The changes made today are a direct result of the feedback the community. A public example is this thread, but there were dozens of players that spoke to me privately and gave some very extensive opinions on all the major variables that go into HUSNGs (structure, buyin, rake). Thank you everyone.

A shout out to Carbon for actually implementing some changes that the players want. The few poker rooms that do this for HUSNGs have wound up being the very best rooms for HUSNGs, and Carbon joins a small group of rooms that truly seem to factor in what our community wants.

Carbon plans to continue to work with what the players want. They have some promotional plans for later in the year centered on HUSNGs, and if you have feedback on the changes they've made today to the structures, buyin levels and rake, you can post about it here.

Here's a short video I made, a pair of hyper turbos at the $33 level, with an overview of the changes on the three structures, as well as a little strat. Feel free to discuss either at length in here.

Here is a look at the changes in depth.

CLICK HERE

So one of the biggest things I struggled with recommending was whether or not there should be a 70-140 blind level in the hypers.

Overall, more were against it than for it, but nobody seemed particularly insistent about it either way.

Coffeeyay brought up a good point that there is more play and potential edge in the ~8bb area than many of us seem to consider when talking about blind levels in this area, but another question is, how often are you going to have 1200+ effective stacks in a 70-140 level? It's not a damning argument against adding that level, but it does come into play.

If anyone has feedback there, feel free to post here or in that Carbon thread or talk to me privately. Like I said, Carbon wants to make sure players are happy here and that their games spread are very fair and appealing and mapped out in a rational manner.

rake went up at 215 and above hypers by alot

the $1050 buyin has a rake of $20 while the 1K's on pokerstars have a rake of $11.2

isnt rake supposed to be smallest at highest levels due to smaller edges.

plz do something about this!

The higher buyins won't be as close to Stars rake, mainly because they are a US facing site with a lot of higher costs.

Rake is still under 2%, and the games are softer. They don't run as often obviously as well, it's difficult enough to convince smaller sites to actually run 1k hypers, so I think keeping rake under 2% was a fair compromise (especially with the lower stakes rake being lowered too).

That said, if there is concrete information that shows them that having 1-1.5% rake is better for their business, I'm all for presenting a case to them on lowering it, and I think they would be receptive.

Currently, it seems like players that play that high on Carbon and similar traffic sites, they wait a long time for a game and when they get that game it is often very soft. So I'm not sure we can make a good case for lowering it more than the 1.95% it is currently, given the information at hand.

Why, oh why did they jack up the rake for the regular speeds?

Because the edges of those games are very high and the average length of the games is long.

If you compare it to a super short game like hypers, and 2% rake... it ends up being a decision between raising regular speed rake and eliminating regular speed offerings (because hypers are so much more profitable for the room).

So the rake is higher in order to balance a bit more the amount of money won and time played relative to other games.

If the people regularly playing these can show that their edge has disappeared, I think that would be strong evidence that could lead to reductions there. But I think the likely thing is going to be if people want to play the slower, deeper structure that results in a huge edge on the opponent, they are going to have to pay 3x or so the rake of a hyper turbo, a game that probably finishes in 1/6 of the time on avg of a regular speed.

Ya rake got worse, and seems like structure got worse... 3 mins of 30bbs was nice

I think most regulars playing husng hypers don't like this changes.
There is only one lobby for each stakes that leads reg wars on midstakes (although there are not many of them). yeah, i also enjoyed 3min for 30bb

They're adding an extra lobby I believe. I talked to them about lobbies tonight.

They don't want 4 regs sitting waiting for opponents, because there isn't enough volume. But a middle ground does make sense. The occasional reg war when it is slow is something the site wants and isn't necessarily bad for players either. There does have to be a give and take here, though I definitely see the issue with one lobby and there should be a second added soon.

30bb vs 25bb, most people seemed to prefer the Stars structure overwhelmingly and any improvements suggested to it did not involve 30bb.

The speed thing is another story. If people prefer 3 minutes over 2 minutes then that might be a good idea. I'll ask Carbon to keep an eye on traffic for a few weeks and compare before and after and see if there's any difference, and in the meantime I'll try to reach out to more players to get their view as well (I assume if it's staying 25bb or going to 30bb, you'd prefer 3 min to 2 min yourself?).

Thanks for the feedback so far.

I totally agreed that merge does not need 4 lobbies for hypers, but 1 wasn't enough since even if having reg wars is not an issue, regs at low/mid stakes usually want to multitabling for hypers. Now there are 2 lobbies for $33 hypers or less which is more reasonable.

For the speed, i think ppl would prefer 2min rather than 3min .