orrrrr they can just be more proactive in weedking out rat-holing from normal tables, using very strict rules.

...without the need of your newly re-branded Axiom Tables (that everyone disliked). aka bounce. everytime i read that i think of commercials like this.

*** "bounce".
if you do make 'em. put in them in a separate tab with CAP/Scumbounce.
and keep them outta the WITHOUT LIMIT games. tia.

ppl need to be less vagina-y about poker and try to keep the money on the tables(.) ffs.

As-salamu alaykum.

the last few ideas listed off should make like a stain and bounce

So it's now official, pro 40bb ratholing stacks, your days are numbered

For those of you who do not get the email, Copy and paste of the section dealing with ratholing:

Cliffs- Stars is implementing a system that will prevent the pro 40bb stacks from ratholing while allowing the rec player to continue to do so.


RATHOLING
Ratholing has been the number one issue at our NL/PL ring games for several years. We do already have effective limits that prevent players from leaving a table and then returning to the same table with fewer chips within 2 hours. In this email, however, ‘ratholing’ will refer to leaving a table and then buying into a *similar* table with fewer chips.
An individual instance of ratholing, taken in isolation, is not a problem for our poker room. Players may change tables for a variety of reasons. Perhaps they are playing with their whole bankroll, have won a large pot, and would like to split their stack to play two tables. Perhaps a player they do not like playing against has just sat down. When sitting at a new table, perhaps they like to start with a smaller stack to risk less against unknown opponents. Whatever the reason, we do not want to restrict such activity within our Poker Room.
On the other hand, systematic ratholing as a predominant strategy is a problem. This strategy is well known and practiced by many multi-tabling regulars, some of whom learned the strategy from poker education websites or poker forum discussions. It’s hard to play for very long at our ring game tables without noticing at least that many players leave after winning pots, though perhaps not everyone understands why.
The constant leaving and joining of tables adds up to having a negative impact on the playing experience of opponents. Regular ring game tables are meant to offer more stable line-ups of opponents, as opposed to Zoom where opponents change more regularly. The constant resetting of stacks to 40bb keeps effective stacks pegged at the low end of the 40-100bb buy-in range at our standard tables, sometimes to the extreme of turning tables into effectively 40bb CAP tables, contrary to the intention and labelling. Recreational players would prefer to be able to have the opportunity to win their money back after losing a pot, but instead they see it leave the table immediately, time after time.
We are going to take action to limit ratholing activity at our ring games. Our current plan is to address this issue during the first half of the year and it is a top priority to act within this timeframe. I do not anticipate delay.
It is a great challenge to define a solution that allows acceptable limited instances of ratholing but stops systematic ratholing. A seemingly simple problem becomes more complex when details like table type and buy-in are considered. We have spent quite a lot of time considering ideas that have been put forth by our players and staff. The more intuitive and simple solutions that have been suggested have all been found to have fatal flaws due to complexity, loopholes that would render them ineffective, or overzealous mechanisms that would inappropriately restrict recreational players.
Because we are determined to take action in this area, we are considering a solution that is not quite as simple or easily communicated as we would like. This solution, based on a brief suggestion from a player, is still being developed. When it is ready, we will share it with players for feedback. Assuming there are no serious issues encountered, we hope to finalize the details within a month in order to meet our timeline for deployment by June 30th.

Problem with this is that it gives no outlet for rec players that just legit want to play a game with 50bb stacks to play.

Also part about recs and hit and running is slightly dubious, eg. recs play 20bb CAP every day and they don't have a problem.

Again here are my keys to growing the online poker market.

1. Bounce tables so recs can get their 50bb fix
2. 20bb CAP at lower stakes so shortstackers don't crowd normal games
3. 50bb min at normal tables with ratholing restrictions
4. Fix CAP and PLO rake structure

the email addresses recs with 50bb. It's only pros that do it alot that are targeted.

