How can you write a post that long about these games and yet come to the conclusion that the only contributing factor to their being a small skill element is rake? I mean really??

The main deciding factors in whether you win or lose over any given sample, are the distribution of jackpots over your playing sample, and how well you run in the games with the biggest jackpots. Two things you have no control over...

Sure, you have no influence about the jackpot distribution but that even itself out in the long run to some extent. But once again, a random prize pool distribution doesnt mean there is less skill involved.

I understand the concern about "how well you run in the games with the biggest jackpots" and I am def for an automatic deal function like FTP has to give players the chance to even out variance in the games with the biggest jackpots (in fact I had a lengthy discussion with Steve in the Stars improvment thread about that topic) and having some sort of fix payout structure for the games with the biggest jackpots -something what FTP has as well.

The way I see it is that there is a close to zero chance that Stars will not offer that Spin & Go format on the other clients at one point. I mean sure, we can just lay back and say "zomg, no skill just luck format" all day long while spilling beans or we can give Stars constructive feedback in the hope Stars will listen to us and implement a format that will not be a high variance fest.

The lottery style "jackpot" possible hit is a very good thing for everyone. Regs/winning players will still see their edge come through in the long run. It just takes longer to even out to your theoretical winrate. If you cant understand this and cant handle the variance, being a professional gambler is not for you.

Recs will love it when they luckbox a big prizepool. Their lifetime as a player will be DRASTICALLY increased by this happening. This is what makes this format great. Regs will see their theoretical winrate rise (and over time their actual financial gain) because of this, the games will be much better. Recs who don't hit a big prizepool will not have their lifespan as a player shortened substantially as a flipside either, it is a great idea.

What is bad about this is the possibility of collusion due to it being 3 handed. I am not 100% convinced about stars security department these days for a variety of reasons. Battlenet style lobbys are the best way to do it but to be sure they should only "launch" the game when 20 ppl are waiting, and that's just not going to happen. The lowest stake games will be safe imo.

Also of course the rake should not be outrageous. 5% would be fine to me.

FWIW, $7 6max hypers are raked at 4.3%.

yeah any reasonable explanation why if husng hypers (1.6-2% rake) and 6max hypers (4,3%- rake), with no huge variance jackpots, the conclusion that 5% rake for Spin and Gos is fair ?!

Are we falling to the trap of thinking it was originally 7% and being happy with 5% now?

Seems like it pretty much... makes no sense to offer those rake distributions and out of nowhere put spin and gos, with huge variance jackpots on higher rake, when the jackpot is paid thru prizepool and not rake.

1) Softer games justify higher rake from Stars' viewpoint as they spend more marketing money per tourney to attract recreationals and also don't need to lower the rake to the extreme to keep games going because regs (who go to where their prey flocks) will get interested anyway;

2) Spin & Gos are gonna be comparable to 6-max hypers one limit higher in terms of both profitability and variance, and the rake will be still lower in a $X Sp&G than in a $2X 6-max hyper in absolute terms.

Who said 5% is happening on higher stakes or is fair?

As far as I knew, only FTP had these, and only up to $10, where hyper turbo HUSNG rake is higher than 1.6-2%.

That said, I don't anticipate lottery rake to be as low as hyper HUSNGs. While hypers make more rake for PS per hour than turbos ever did, the profit in hypers is also higher, and that signal is likely to lead decision makes to conclude that the rake should be higher.

As a player, I look at "hey, games are raking in more money per hour, that should be a fine place to set the rake." As operator, they probably say "hey, games are making pros more money per hour, they should be very happy." Not sure how that disconnect bridges, or who is more correct, just putting it out there from my own opinion on the rake debate.

Hopefully the variance is taken into consideration as well as what hourly rates are being achieved. As pointed out by Alex Wice, the potential seems pretty high for unprepared grinders to face a whole new level of hurt.

I've disagreed with Alex in the past (especially when he recommended eliminating HUSNGs to Stars), but his points on lottery spin and go make sense here.

Well, "lol2p2bitching" withstanding, don't really agree with what he means there.

I have to disagree on almost everything you say.

