NL50/100 on Stars confirmed softest game on the planet

i m not watching the highest stakes on stars very often but this is clearly true on other networks where games almost only run when a mark sits. any reasonable 1/2nl 6max grinder would have been a significant winner in games with guy laliberte.

lol

A recreational player might not want to play a game, where his actions per minute (APM) are so high and as a consequence limit his ability to do anything while playing but clicking buttons. If he would want to increase his APM he would play more tables, but probably he enjoys the relaxed atmosphere of 80hh per hour and e.g. a sports match, a cigar or drink, browsing etc.

You could give them the option to play Zoom at any stakes, but I would not force them, only if your intention is to have them play on FTP instead of Stars, this could be the right decision.

There are better ways to make the games more accessible for a bigger player pool, through competition, than imposing a game on people they clearly have not enjoyed in the past (>NL5/10 Zoom is apparently dead).

Give the (recreational) players the opportunity to decide for themselves how they want to spend their time on your platform.

I feel like i'm in kindergarten again, but: you started it. I hope you have a backup plan too as this is also going to minimize your winrate up to a point where you can't play professionally anymore. Or you might consider yourself one of the top regs

'You could give them the option to play Zoom at any stakes, but I would not force them, only if your intention is to have them play on FTP instead of Stars, this could be the right decision'

surely this is the point? FTP and Stars are effectively one company. If players don't like what is happening at Stars and decide to play elsewhere where are they going to go??? sealwithcubs?? very few are going to go anywhere apart from FTP. This would help them develop FTP as the home of highstakes poker.

If this happens is it so bad for u highstakes players? .. u still get action ,ok on a different platform but with the same professional reputable management. You may even get more action, if most people switch over you could get more playing there than there are at Stars at present.

There's a site out there trying to solve all these issues and has been taking on board everyone's suggestions on 2+2.

http://www.reddit.com/r/poker/commen..._online_poker/

How are we supposed to know this site isn't a complete scam? Anyone reputable behind it?

when people are talking about what real poker is or stars is changing the game blah blah blah it's pefectly valid to talk about it. 24 tabling with huds,seat scripts etc isn't real poker either.

It's been live since April and even with low traffic the owner still works on it and has not done a runner with funds.

A lot of players I play with at other Bitcoin poker sites have never had an issue either and have deposited and withdrawn many times.

I don't understand how, even a 10-year old could detect scripting by just looking at the tables. And if you create a script that doesn't take seats instantly, you'll have a TST like program which no one cares about.

It seems to me from your self-admiration, fear mongering and random derailings that you are just trying to put an end to a constructive discussion on purpose politician-style.

Why don't you at least explain some basics instead of being so cryptic (and condescending)?

winner winner

Party Poker NJ doesn't let you choose cash tables at all. It randomly sits you at a table. It's just a universal pool and you're sat. How is this not the best solution?

I'm just an on looker at this point and don't play this high, but when I move out of my home country to play here in a few months I'd really hate it if I could only play Zoom at the stakes I play. In fact, I would never play cash on Stars if it was this way. I'm sure many others wouldn't either. Zoom is not the same as a regular game.

I really hope the people playing 50 100 decide on Jan. 1st not to play until these tables are gone. It starts with 50 100 and then it's everything. Sure, you might miss out on games for a bit, but would that not be worth it to keep normal games? Zoom has its place, but that place is NOT every cash table.

couldn't agree more^^

If people were seated at a table they didn't like they wouldn't play. Scripts could still work to only seat when games are good.

How would a script know if a game is good if you can't see any info in the lobby? Download Party Poker NJ and check out their cash lobby, you don't need to be in the state. It looks like this:

$1-$2 6 max- 8 tables
$1-$2 9 handed- 5 tables
etc, etc

Of course they wouldn't be forced to play, but they aren't in Zoom either. Especially since they can just fold and go to a better seat. I don't see how you can bum hunt if you have no choice of where you sit. If you really want to take it a step further you can limit the amount of times someone can sit and get up within a certain period of time.

I'd suggest PokerStars open up the NJ client and take a look at it. It's the solution you are looking for without changing the dynamics of the game.

Is it randomly assigned to a table when you join or randomly assigned to a table to get dealt a hand? In the former tough games wouldn't run and the latter is pretty much just zoom isn't it? Maybe slower or something?

For this to work I would imagine you would need to pose some restriction(s) on the ability to join a table, then leave, and try joining another table again. Without some restriction preventing this then it would defeat the purpose since bumhunters could keep hopping in and out until they find a table they like or have gone through all the tables at that stake

Randomly assigned to a table. I don't see why games wouldn't run. If you can't choose your table and are only allowed to leave and rejoin the pool x amount of times at each stake within a certain time period then you either play where you're put or you don't play at all.

Sorry Stars, but this is really pissing on pretty much all the regs.

Zoom is a whole different game and without enough fish the games wont simply run, they just arent attractive enough (1 loosing player entry per every 50 entries?). If you want a big field and more loyal costumers to contribute rake in the hsnl section then theres gotta be better incentive to play then that.

The problems you have are based on unfair seating mostly because of scripters. I hope you come up with a solution for that matter without this shortcut.

Any idea on the timeframe for this?
Thanks.

How many hands of Zoom 50-100 have been played today?

Some really good points made in this thread for why this isn't the best idea.. +1 forhayley, klink, kanu, etc

WORST

CHANGE

EVER.