Extending 20bb CAP to all stakes is useless, the game is unbeatable bellow 200nl unless you play with complete fish that almost chip dump to you.
Also, even if it wasn't unbeatable the 40bbers wouldn't play it, duh. Why don't they play CAP at 100 and above where there are tables?
Because there is no math advantage and they would get killed. The guys playing CAP are actually very good unlike the 40bbers.

So many recs love CAP that much that FR cap totally died. You barely see 2 tables above 200. Compare that to regular fullring tables.
If recs love something, it's running, regs would go after them there.
A very small percent of recs love it and rake is actually ok above 200.

First to your point about the game not being beatable below 1/2. I completely agree and it's because CAP rake structure has to be addressed.

Second to your point about 40bb shortstackers. I also agree, but that is kind of the point. We are trying to smoke out these bumhunters mousehole by mousehole. Eventually they will be left with a bunch of bad options - CAP sharks kill them, Bounce sharks kill them, normal tables can't be ratholed, etc. and they will all go away.

Stars wouldn't change rake for CAP.
ok, so we shoot with a bazooka in each room of the house to exterminate them while killing winrates at each game in the process? Because splitting the games into zoom, bounce, cap, normal, deep+ante would do that.
When mme's solution(errr, Alex's solution) would directly exterminate them? And it's actually stars' solution now as well.
And bounce wouldn't even get rid of them, there will be some regs buyin deep + some fish to make them breakeven before rakeback.

Stars actually took the correct decision to my surprise and made me believe that they still care about the game (well, let's see them actually implement it first)

They ought to. It would be a very high demand game.

Changes are slated for June 30th. Lets see what happens to traffic. In my opinion traffic will shrink about 30% by the end of Sept., and waitlist problems will get much worse (unless TS saves the day.) Those are objective facts. If I am wrong then those facts will be wrong. So we can have concrete proof of if I know what the **** I am talking about.

Reason is, mme's suggestion doesn't actually solve anything. Every account getting only 24 ratholes per X hours is not a solution. I already described why in previous posts, but the argument goes like this (cliffs are bolded):

1. Advantage of ratholing is inversely proportional and LINEAR to how many people do it - if there are 8 full stacks you show a lot of profit, if there are 0 full stacks you show a bad result, if there are 4 full stacks you show a profit of something in between.

2. If you are allowed only 24 ratholes then the first is worth $x, second worth $x, 24th worth $x, and 25th worth $0 (because you can't do it.) So people are still going to rathole #1-#24.

3. If pro ratholers can only rathole #1-#24, then other players are going to shore up the difference because by #1 the profit function is very elastic. For example MTT stables now have their players rathole 24 times. SNG players rathole 24 times before starting their session. 180s players. Even some cash players, etc. The more profitable it is, the more people that would never consider ratholing, become lured into ratholing. Also, there are ghosting and MA issues.

---

But that's fine, the ship is already sinking and we've already heard the captain's orders. So I will just wait for Sept to say I told you so while I sit in my life raft.

<3 stars, really looking forward to the KOTH and anti ratholing implementations.

Mindblowing how a person who has not teh slightest clue about ringgames comes up wit new bs every 2nd post...

whilst the ratholing part seemed good the "group table" part of the email (ie removing table selection) seems as bad if not worse than the ratholing solution seems good.

+100

so would this not work?

are you dumb or just plain stupid?
it's ****ing clear that Pokerstars do not want to inconvenience rec players. How do you not see that? Prob b/c you don't want to? Prob b/c you feel like if you come up with some feature (pogo tables) and complete ur challenge while managing to not lose more than 100k during the year PS will offer u some pro contract or hire you in their company? This is the only reason I can see that you're pushing your goddamn pogo idea around so pigheadedly.

Does Pokerstars plan to also prevent players to rathole zoom? I didn´t read the whole thread so pls excuse if this was already stated/discussed...

Internet >>>>> Sex

I hope your life raft floats to an isolated island where we will never have to hear from your idiotic @ss again. It should be an easy transition for you given you're already isolated and have no interpersonal relationships.

hope dies last

No one really commenting yet on the part of the email that sounds like stars basically plans to remove table selection in the near future with the "group tables"?

