Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** *** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread ***

09-08-2016 , 12:13 AM
lol yea i caught this one the other day

*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-08-2016 , 02:04 AM
Maybe all the fishes decided to play 600+ that night
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-08-2016 , 07:33 AM
paging no tank you

*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-08-2016 , 07:34 AM
haha newguy is a cap boss if green is fish
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-08-2016 , 07:36 AM
i mustn't have thought he was much of a boss at 100bb
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-08-2016 , 08:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtankz
The future of online poker:
(6am European time)
In every thread i bring up such a delicate problem people tell me to stfu adapt and everything is fine.
Apart from weekends i have to quit 80% of my sessions around 3am bc i fall under 10 tables and barely get new ones.

Teh fun thing people dont realize is that poker wont really be ded bc they dont beat it anymoar but moar like 3 yrs from now nothing besides a couple of hundo tables will run during peak...
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-08-2016 , 09:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dg4
paging no tank you

wanted to join in rail chat but didn't have 1k in account
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-08-2016 , 09:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimStone
In every thread i bring up such a delicate problem people tell me to stfu adapt and everything is fine.
Apart from weekends i have to quit 80% of my sessions around 3am bc i fall under 10 tables and barely get new ones.
yet youve done absolutely 0 to try help for there to be more tables.

would love to see how many full tables of 100 there would be if there was a constant stream of people willing to play 3h for 10 hands. imagine there would be so so much more

you playing two tables 3h for 10 hands each when youre at 8 tables whilst being -ev in them games just has to be +Ev and worthwhile. surely. instead of quitting ur whole session



dno why i typed that becuz i know im tlking to a brickwall but w/e

Last edited by burnsv2; 09-08-2016 at 09:56 AM.
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-08-2016 , 11:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by burnsv2

you playing two tables 3h for 10 hands each when youre at 8 tables whilst being -ev in them games just has to be +Ev and worthwhile. surely. instead of quitting ur whole session

Idk I thinkin Tims case, quitting whole session is the optimal solution here
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-08-2016 , 11:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by burnsv2
yet youve done absolutely 0 to try help for there to be more tables.

would love to see how many full tables of 100 there would be if there was a constant stream of people willing to play 3h for 10 hands. imagine there would be so so much more

you playing two tables 3h for 10 hands each when youre at 8 tables whilst being -ev in them games just has to be +Ev and worthwhile. surely. instead of quitting ur whole session



dno why i typed that becuz i know im tlking to a brickwall but w/e
Would help close to nothing. From an EV standpoint questionable as well when i barely get 3bb in my reg games and then get destroyed hu for 5bb+ + rake and barely any fish joining not even talking about which position they join
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-08-2016 , 05:38 PM
why play then Tim
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-08-2016 , 08:45 PM
*** tim
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-08-2016 , 10:13 PM
lol mindlessly giving stars ur rake playing 3h at 100 is not the solution
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-08-2016 , 10:14 PM
tim
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-08-2016 , 10:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssg
why play then Tim
Im doing everything in my power to quit asap, believe me
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-09-2016 , 12:27 PM
This just in:

- In 2017, date still to be determined, we will launch a new rewards program that recognises your play on poker, casino, and sportsbook (where available) and rewards you for recent activity, not monthly or annual play volumes. As a result, from January 1, Supernova VIP status will become a monthly status for players until the launch of the new rewards program.

- From January 1, Supernova will be a monthly status for players who achieve it in 2017, while players who earn Supernova status in 2016 will retain it until the launch of the new rewards program. The value of VIP rewards and monthly VIP status requirements for 2017 are still subject to change.


- As a result, our current VIP statuses will be discontinued upon launch of the new program and replaced with a new program rewarding your recent activity.


So if I get this right, this new rewards program is coming later in 2017.
If you grind supernova in 2016, you get to keep the status until this new program. For <Supernova, it becomes a monthly status.
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-09-2016 , 01:53 PM
Sounds like the 888 reward program which equals an amazing 1% rakeback roughly...
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-09-2016 , 02:37 PM
One thing is for sure - they aren't altering the system to put more money in your pockets.
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-09-2016 , 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishtankz
This just in:

- In 2017, date still to be determined, we will launch a new rewards program that recognises your play on poker, casino, and sportsbook (where available) and rewards you for recent activity, not monthly or annual play volumes. As a result, from January 1, Supernova VIP status will become a monthly status for players until the launch of the new rewards program.

- From January 1, Supernova will be a monthly status for players who achieve it in 2017, while players who earn Supernova status in 2016 will retain it until the launch of the new rewards program. The value of VIP rewards and monthly VIP status requirements for 2017 are still subject to change.


- As a result, our current VIP statuses will be discontinued upon launch of the new program and replaced with a new program rewarding your recent activity.


So if I get this right, this new rewards program is coming later in 2017.
If you grind supernova in 2016, you get to keep the status until this new program. For <Supernova, it becomes a monthly status.
Little confused by this, does it mean you'd have to earn 100k VPP every month to maintain SN after this comes into effect? If so, does that equate to making what we used to earn through rb in one month, in a year?
Spoiler:
I'm tired and a lil in shock so prolly didn't word that correctly
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-09-2016 , 05:01 PM
Im assuming they will lower the requirements to like 8-10K VPP or something per month. I just don't think they want to have a bunch of people make SN @ 100K and then complain when it gets taken away after like 3-6 months or w/e. Although this years supernovas are still getting shafted on prob 6+ months of status anyways but seems std now.

1.2MM for SN seems a little excessive, altho in a couple years who knows
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-09-2016 , 05:35 PM
Is tim stone a bad player? I assume he must be...
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-09-2016 , 06:44 PM
Im looking forward to supernova casino grinders!

Quote:
Originally Posted by dikface
Is tim stone a bad player? I assume he must be...
what does it mean to be a bad player?

what doe$$$ it mean to be a good player?
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-09-2016 , 08:44 PM
Out of interest, how many of you are thinking about trying Galfond's RIO site?

(making the big assumption it'll actually happen)
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-09-2016 , 08:47 PM
i've been trying to think of a way to empirically test the impact of starting tables on the number of tables running with fish. i know myself that fish are far more likely to join a running game, but hard to take out all the variables - time of day/day of week etc.
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote
09-09-2016 , 10:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d7o1d1s0
i've been trying to think of a way to empirically test the impact of starting tables on the number of tables running with fish. i know myself that fish are far more likely to join a running game, but hard to take out all the variables - time of day/day of week etc.
On bot filled networks for the past few years i would just sit by myself while bots and losing regs played each other hu/3handed and i would always get the fish.
No idea if its because my table was on top or the fish got turned off by the constant 3betting. What im certain of is that one or two tables with a guy waiting by himself works better than regs battling
*** Official PokerStars Regulars Thread *** Quote

      
m