http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/i...rstars-vip.php

So, I only take "Supernova1 (100K-199K) (w/o bonus) :

For the 10-Max FL ($1/$2 and up) it is a drama (66% rackeback ==> 28%, lol).

For the 9-Max NL ($1/$2 and lower) it is very bad (37.6% ==> 28%).

For the 9-Max NL ($2/$4) it is a little worse (29.5% ==> 28%).



For the 9-Max NL ($5/$10) it is worse (32.4% ==> 28%).

For the 6-Max NL ($1/$2) it is a little worse (29.7% ==> 28%).

For the 6-Max NL ($2/$4) it is sligthy better (24.9% ==> 28%).

For the 6 Max NL ($5/$10) it is almost the same (26.8% ==> 28%).



Summary

The changes are atrocious for 10-Max FL.
The changes are very bad for 9-Max NL ($1/2$ and lower and $5/$10+).
The changes are slighty worse for 6-Max NL ($1/$2 and lower) and 9-Max NL ($2/$4).

The slighty winners are 6-Max NL ($2/$4 to $5/$10) and maybe FL 6 max (roughly 12 players nowadays).

It is a very huge joke, PS wants to win a lot more $$$.

So they expected pokerstars to increase their rakeback budget by like 40%? Really? lololololol

How is it unfair that one players gets the same amount of RB/VPP when they are both dealt into the same game? Just because someone chooses to play more loose should make absolutely no difference. I don't know where you guys are getting the idea that a LAG should get more RB/VPP than a nit....that's just ridiculous.

Yes.

And they would still be giving out less rakeback than a lot of the other sites out there.

For all those who are doing calculations; is the rake stat you're getting from HM the table avarage rake or the rake you paid? If it's the actual rake you've paid (which I'm assuming) your calculations are all way off since you're probably much tighter than the avarage player at the table, and the VPP/hand stat does take this into account but the rake paid stat does not.

In other words, if that's correct, your percentage will be significantly better.

Also this new proposed system is MUCH more fair. As has been stated many times, the 6max and especially headsup players are being screwed over with the current system. This will bring SN for all levels about equal to full tilts rakeback % (maybe slightly lower if you count all the other promo's from FT, but also remember that if there's overlay on a tourney on FT it comes straight from your MGR and other promo's hit your MGR too whereas on stars it doesn't).


I'd suggest before you threaten to take your business elsewhere etc to

1) Calm the F down
2) Wait until the system is finalized/optimised and until accurate calculations are out

All this spastic "this sucks" posting is burrying the constructive criticism that some people have posted. If you think it sucks come up with some nice suggestions that don't involve keeping the system the way it is (because that is clearly unfair for HU and to a lesser extent 6max players).

Another thing I'd like to add, for those higher stakes players, 6max tables are often 3-5 handed, which takes an even bigger hit in the current system.

You do see that being more competitive in one area doesn't necessarily require getting less competitive in another?

The more you put in the pot the more rakeback you should get.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this pretty much ruin the micro cash players' FPP income? Since a FPP is rewarded for pots that reach $0.40 for NL/PL players w/ blinds $1 / $2 and lower, assuming we're playing 6 max that means the new system would give 2 VPPs to spread on 6 which would be about .33 per player, or .67 less

They pay more rake so they should get more rake back. Pretty simple concept, no? Not saying I agree necessarily, but it's not too hard to grasp why anyone would think this way. If you play LAG for 1000 hands and pay 50$ in rake, and some nit plays at the same table those 1000 hands and pays 20$ in rake, it's hardly fair if they both get 10$ back, right? (extreme example but you know what i'm saying)

this has to be a joke.

its a good thing I just got a stake on another site cuz I'm out, the FR tables are going to be dead after this

Assuming Pokerstars wants to keep it revenue neutral, of course it does.

Yes, I understand. I also disagree. And clearly so does Stars, Party, FTP, Ipoker, and a few others.

Ps does not include rake taken in previous streets when they calculate it at turn/river.

Example:

5/10 FL (Ps take $1 in rake at 20,40,70 FT at 20,40,60)

Sb raise to $10 bb calls. Pot = $20

Flopp: Pot = $19, rake = $1.

Sb bets $5, bb raises to $10. sb calls.

On Stars: Total pot = 19+20 = 39, $1 in rake

On FT: Total pot = 19+20+1= 40, $2 in rake


Sorry my bad english.

luckily they rake less too!

Equality for all types of games is a good thing.

Taking away benefits that have existed for years is a REALLY bad thing.

One way to counteract the extreme negative reaction to this change amongst full ring players would be to increase the FPP multipliers for each VIP level and/or increase the value of a VPP for high-volume players to something like 2 cents per VPP instead of 1.6 cents. Otherwise I can't imagine ever playing full ring again.

For now, I'm just going to pretend I didn't read this thread and hope for the best.