+1 this definately needs looking into, in the long run it will create more rake for pokerstars if the games run better.. Also it adds signifignantly to the player pool if stars is the first to do something about this since everywhere else is the same problem..

And maybe even generalizing the issue a bit. Lee, you described the player-site relationship as symbiotic and you know that poker is a game of really small edges. A guy that does nothing but fold 100% of his hands at a 9-max game is only going to lose at 16.7bb/100. You also know the games have been really drying up. Midstakes and higher is in its death throes and that's created a downward pressure in the games as most players are left moving down, not up. This is all matched with Stars raking from 5-20bb/100. This doesn't seem like a relationship that can sustain itself much longer.

Even Stars 4.5% "rake reduction" this year was paired with a bunch of fine print that meant it actually resulted in a < 2% rake reduction, and most regs are reporting an effective rake increase all the same. And the player panel revealed that Stars initial 'offer' was actually an effective rake increase for all players! Doesn't now seem like an absolutely horrific time for Stars to be trying to increase the rake? How do you propose this relationship remain symbiotic well into the future? Right now it looks like the small fish is getting eaten by the big fish and the latter is just calling that symbiotic since he let the small fish swim around in the same waters for a little bit before gobbling him up.

Hi Lee,

While it's understandable you don't want to comment on the state of US legislation, it doesn't seem unreasonable to ask what you think PokerStars' status would be if legislation were passed. Judging by what I've read in the legislation forum and elsewhere, Stars has very little chance of being allowed back in.

Are you back in control of the doomswitch?

Specifically, does the agreement between PS and DOJ have an expiration date?

http://www.justice.gov/usao/nys/pres...reementspr.pdf

Under the terms of the agreements with PokerStars and
Full Tilt Poker, the companies agreed that they would not allow
for, facilitate, or provide the ability for players located in
the United States to engage in playing online poker for "real
money" or any other thing of value.

Welcome back Lee, I hope that things will improve in the area of communication with the players now that you're back. On that note, I have a couple of question I would love if you could answer:

- What is your new role at PokerStars? That is, we know what you did in the past for them, but what are your new responsibilities aboard the PokerStars ship?

- Will you be present at the next player representative meetings to be held at IOM?

Hi Lee and welcome back. I'm very happy to hear it.

Can you let us know what your role is?

I dont know if you care to comment on the recent changes and how they were handled but its fair to say the consensus is it was a disaster. I'm far more sympathetic to Pokerstars' pov than most and sometimes painful change is needed but its hard to believe just how badly it was handled. Will you be involved more in future?

+1

Current rake levels for PLO are unsustainable imo.
Lee, can you please look up average rake paid in bb/100 for 6max PLO25 vs NL25?

Slightly higher rake for PLO could be justified; less hands/hour, bigger edges.
But do you think ~100% higher rake is healthy for the game?

I am afraid Pokerstars is too greedy and won't adjust the PLO rake structure until it's too late.
I hope you will understand our concerns as a PLO player yourself and please monitor the PLO ecosystem closely.

Also please consider the effects lower rake could have maybe offsetting a significant percentage of its costs:
- recreational players keep returning because they win some of the time (now almost impossible considering they must contribute 30+bb/100 in rake)
- recreational players keep returning because they get decent entertainment time (value) for their deposit.
- more players running hot, moving up and feeding the higher stakes
- more high stakes action, more successtory's like Isildur and Phil Galfond
- more railbirds that also try themselves
- Overall healthier ecosystem that still generates tons of rake for Pokerstars long into the future.

thanks lee, welcome back

why did pokerstars increase rake cap for 5handed play and sold it to the people as an effective rake decrease (which it is not, most 6max players are paying more rake compared to b4 the changes

why is there still a difference in $ per vpp 6max, SNG and FR under weighted contributed? (5.5:5.5:6.0)

Why are split pots raked so that the two winners both lose? Can you ensure that winning half of the pot does not mean losing several big blinds at the lowest stakes?

When are you going to improve the lower end of the system to compete with the standard 30% min from other sites?

When will the games only getting 5.5 multiplier stop being treated as second class citizens and get a 6x multiplier.

6max generates more rake per hand and gets a smaller multiplier back makes no sense to me and certainly isn't fair.

Lee Jones:

Simple question:
What is the definition of a beatable game?

i miss you lee

Did you not bother to read the initial post?