I received this message after contacting support:

---
This is a follow-up regarding your recent email about NL2 cash game.

We have received the following information about these games. We are sorry to inform you that this is intentional.

We are indeed trialling the removal of $/€/£ 2.00 No Limit as well as $/€/£ 0.01/0.02 Pot Limit and No Limit games in Belgium, since June 15th.

We frequently review the selection of ring games and tournaments within our lobby and monitor how that affects the overall playing experience, whether playing on smartphone, tablet or desktop. We experiment with all aspects of the game by trying out new challenges, promotions and types of poker; launching new online series, such as the MicroMillions; and sponsoring live poker festivals around the world.

However, we do value your feedback and assure you it has been forwarded to the relevant team for this trial.

We apologize for the inconveniences and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,

Mathieu
Stars Support
---

I hope (but doubt) they will bring it back. Will other regions follow soon?

Yes I think the same will happen in the ROW. IMO it will take divine intervention for NL2 to come back.

The PokerStars experiment with Card Hunt & the Pyramid challenges - [the latter finishing tonight midnight ET] was a rake revenue success. It was limited to cash/zoom stakes $0.05/$0.10 or higher & plenty of the $0.01/$0.02 & $0.02/$0.05 players moved up to take advantage of the opportunity to bink the unlikely middle/top lottery prizes

You can see the relevant numbers below. Screenshot taken at peak traffic today Saturday. Note the player number at each stake bumps up where the challenge kicks in. Also note the rake at each level [I've shown the NLHE rake structure, but not the PLO rake]. The right hand $number is the 5+ player rake cap:



The great thing about Zoom for PokerStars is the 5+ player cap is always operational rather than the 2,3 or 4 player caps. I imagine they'll be thinking about reducing Full Ring seats to 8 per table in cash - up the action a little...

@kmeirlaen I've mentioned you & this thread over here: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...ostcount=25248

Were there too many rb pros and predatory behaviour in NL2? And more serious how was the traffic at NL2? Don't think they will remove NL2 from the main client though. At the moment 199sh 118fr tables and zoom 710 and 393 players. If they do would love to hear the logic behind that.

Weird move. If average deposit is now only $20 surely making $10nl the lowest stake leads to instant busto and a bad experience for a lot of min-depositors.

Maybe they think fish are more likely to play micro Spin & Go if the lowest stakes cash games are gone. Who knows, Amaya gonna Amaya.

wow, more big changes ... every couple of months they seem to drop a new bombshell

It's funny, they had a chance to start off New Jersey without 2nl, since Bovada doesn't have it, so people would be used to that. But they included it, and now are taking it away from Belgium.

That's a good point about how maybe the CardHunt/Pyramid got their wheels turning about how to make more rake ... but then also yeah, what about deposits not lasting? And then are there problems with regs or something? Or are they trying to get more people to play Spins?

Will sure be interesting to see what happens next

PS. Surprised they're not worried about losing people like op to other sites, like Unibet?

Speaking about just the Zoom games not regular cash:

** IMO the bottom of the Zoom microstakes has too many grinding regs [nitty bad regs] who have no intention of moving up. They can get a lot of hands in 4-tabling & they eat up the new depositors just by waiting for the noobs to make mistakes. So it does kind of make sense to me if PokerStars are removing only the 2c Zoom tables but not the normal cash 2c tables. Perhaps the slow boring normal 2c tables will be less predatory, but I'm not confident about that!

** It was my impression that PokerStars was trying to increase the flow of players moving up the stakes & that's why they put a lower limit on the stakes for the cardhunt/pyramid challenges - as a test to see what it takes to induce players to step up a little. And I recall you noticed that PokerStars were having to run TWO 10c Zoom pools throughout the challenges. I reckon that really surprised PokerStars - they didn't expect that number of players to gravitate up [& down too?] to 10c stakes.

** So PokerStars know that cheap, flashy costume jewellery inducements work. A lottery prize model [in challenges & spins], speeding up of games, increased rake [often hidden] & marketing seem to be the way things are going.

** The one thing I love in the new PokerStars are those KO bounty tournaments - complete bloodbath & a lot of fun

If the player pool is small (which it no doubt is in segregated markets), then liquidity (and upward mobility) is better served by a smaller choice of games/buy-ins. I doubt 2NL will be removed from the .com client, as it's still incredibly popular, but I wouldn't entirely rule out its future removal either.

FWIW, on Unibet, the lowest stakes for cash games are 2c/4c (4 euro NL), and the games are good. If Unibet introduced 2NL, it would likely lead to lower revenue (and worse traffic at higher limits), as many breakeven/losing players would move down. I think most sites make most of their rake money at 100NL or thereabouts, so they don't really want players staying at peanut stakes forever.

Belgium isn't segregated (have played against Belgians on UK client).

