sure that by the division rules it's OK to decline a sitlister if you're playing another, i do think that if a division member opensits they should be able to play a sitlister if they're sat by one, but i don't think they should have to 2-table under those circumstances.

Fwiw I just got done playing 1v@x, i ran well vs him but he still played for over an hour, and didn't bm in chat. Ofc it's still possible he dodges action vs other people idk. It's true his chat with you was immature.

I don't care much for the chat tbh.

I'm mostly annoyed at the fact that he declines 2 times in 2 sessions, both to 2 table or give longer action.

I think it's also unfair that for example, if you are multitabling him and he sits a 3d lobby and you join him, he declines and tries to get a fish instead. (because this is what he's basically doing)

I believe the idea behind the cartel is to have a group vs individual dynamic going, not a "if your in, you get 1 table of fish for every 2 of reg you have" (which I wouldn't even mind if it didn't **** with my volume this much)

I mean, thats not defending the lobbys at all...

Yeah i think it's a good idea to have a rule where if a division member opensits they have to be willing to accept on that table if a sitlister sits them. If a division member is a 2-tabler then they have to be able to play 100% of their tables vs sitlisters, so why should a 4-tabler get protected and be able to get free recs while a 2-tabler can't? This just ends up encouraging people to play more tables than they should which is bad for the waitlists.

Agreed and also the feeling I have/was trying to word, you did it well tho, thanks.

"This just ends up encouraging people to play more tables than they should & normally would, which is bad for the waitlists."

Also for all the other cartel members who are abiding by the rules and not trying to angleshoot free fish, it sucks that he's doing this.

That kind of chat is completely ridiculous. I wish poker players had more respect for each other.

He doesn't need to two table you when playing another reg, but I would definitely recommend taking all his action and just have him decline you. Especially if he is going to be that ignorant about it.

"but these weak kinda guys I especially want to play, and I need volume to get 4K games, like this I'll never get there. I guess it's their way to decline action secretly."

Nice part about this is you get to play weak guys to increase your EV at least until the 100s Division starts kicking players that clearly don't belong.

If they don't give you action I strongly encourage you to keep posting this type of stuff so that it is dealt with in a constructive matter within the division.

Thank you for your post currr.

I am just posting here for informational purposes towards you guys mostly, I'm not trying to start any drama but I did feel like it was worthwhile to post situations like that, and will continue to do so if they arise.

Side question, if he doesnt need to two table me when he has a diff reg (understandable) is he allowed to decline after one game still tho? If I do snap him up?

yeah, right now if a member is already playing one reg and sits an empty lobby he is free to decline after one match.

from what date are we counting?

AFAIK its 27/11/2013 (not 100% tho)

afaik I know that is correct. I am no longer a 100s member or leader though so I'm not 100% sure.