crude if they cut the rb in 9max games and improve the rb in 6max and hu games for the same percentage, i wouldn t complain. but taking away more than 25% and giving back 5% max just doesn t sound fair to me.

[QUOTE=ROM Amnesty;11544307]lol, what?

The "great game of poker" will always be here because so many people have trouble thinking logically- as your post demonstrates.
[QUOTE/]

lol, whata douche.


When I was making my post I was trying to point out how the VIP system has changed the way the game of poker is being played in a negative way. Players playstyles being exploitable is irrelevant to that point. The point is players on pokerstars play differently than on other sites because of the vip system. People aren't playing poker, they are playing the system.


I don't think it can get much worse than it is now.


Well obviously fish don't stand much of a chance, but I was referring to how LONG a fish or average players deposit lasts them in the current environment. That should have been clear to you.

This.

The more numbers that make the way to this board, the more I'm realizing that this equitable restructure is just a guise to raise the rake.

not true

atm there are 156 9max nl50 tables running on stars and 162 nl50 6max

I hear ya bro'. My comment was not meant to endorse 'stars actions in any way. Obamanomics is not a good thing fwiw...

I assume this is not accurate.

ass
u
me

I don't play NL but looking right now at the 3-6 level it is 10-0 for 6-max. At the 2-4 level it is 29-10 in favour of 6-max.

In Limit 6-Max is 7 5-10 6-max tables and only 1 5-10 FR table.

I play FR and prefer it but we can't change reality to favour our argument.

My first reaction to this was yeay! Assuming SN and 1.6c per VPP, I've been getting 19.x% rakeback. I was aware that I was getting a bit screwed over, and tourney players got 28% rakeback. I've never liked it, and always wondered why Stars didn't have a system similar to the one their planning now. So I was delighted.

But then I see all these people complaining that there rakeback is going to be significantly lower. This makes me sick. I've heard as high as 38% mentioned in the thread. Double me. And I realise just how screwed over I've been for ages. Absolutely ridiculous. I feel pretty bitter about how this joke of a system as been allowed to go on for so long.

The same base VPP/$ paid is clearly fairest. It should be brought in as soon as possible, preferably tomorrow. And lol at all the full ring grinders complaining that instead of getting a much much better deal than everyone else, they're now only getting the same.

There is no reason to not make the change tomorrow. Making the system fairer for the zillions of players stars has is much more important than the handful of people going for SNE who will now be getting a fair deal instead of a good one. Stars clearly states it can ammend its FPP program at any time.

I've looked at every game I've played from low to high- 6 max to full ring and I can't find one that that would award me more vpp.

When you say some games will reward more are you talking about the freakin micro's??? so when you guys rake that 15 cents everyone at the table gets .1 vpp?? Is that where all the vpp's are going?????? Cause by my calculations you aren't awarding more, like you say

Maybe if it would be 10 x the rake divided by # of players if the rake reaches
$2 at 6 max and $3 at full ring it might help. Like how now we get double vpp, but if that isn't the case- this sucks!!!!

I would love to see what calculations you used to say that you will be awarding more? Thats a bold statement to say- when its obvious not even close with the examples you provided.

without actually checking how many are on at the moment, it's been my general experience across a number a number of sites that, in nl at least, the higher the stakes the more popular shorthanded becomes.

1. ppl wait for accurate numbers before conclusions
2. if the FR numbers are really down 20-25% (seem like 25% for me if i calced it accurately on 500k sample)... that suprises me cos my guess is nl100-400 fr games generate quite some rake. nl100-200 table count seem comparable if not same to 6maxers.
3. if stars up rake this way then i dont see anyone who aint >16 tabling staying at stars lul.

**** 6MAX!!

There's no need to wait if you have a database and can do some simple arithmetic.

And since the higher the limit the more someone gets out of the loyalty program the claim that they will be giving out more this way makes sense.

This is a redistribution that is likely to lead to an increase in the total amount awarded. Unfortunately, my game of choice gets slammed but that is life.

easy solution to end all the yadayada: give 7 VPP's per $ in rake.