Long run? What's the long run here? 500k games? (oh wait, not even, in that number of games you may have not hit the big multipliers you are supposed to... Remember 4 of every 100k games will be x1000)

Not only the variance of the game affects, the variance of the prize-draw, of the lottery, is there... So could you estimate what the long run is?
You could play 1 million games and hit under the stats for the big multipliers, if you are lucky enough to hit them then you will have to win the game, and your edge isn't big enough in a HyperTurbo 25bb starting stack 3 handed game to beat this.

New Recs coming because of this new format? They won't love to play 10 or 20 spin&go if they don't get a big multiplier, they will feel deceived since they don't get all the money in the prizepool, there have been complaints already in twitter/facebook...
So the ones that would persist on playing are already playing nowadays, normally 6max SnG and HU, they will play anything to try to win, no new traffic will be generated imo, only moved from those formats to this new one. Check pokerscout.

Collusion would only exist as long as they keep the winner take all format in big multipliers.

Rake is just... abusive.

The variance of the prize draw is quite easily removed by staking / swapping, especially at Stars, who provide convenient audit files. It's easier for a backer / swap buddy to determine the horse's 'true' ROI fast with a good precision when the bulk of the variance is pure RNG luck unaffected by the player skill, much easier than in MTTs that used to be the most lucrative format (until lottery SnGs appeared) but require an unrealistically big sample to make accurate ROI assumptions, so the Spin & Go format is likely to attract massive investments. (I guess Ry is already rubbing hands.)

$50s released on ftp

The rake in them is $2 = 4% (just a reminder in case sm1 didn't calculate/see it). There's no BI level between $10 and $50, maybe out of fear of $50s not running smoothly (which has no real grounds imo, one of the reasons behind the 3-max tables and the blind registration is that it makes them kick off very often).

At least they had enough common sense to not make it the same 5% as in $1-10s; that would stir some rage for sure.

and there was already a $50 game hitting the 2,000x...

Is the RNG real? As in are all spins independent of all other spins?

At least it's supposed to be independent. That the 2000x has happened so early is hardly believable, smells like a marketing move... but the chance of that happening with the fair RNG is still statistically significant.

Is there an assessment of how many $50 games start per minute? The iPoker counterpart sometimes takes more than a minute to fill up, especially at offpeak hours, at the €10 level, so I doubt that more than 2-3 $50 games start at FTP every minute. Or maybe there will be more for the first few days while Stars customers are trying the format out, but they'll return to Stars soon, especially when Spin & Gos appear at .com, because Edge rewards are a bit less generous and some people are also committed to Stars VIP goals and will prefer to continue the chase even despite having to play usual SnGs for a while.

def a marketing move for sure, when they first came out a 10 hit the 2000x within 24 hours (some russian girl won it with no chop)

that would be presumably illegal to do so i doubt it (marketing laws)

Probably they could have financed first one as a startup promo which seems fine to me.

Also, after 24 hours hitting the 1000x doesnt mean much, as its completely normal to have reached the jackpot number in 24hrs.. that would only take a few thousands of tournaments in a 10$ stake in a big site.

A sad thing for me is that, if they decide to give a 5-figure prize away on the launch day of .com Spin & Gos, they'll ensure that its doesn't go to another Russian

Well we are allowed to question RNG. Something like this is easier to "rig" to reduce variance for the company. I remember that on absolute poker/ub they had some casino games that were exactly rigged (though obv the house edge is the same). I'm not even sure if this would make it illegal unlike rigging poker dealing.

Yeah, the possibility of that being rigged indeed is real imo... I mean Pokersites have a very good understand of their player base and who is winning or not.. And as they showed in the past, they are not really too preferrantial of grinders, because, lets face it.. If some grinder is SN or going for SNE elite, where would he go if he never hits the big one..

Nowhere - he would keep playing. But a fish, thats close to busto, hitting the jackpot is obv. more profitable to them.

So by introducing these kind of games, actually pokersites have an additional way of making sure, that loosing players keep on playing and earning rake for them.. Not a nice prospect for us, because we keep paying the bill in form of rake, over and over.

I assume the very first game has the same odds for hitting the top-tier jackpot as any other game.

It's definitely possible but let's not jump to conclusions. I was just putting it out there.

I fail to see how a fish hitting a jackpot and going on to lose a good chunk of it back to regs is a negative. Better than a grinder hitting it and pocketing the lot, imo.

But no one was saying what you wrote.