Oh, my apologies. In that case, it seems like a pretty weird strategy, as the reaction of Belgian players (do they move up, quit the game, or switch to another site?) is not necessarily a good predictor for what would happen if Brazilians or Brits faced the same 'closure'. It's quite unfortunate for Belgians that they are 'guinea pigs' in this trial, as being locked out of the lowest stakes games while other nationalities can still play seems quite unfair.
inb4 the Stars lobby has one button "HU4ROLLZ? YES/NO"

I would put the peak lower at 25c OR at 50c OR perhaps 25c & 50c share the peak.

Now I'm going to risk an opinion & see how much derision comes my way from the masterminds on this forum ~ My guess [emphasis on the "guess"] is that EVERYWHERE the cash Zoom! lowest stake will become 5c or 10c & regular cash tables lowest stake will increase too or maybe remain at 2c. My reasoning is:

** Hiding table selection at regular cash tables is coming - random seating will be mandatory. This is to try and preserve net depositor bankrolls for longer to improve their 'play experience' & increase PokerStars' total rake of deposits a bit more
** Encourage first depositors to move from Zoom! to regular tables [the only place where there will still be 2c games]
** Regs/sharks reduced at regular cash tables because much harder to table select

PokerStars needs the money because
It's an expensive game to be licensed. Just two examples: [1] Belgium is charging PokerStars 11% tax on their Belgian GGR [2] The UK is charging PokerStars 15% tax on their UK Gross Profit. And yet Belgian & UK players are raked & 'rewarded' the same as the ROW

PokerStars are absorbing these costs for now, but they have to ramp up their net profits because breaking the US is going to cost 100s of millions of $s. That's without bringing in the extra costs of no longer being a privately owned business. We can be certain that operator licensing/taxation costs are going to soar & that when all the US states catch the poker operator taxation bug they'll start to block [or hinder] the offshore grey sites to maximise tax take. Sites on the inside will do nicely once ACR, Bovada etc are blocked out.

So - just my opinion of course, but I think the 2NL stake level will be removed on all licences for some or all poker game variants mainly so as to increase total rake

Last time I checked UK and BE players were rewarded less than dot-com.

Apparently this started last week for NLHE and PLO tables, the minimum now being 5NL. What are the chances this 'trial' spreads to all their sites?

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28...lgium-1615542/

^ I've since been told i'm wrong, that changed this year.

Thanks Hood, forget to check anything except NVG for a thread

I think you corrected yourself later in the thread, but it will not be absolutely clear to someone finding this thread later...

UK players had 10% reduced rewards for eight months from Jan '15 to end of Aug '15 [actually the whole year officially, but see below...]

[1] PokerStars split the difference for UK players & recovered only half the tax burden via reduced rewards
[2] The PokerStars shenanigans with StarsCoin was field-tested in the UK client from Sep '15 & we were rewarded with extra StarsCoin that coincidentally roughly equated to the loss of rewards from the tax thing.

See this (old) article from Pokerscout: http://www.pokerscout.com/news/weekl...ar=2015&week=7
Cliffs:
* Popular does not mean more profitable.
* Stars makes more money from Zoom games than regular tables. ($200 PLO zoom generated more rake than any non-zoom NLH cash game stake below 100NL, despite having a much smaller player pool).
* Regular 2NL games aren't even in the top 15 earners, despite being the most widely played cashgame format by far.
/derail

Hey Guys,

Originally posted this in the wrong thread because I could not find this one, but ok here goes!!

ok guys a couple of days ago I asked whether other players had also seen the disappearance of the 1c/2c ZOOM pool games.

I asked Stars about this and this was their response to it!

Thank you for your email.

We are trialling the removal of $/€/£ 2.00 No Limit as well as $/€/£ 0.01/0.02 Pot Limit and No Limit games in Belgium, effective from 15 June.

We frequently review the selection of ring games and tournaments within our lobby and monitor how that affects the overall playing experience, whether playing on smartphone, tablet or desktop. We experiment with all aspects of the game by trying out new challenges, promotions and types of poker; launching new online series, such as the MicroMillions; and sponsoring live poker .
festivals around the world.

Thank you for choosing us.


I really do not understand were this goes along with the idea of catering more to the recreational players and giving a more pleasant experience?
I might assume that a rec who wants to play some quick cashgame does it on the lowest limits instead of higher up and risk to chance of ruining his br.

My assumption --> 1c/2c Zoom does not generate enough rake and by forcing rec players to play higher limits then their br allows they would have to deposit more often. So long for the experience.

The thing that bothers me the most in this story is this.
As a Belgium player I feel discriminated with this move. All other countries still have the 2NL Zoom pool available to them and people on .BE do not.
This is not something that is done out of legal decision i.e. you can not play 2NL Zoom as a Belgian citizen.
Therefore in my opinion this is pure discrimination because hey if I feel like playing 2NL Zoom just for the fun of it I cant!!!

Curious what other people think of this?

NL2 is the stake with the lowest rake % (not considering the effect of caps) and the highest rewards in terms of VPPs (10VPP/1$ rake). Due to the success of the cardhunt & co promos Stars thinks that they can get away with removing the lowest stake as people will move to the new lowest stake. Obv they they kill 2 birds with 1 stone:

- former NL2-players will have to pay way higher rake in terms of % and due to the bigger pots

- less rewards to pay as only 8.5 VPPs are given compared to 10 on NL2

Considering how popular the NL2 games are, i think that this could be easily a money-grab in the area of the Supernova rip off at the beginning of the year.

