Originally Posted by Nihility77
Lee Jones said in his thread they weren't going to do anything to help any specific games, contrary to what we were told after the first player meeting.
Well we were kind of told this in January too, although its hardly black and white. We were told that they wouldn't consider any kind of promotions that specifically targeting a game in that it encouraged a player to play one game over another
. So, for example, a deposit bonus that can only be cleared at LHE. But general things to bring attention to a game (through superstar showdowns, that kind of thing) are fine.
Now with that said, I agree with all the points above - right now most freerolls are about NL, superstar showdowns, most pros are NL, all live events are NL, Zoom appeals to big bet and not fixed limit games, all "we are poker" TV ads feature NL etc. I strongly disagree with a lot of Lee Jones' recent comments about it being a "natural death" of LHE (I paraphrase), and I was surprised with the things he said and felt they didn't fit with what I was told in January (although its good if he's speaking his own opinion and opinion on these topics and not just a company line).
Any LHE-specific promotions are a rebalance of what I see as years of subtly selling players on big-bet games.
It's funny, i'm a lot less married to LHE like many of you, I've played three poker games in my poker 'career' and i'm facing learning a 4th (Spainaments) and it sucks but i don't mind it, i don't feel I was "born" a LHE player and have no issue learning something new if it's more profitable for me. But for the good of recreational players and poker sites, I think it's really important they support LHE, even if it does mean "propping it up" by making the game a better deal (much lower rake, specific ongoing LHE promotions). There is nothing natural about LHE's lack of popularity, it is one orchestrated by poker sites to sell NL as the sexy game. It looks great televised, it's more fun in donkaments. But to many, it's boring to play, and you need to invent stuff like Rush to make it palatable.
LHE is fun to play. All the other reps in the January meeting agreed that LHE was important game for PS to spread, it acts as a good "stepping stone" for new players, you can play "real" stakes for much less money, learn the ropes without risking a stack.
I doubt if PS looked at their balance sheet, Badugi was a profitable move. The cost to develop and test it vs the small rake they generate from the few games they deal. But they did it because "they are poker" and they want to spread everything, be the home of all poker games you've heard about, offer everything going. LHE is still as popular as the new sexy game (PLO) despite zero coverage, attention, and a very high rake. But if midstakes games stop running around the clock--as they have done everywhere but stars, and at stars at the end of the SNE cycle I can see the same thing happening--then everyone loses.
Aaaanyway, that's all way OT and well-trodden ground. To the OP: As with most I would be somewhere between mildly and quite strongly opposed to both suggestions, personally i've never had any problem with short stacks, and any negativity in some people exploiting a short-stack edge is more than made up for recreational players being able to play higher stakes for their $x.
Any ratholing policy that is "if you win more than 12BB, you must return with *at least* 12BB" is I guess okay, but personally if a player wants to split his roll across two tables or bank some of it, I'd rather that then he stops playing. Any ratholing policy that means you have to return with what you had makes little sense to me.
Either way, as others have indicated i'm not sure these 2 decisions will have much positive effect overall. I think Table Groups enabled by default will have more of an effect on the games.