+1

Yes, if the weakest half of the theoretical group all had SNE and the best triers had SN, the #s would skew because the SNE would have better return.

People talk about bankroll and endurance, but 4k+ games at double your stake vs 100% of regs while those regs are playing 50%+ of their games vs bad players... I think that's pretty solid endurance and bankroll hurdles skewed against the triers already.

This need to make it 5-10k games when the results are already telling is just unnecessary. We know who is better, it's the guy that has done better despite having to play double his stake vs 100% regs.

Maybe my lack of understanding is that I see divisions as a chance for the very best players at each level to earn spots, rather than whoever can get in to stand behind a wall and only move once that wall is broken + they are broken.

When poker players lament about why taxes on poker suck, why political situations suck, why countries segregate or outlaw online poker, it's the deep rooted political favoritism and lack of caring about a fair system that creates this. A lot of what has happened with divisions (especially up until major changes a few months ago) can be a microcosm for what happens politically with poker.

I'm not sure I agree with your post either Dave. If the $200s didn't let anyone in, I could potentially agree. But they have let players in.

I don't think the voting system is likely to deteriorate into what you theorize in your post.

I think a far more boring but realistic result of voting systems is just that they are less efficient at finding the best players as quickly as possible and replacing the worst players with better ones.

I believe your situation is an extreme one that could possibly happen, but it would require short sightedness and fallacy to reach such obvious levels to those within that i don't believe it's likely to ever happen. Far more likely that people just have to play 2-3x the games they should have to when they've already proved they are better statistically while also enduring tougher conditions (reg war % + buyin risk).

.

Shortly I'll be up to 200s crushing every reg In my way. You all are worried about being involved in something rather than winning winning winning and winning and moving up. For me there's no motivation unless it's crushing all you little fairys in in this group . I'm in a great spot. Keep sucking each Other off and being proud of where you are. Unless your in the 1ks your just another wannabe socialing to feel wanted. ..... Enuf said.

lol stars should clearly make battlenet all this cartelbs is pathetic
so if u are a random hasbeen like there is heaps and are in the 200 cartel u make heaps from playing fish and good new players climbing the ladders have it superhard to get fishaction
this is not how poker is supposed to be

ignorance is bliss

.... 2 weeks ago this guy posted:

snapppppp!

Good to see his confidence. Go hussler!

seems like he figured out icm perfectly

both systems arent that bad because for both it holds true that you dont want any leechers if you are in the top of the group skillwise


the voting system however allows for more freeriding as its not as objective as EV ROI requirements. So every buyin level will eventually do a ev requirment im pretty sure. The only reason not to is if there are other (collusive) factors in play but i very much doubt that

I predict stars will move to anonymous regging for husng eventually. The question is whether it will be the 100% anon ala Bodog or the partial anon ala Merge.

That would be an interesting development. Anonymous poker would end up being the fairest system because in the long run it would naturally favor the players playing closer to optimal but it would certainly make the game less interesting.

An arbitrary "voting" system tracked on a Google Docs spreadsheet that essentially creates a moat around the good players and the fish and prevents others from penetrating the castle is defin not in the sites best interest for long term revenue optimization. I'd be shocked if this joke system were not dismantled by Amaya Group once they get Accenture or McKinsey in to consult them. The PS culture of bending over backwards to coddle to pros wont last imo.

Kelvin thanks for the reply I'm not sure re-posting my thread from 2 weeks here is really necessary , I'm sure a reply in the correct section would of been appropriate and it would of been nice if you could of replied to it so I could see your opinion. I'm not to far off the 200s now. It is going to be a challenge getting through these regs but I'm really excited at the challenge. Take care.

This is so wrong, stars loves reg battles! Also read the stt suggestion thread or hsplo. Stars couldn't give a **** about the pros. They care what the recreational players want.

If what you are saying was correct, they would implement some sort of anonymous poker or at least anonymous registration.

No they wouldn't and it is exceedingly unlikely they ever will.

Hence, your previous comment is incorrect. Thanks for proving my point.

KelvinKe, I don't agree with wingpin's logic 100% but i'd much rather people actually tried to have reasonable discussions like him rather than post memes and take potshots at people and post 0-content oneliners like "ignorance is bliss". All you're doing is lowering the quality of discussion.

I've got 2 votes at the moment so it's only 17 to get in Pretty exciting journey. So far I've got EV ROI -0,35% pre rakeback. It means I do like 0,32% post rakeback. My villains from the 200s group have -3% aggregated EV ROI so it means they reached -23 900$.



Hopefully there will be empty spot before I get all required votes but so far I have plans for following weeks. Main goal is to reach positive ROI after next 3k games. I won't add 100s fishes on the side while playing those capped for number of tables opponents and I will stop all my CAP action except 10/20 while playing 200s hypers. Moreover I'll increase 1,5x my time spending with analysing. Cross your fingers guys - for me, for hypers and for professionall poker attitude.

Sick job buddy!! Congrats congrats and GL!

It's closer and closer but 0% EV is still not reached.



Already over 200 BIs of margin so it's pretty safe. Let's go for 0%+ EV in October!

what does "200 bi of margin" even mean?