Not sure how this will work out. It will clearly increase the price of playing Poker for a lot of people and definitely some will give up on it.

That said, since i saw a screenshot made by ArtyMcFly of a fish on NL2 sitting on a table with 5 players who each played +12 tables, i personally think, that the concept of lower rake and higher awards at this stake to help people move up has failed. Introducing a table-cap of max 4 tables would have been a good solution, but Amaya obv gives a **** about the "ecosytem", they only look to increase short-term revenue and the removal of NL2 will certainly do this. At what cost? No idea, but i hope someone knowledgeable could shed some light on what might be the consequences.

of all the lies about improving the ecosystem, when in fact it was just pure moneygrabs, is the removal of 2nl not actually the first real improvement?

from my pov getting rid of a lower stake like that and pushing people up to 5 and 10nl has to be good for the poker economy as a whole, is it not?>

No need to put that email up here again - it's in the OPs post #1. I wish PokerStars practised MORE discrimination. More trials [of future global changes] in small markets might lessen the bugs & poor ideas released globally at the expense of players everywhere. [obviously some types of changes by their nature can't be trialled in small markets but you get my meaning]

In my opinion you are only noticing when YOU are effected & not noticing so much when it doesn't effect you. The truth is that other players on other small licences have had "discrimination" in the past as guinea pigs for global changes & now it is your turn.

You can look up other examples in other regions - but how about us in the UK? We were PokerStars' unpaid StarsCoin software testers for four months before it hit the World. Yes we did get 50 StarsCoin every fifth step as compensation [figures might be wrong - haven't checked], but it cost me a lot more in my time & it also drove away some nice 'fun players' I was being really nice to. They departed to another site I couldn't access from the UK. Sad story

There are two consolations for you:
[1] As far as I know you get the same rake & the same rewards as other licenses even though PokerStars pays your government 11% tax on their total GGR for Belgium. This means in effect that other licenses & other players are funding [a portion of] YOUR rewards & MY rewards in the UK

[2] You can turn the lack of 2c to your advantage by playing lots of Zoom! hands at 5c & at 10c. When the change goes global you will have a very good idea who has moved up & you'll be able to exploit those new noobs on your stake who have been forced to move above 2c - you'll profit nicely overall [unless you find 5c too tough of course].

Does that make you feel happier just a little

I agree, 2c is a grinder infested, nit heaven ghetto littered with all-in short stackers & other anti-fun players. Something had to be done to change this because it's a terrible environment for new depositors to find themselves in. New depositors are going to spend their $20 & decide "that was boring & frustrating, I'm putting my poker learning somewhere else. Bye bye PokerStars"

I'm not sure removing 2c is the ideal answer, perhaps a table cap only at low stakes would drive away those people who only want to nit it up & grind for 5$/$10 profit per session.

Thank you Arty for the correction - my intuition was wrong. And not in my opinion a derail at all.

well, I do not think they say bye to stars but certainly saying buy to zoom or cashgames and playing spins probably

good update!

being from belgium myself and having my share of the old deepstacked 2nl games.

I believe the nl2 100bb games are full of bad regs/nits grinding like 30-20$ a day.
(you can be good all you want it's hard to play vs. 5 nits)

I've seen that grinding it up xxxflix a PSpro guy from germany actually quit his challenge earlier this year he was streaming on twitch suddenly stopped, it just isn't worth to play poker and exploit tagfish/nits on nl2-nl5 especially if its 5v1 and you aren't from a country where the average guy makes 500$ a month.
-> Leading to a quick withdrawal from poker as a whole from new players becouse most of us don't give a **** about 500$/month and it probally is better to give up if their KK all in pre is up against AA everytime becouse hes trying to win from 5 nits wich wont happen as a new guy. I'd then rather play some blackjack basic strategy for 5$ where the house edge is less then 1%.

I'd say apply the changes from the .be site ASAP to the guys in the country's above!

Also STOP table selecting it's the most disgusting thing ever! think about table selecting in a live cash game 5 empty tables and 2 running with 20 people in line????? its just silly and should have stopped from the moment people where using seatingscripts.

Anyway what I think now after writing this is that they really always increase rake,

spin & go: hated it ever since people played it. There is a thing like blackjack & roulette BAD MOVE! A new player doesn't give AF about doubling their money after being the champ of the table! and most of them won't ever win the top 3 prices there anyway.
It's like a game to rake the bankrolls of existing players that don't deposit.
ko poker: what is up with 12% rake in super hyperturbo games.
as if they only wan't to make money of the people current bankroll wich are still playing online before they all leave pokerstars.

-

LOL at people still playing on GrabStars in 2016 !

ps : I signed up on there because I wanted to play against Neymar, but he's never online, is it normal ?