The word is from most players that other sites (specifically Full Tilt) already have fishier games. I would think that if a bunch of the better players from Full Tilt migrated to Poker Stars that the even fishier games at Full Tilt would attract some of the sharks back.

I think the best option is 20-50bb tables and 35-100bb tables. And I think the shallower tables should get some kind of a reduced rake.

Most shorties are terrible, it's amazing how many ppl overlook or don't believe that. Anyways I really do hope the changes make both sides happy, I couldn't take another thread like this in 12 months time.

T - 6 weeks or so?

Agreed on both points.

I'm pretty sure shorties will be just as terrible when playing shallow or regular tables.

1p0kerboy - yeah, if it's a big cyclical thing then that can certainly play a role as well. But I think there are more players saying, "I would prefer to play at Stars and will come back in a heartbeat if they take similar anti-SS measures" than would head back to FT. But it's difficult to say and nobody know for sure of course.

All of this is just guessing. And it's my hunch that in a matter of weeks we're going to get to see it all for real anyway.

If we had known about the concept of Rush Poker ahead of time I have a hunch all of our theories about what it would mean would have been not too close to how it all really did shake out (and continues to shake out). I personally know I would have been way off about that one if I had been asked ahead of time including some theories on how their software couldn't possibly handle it.

We can theorize about the different buy-in's all we want but, in the end, we don't know exactly how it will all shake out until it's finally implemented there. So I think we should just go ahead and do it anyway and stop worrying about it. The games will survive one way or another anyway whether you change the min to 35BB's or 40BB's...or whether you make the smaller tables 20-40BB's or Cap.

we agree on something.

I'd be fine with that, and to borrow a very good suggestion from [Phill] in another thread....

Right. Seems like the proposed solutions are trying to make a fair amount of players content. And those shortstackers who rely most heavily on the "inherent advantage" will be impacted the most too which I'm perfectly fine with (especially after needbeer's posts earlier in this thread).

It is a completely valid point that Stars wouldn't be getting rid of those who want to play with a shorter stack completely. If they want to play with other shortstackers for whatever reason then they are perfectly welcome to.

I'm fine with all of that.

The color coding idea is a good one...it just makes me wonder why they haven't implemented it before.

I believe we actually agree on a fair amount of stuff...perhaps more than you realize.

We basically disagree on general stuff like game strategy, how talented one has to be in order to be a decent shortstacker, how many of the shortstackers on the games actually are decent, etc.

this

I don't think we disagree on this. I think we disagree on the impact a less than decent short stacker has on a game compared to the impact he should have based on his skill/strategy.

So now you're basically saying that we disagree over what we disagree about. Do you agree?

I'm not committing to anything.