It's the weekend, ppl be grinding

Terrible

I am not a fan. Like I do not understand how having 5 regulars in a table starter is better than having the five regulars playing shorthanded? Are RPs not supposed to realize what is going on there? The idea is that a 6th better regulars going to join in force one of the other people to get off the table and then the game is going to keep running after 18 hands is dealt? I don't see that happening, doesn't make sense to me. Game is just going to break. And if that wasn't the case why would they not be playing 5 handed.

The theory behind TS could be cool, but it's not going to work. Especially since people are going to be able to play TS get potentially four free hands and then sit out. BHs can still bh the TS lobby. Steve does not address a penalty for that. It's almost too tilting even type about this. Just lose their ability to play no financial damage? Like seriously? We are going to let people get free hands and you won't do anything about it?????


The first bolded is not good. Don't change the ring game lobby......... they will not be taking away table selection for regulars though. Just changing how new RPs see the lobby. I mean I still think stars is trying to deter people from playing the ring games and go to games with lower edges. That's what makes sense to me.

The second bolded how about you do this now? How hard can it be.

The third bolded is absurd. You can't make an automatic solution for this Stars you have to do it manually.

The last line is just hilarious too of course players are focused on getting a prime seat. That is what poker is about everyone is at a minimum a bit of a bumhunter. I start tables when I am at my max to get on better tables. Why is this a problem? Why should I not be focused on getting in good games with the prime seat?

it only seems to be the default view for new players, not the only view.
In the next lines they address the bumhunting and say that they will start to fix it by deploying zoom, so why would they say that if they removed table selection altogether with "group tables" above?

Also, it would make sense to first implement the ratholling solution before implementing TS. Not many would be happy to use it and get placed on a table with 80% shorties.

ah fair enough i misread it then. Thanks for pointing it out and thanks for the pm too, may take you up on that offer, ty!

I really don't understand this thread.

Who wants all zoom at high-stakes? The person who suggested it wouldn't even come into the thread and defend his idea.

How is all zoom supposed to make RPs not feel haunted? What what do you think they are going to think when they sit down and a lobby goes from having nobody to very little people playing to lots of people playing? They are not going to feel haunted there. This is what you're trying to tell us Stars? This is what you think we will believe is your motivation behind all zoom?

If you wanted to make RPs not feel haunted you would be banning extreme BHs. Why do you not do this?

Here's to having an open discussion and ignoring all the questions. I refuse to believe the employees at Stars can be this incompetent. You have different motivations behind the changes you are going to make and you're lying to us. You won't come into this thread and defend your proposals because you can't.

Just unacceptable. What went down in this thread is ridiculous. I would have had no problem if you took the we have a monopoly route. These are the changes we are making. I dare you to take your rake somewhere else.

Instead you try to put up a facade of having an open discussion when you were going to make these changes anyway and lie to us about your motivations. Ridiculous


spot on

I don't think zoom at high stakes was part of this discussion in this thread.
zoom only at high stakes was said to be implemented a long time ago. I think I've seen it way before this thread was made.
I don't play those stakes so I can't comment on it but would be pretty stupid if implemented for 400 and bellow.

I don't know on the first point. All zoom anywhere is idiotic. It makes the RPs play better and lowers the edges of the regulars v each other. Stars says the problem (extreme BHing , "seat gamemanship", and scripts) is greatest at high stakes so they are going to implement this solution there first. The implication from that is if all zoom works they are going to make all ring games all zoom... This is what I'm worried about. Steve has not denied that making all ring games all zoom is on the table. He has hinted at something like that happening in some of his posts with no warning.


This is just so ridiculous. The ability to play shorthanded while you are grinding multiple tables is what allows you to get on the best tables. Going to the table starter route could potentially screw the battlers out of getting on the best tables. I know I'm not the only one who would rather play HU then 5 handed with 4 other regulars.

How is putting your name on a list going to help start tables? We still have to wait for a RP to get the game going, and it would be running the minute he joins anyway. Table starter is just the dumbest thing ever. How does this even get put on the table and then implemented. Just so tilting.