Hi Walmsley, Do you have any further information about PS plans for the 9 man's, I.e. additional buy-in levels, specifically $3.5 & $15? If so when are we likely to see them?

Thanks

they have decided they are good.

FFS Walmsley add some 15/9 hypers. Ill personally play 200 a day.

if they take them away, then don't come crying

Haha I'm not playing them, so it doesn't bother me either way.

I'm going to guess the 200s are going to stay and the 60s are going to be removed.

Good to see Stars experiment though.

Think the rake in the $60 should be between the 30s and 100s. Not the same as the 30s. 60s will def be tougher imo

Tyvm, ill personally rake an extra $100k+ to PS this yr than I was planning on if you keep them. (had given up on SNE)

Damn, picked the wrong week to take a vaca back in the States. Be interesting to see how it all shakes out.

Walmsley, any updates on the status of NL Omaha 8 hypers? Feels like a good time to ask with the two hypers that were just implemented.

Imo a $3.50 and $7.00 to pilot the game + format would be reasonable.

Please please let us see the players registered for 18men sngs in the pokerstars client on the right hand side like you can for 9men. I understand if it were 180s it would take a lot of resources to load them, but for 18mans its so vital to be able to see players registered from the main client and surely would be an easy tweak?

As you can see, in this there is 9/10 players registered and it shows the players on the right of the client, note there is space for a fair few more players to be fit on below on the right if needed, I'd guess you could fit 16 players in the space (when dragged to smallest size) so see no negative affect of listing players for 18s too?



Please in 18s list the players in the lobby where it currently lists the 'Sit & Go Seats will be available when 18 players registered Open for registration':



Thanks

how long's this random $50 6max turbo been around???

Is there a reason why turbos only have three registering and hypers four? Any plans to extend this to 9 max as that is probably the area that needs more of a boost.

I dont really get the need to change something thats been working perfectly well for almost 10 years? I mean, by all means suggest a new format (hybrid sngs, big ante sngs?), but the core structure is fine imo and tinkering will just annoy people. If anything it would be fun to have more deep play in the games, so perhaps a new format could be deep sngs with the structure you suggest but with 3k starting stack and 3 min levels.

+1 million

just remove nonturbos and make up a new structure all togehter

+1. There was a lot of talk of game liquidity when debating whether to add more hypers. Turbos and reg speeds both have increasingly slower traffic, so having both types is unnecessary. Make a hyrbid of turbo and reg speeds and just have hypers and "deepstack" sngs.

HIGHER STAKES F50s! Surely not that hard.

FTR, if Stars was coming up with a hybrid Hyper/Turbo, my vote would be for something that adopts the hyper blinds structure, keeps the Turbo 5 minute levels, starts at ~30/60/6 with 1,500 stacks, and cuts the rake by ~25% to compensate for the shorter average run time.

Also, for people talking about how much the 10/20 and 15/30 levels make a difference for good players, go into your HEM/PT and look at what your long-term bb/100 is, how many hands/level you get in on average, and what % ROI that roughly translates to (i.e. your average +cev/starting stack).

If you gain ~2% effective (or whatever it is) from a rake cut, and another x% from shorter run time, it takes a pretty good edge at 10/20 and 15/30 to outdo that. At the lower buyins and for some really good people as you move up in stakes that's doable, but for many grinders it's not. Plus given that Net depositors have asked Stars for shortened SNG structures, and given Stars has expressed interest, I'm surprised more people aren't pushing for another shortened + less rake structure.

*Kicks dead horse again* . Or maybe Stars uses their (possible) purchase of FT to do some future experimentation over there.

Hi Alex/Walmsley,

also wanted to say in regards to possible BOP restructuring that if the monthly shootout is terminated, there will need to be some sort or solution as to what to do with spare/excess tickets, as anyone who plays mid-high stakes regularly probably has them lying around and they currently have a value of about $100 each in the shootout. Any ideas here?

thanks

idol

have there been any news from PS about future SNG promotions? anything?

This. They better be there when I get back to being a drifter.

Stars is aware about excess tickets and some people have PMed me even before the meetings about this.

My advice is, try to use your tickets -- its unlikely if you have say, 10 tickets right now, that all of them will be refunded at good rates.

Re structure, in an ideal world I would like to see all structures get faster and more gradual. I am not suggesting stars makes these changes immediately because in order to make any changes it seems like one always has to go one small step at a time, also in particular I always play the fastest format so I don't really have a "vote" per se, but here is what I think: that it would be nice if it moved in the following direction:

Current structures and rake: (I am using $100 6max as a guide)
Hyper: Takes about 16 min (to finish if you win), rake 3.637%
Turbo: About 35 min , rake 7.238%
Regular: About 65 min , rake 7.991%

I think these games, based on popularity with net depositors and stuff like that, should move into the following guidelines:

Hyper: 12 min , 2.7%
Turbo: 25 min , 5.6%
Regular: 40 min , 7%

and that those guidelines should be clearly indicated when registering the sng, that this is how long it takes to finish said sng if you win.

This is then the structures I would consider as a first draft:

Hyper - 500 chips:
20a, 30, 50, 80, 100, 120, 160, 200 - 1.5 min levels
[or if they wont go this route, then 2 min is fine too]

Turbo - 1500 chips:
30, 40, 60a, 80, 120, 160, 200, 240, 300, 400 - 3 min levels

Regular - 1500 chips:
20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 120a, 160, 200, 240, 300, 400 - 4 min levels

============

Also finally I feel like the structures have been based around ZOMG 10 min levels!!! or zomg 1500 chips!! instead of like creating the most optimal structure. Like for example just with the regular speed sngs, if someone doubled the # of levels and made it 5 min levels, it would already be better. If I avoided the 50/100 level to create more flops and therefore more play (by having 40/80 and 60/120 instead) it would be even better, etc.

Thats one of the theories I feel most strongly about, if you want to have more "play"* in a sng, playing for example 10 hands at 20bb deep, 10 hands at 15bb deep, and 10 hands at 10bb deep is worse than just having those 30 hands only played at 20bb and 10bb deep, because >= 17bb deep has a lot more flops than 10 to 15 bb deep in practice.


---

Again this only reflects my opinion and I am free to say it, like a lot of posts previous, I realize a majority of people here may not agree with my views.