because if customers could work out the ball park amt stars was raking per day out of spins (1KK+) they would seem quite greedy paying out only 10 3,000x games per million

Maybe you were being sarcastic, but the # of games should not be a factor in whether they show it or not.

Everyone knows the rake %, and whether they run 10k games a day or 10 games a day, it impacts anyone that plays the game the same amount, irrespective of whether you think it's low, high or just about right.

I like information though, so I wish we knew how many Spins ran. I also wish we knew player results in Spins (as an aside, I also wish no winning players over a certain threshold could block stats).

Agree.

+1

i know you are 100% all about promoting spins but my point is logical, unsure why you felt the need to respond

you are correct that stars doesnt care what a small % of the population relatively accurately assesses (what i think)

stars cares about what % of fish with access to a calculator independently have ah ha moments and sour on the games when they realize how slim good multipliers actually are, and get a vague sense of what stars is charging them to never play one

stars not showing the # of active spin tables at any given moment is driven by marketing, managing expectations.... keeping the actual cost paid by customers hidden

(not being able to see the rake at a glance anywhere without deliberately looking in a text hh, a lobby, or the spin explanation page is the same aim)

the reason total active tables arent shown correlates to why "top prize pools of the day" arent displayed in an easier to digest format *because relative to games played, their [in]frequency is nothing to show off, its something to hide

if people knew what they were paying for what they are getting, it would create bad blood, /curb business


.stars should lower their damn prices.


they clearly wont without a decline in customer participation


if stars didnt rake so much there would be more high multipliers in the "top prize pools of the day" and not as many "these 3 donks shared $240" filler bs

the filler prize pools all customers gloss over< is just meant to distract from the absence of big spins by misleading people into thinking they arent there because something else more recent "pushed them out" or because stars is trying to give equal visibility to all buyins

**** you stars, fewer of your customers are clinical ******s than the model you act on

Wow its almost like stars wants to make profit with its games

Don't give them ideas

fyp

Nothing in my post was positive (nor negative) to spins.

I just don't think Stars is hiding the # of spin n gos played has anything to do with rake. I kind of see where you're getting at now, but I still disagree. They could easily show "50,000 games played this month" and if they were afraid people would be turned off, they could just do something like "over 3 million dollars in mulitplier games has been won in the last week!"

Though if you know how many big multipliers go off, you can deduce within a certain degree of accuracy how many have been played at any given level. Or maybe there isn't a big enough sample quite yet for that, but if every biggest winner result is made publicly, I bet we can get a range at a high confidence level.

just your estimate (which i know were just random numbers but humor me) might be telling

just based on the very scientific "me noting on average 3x $3,600 spins in the scrolldown" when ive looked id wager there are approx a quarter million $1 spin and goes on the average day (which is $50k in rake, nothing to scoff at)

and those few $3,000 winners per day are likely to be very close to the only guys cashing out anything from the particular buyin level with its 7% rake,

thats why players wont be offered the information in the lobby, 95% of players dont see the forest for the trees and stars likes the pacified state of its sheep/fish/customers as they participate in the carefully structured rake traps these were designed to be

they are nowhere close to stupid enough to screw that up. good for stars, bad for players, no signs pointing to change.

The top 3 multipliers are publicized yet are only kept visible for 24 hours.. so maybe someone wants to start counting them

Call them a rake trap if you prefer and although the sheep/fish/customers as you call them on a whole will lose more money collectively in this format, there will be a higher percentage of winning players from that group as well do to the high variance generated from the "spin".

If you have ever used the "search" function on a recreational player you would also know that they don't all necessarily stick to one format or game. They play what interests them in that given time frame for their entertainment. People should stop bashing the Spin and Go format without first considering it's effect on the entire poker ecosystem. It's certainly caused some shift in volume of other variations of SnG poker but on a whole it's difficult to really know what influence these games will have on the evolution of online poker's future.

At the very least there is now a format out there that gives a weaker player a chance to be a winner again, even if it is caused mostly from the "luck" of the wheel. If those player re-invest those winnings into other games and formats, higher buyins, etc that is great for the poker ecosystem.

I think you make a good point. As there has been more and more Regs over the last few years it's less and less fun for recreational players. No one enjoys losing all the time. Introducing games with higher variance, give recreational players more chances of being sometimes winners

Regs/Fish wouldn't have a problem with Spin and Gos if the rake/structure was changed a bit.

5% is a lot of rake especially at the 60s BI level.

Rake should be more like

4%@15s
3.5% @30s
3%@60s

I would stop complaining.

I really want to play $60 spins, but I don't see the point when I can play a $50 or $80 hyper mtt for half the rake and it takes 10x as long to complete. These games take 10 minutes, how do they charge $3?

You get more of an edge per minute in these games than those MTTs.

Not that I agree with the rake #s (I was disappointed not to see a break for the $60s at least), but I think we need to compare potential edge (hourly rate really) to the rake since our aim is to have the highest hourly rate in this game.

I think the rake being lower, but not as low as hyper HUSNGs is a good place to see it. There's going to be more collusion in spins and they are clearly pouring marketing money into them compared to HUSNGs, so it makes sense that HUSNG costs are lower than Spin costs from a marketing and security/support perspective.

You did not misunderstood`. The higher the variance the weaker reg you can be and still succeed in the long run. Just look at what horrible players crush mtts (half the people i note as whale turn out to be mtt regs).

The long run is really long in spin and goes and maybe the rake is just too high in the end but it is certainly true that the weakest regs have to cope with the highest variance games so id imagine the ones that are struggling to get into cartels/ not make much money at hu sngs are more likely to switch (and probably do somewhat ok) than the ones who are crushing their format whether its hu sngs/6max/we.

The higher the variance the stronger you need to be to succeed in the long run. Sure, some small % of weaker regs will bink and be able to "last longer" but the majority will get destroyed.

Agree with you that the weaker guys switched over to spins first and made probably ok money. However, now that action had died a bit at HUSNGs I expect a lot more HUSNG players will start playing some spins as well in addition to HUSNGs. Not sure how it is at 6 max but I assume it's probably similar.

Spin and go's are one big joke.

The 'top prize pools' are said to be rare and infrequent but I noticed a few (Russian) players who won a big table twice in a matter of four to six weeks! Other players will not hit a big table even when they have played 50 000 or more games. It's quite ridiculous.

Spin and go's turn poker as much into a skill game as these 'all-in shootouts' where the same people seem to win prizes over and over again too.

It's sad what poker has become: the latest version of the lottery

Wow...another high quality post above!

Spins will get more riggy posts than HUSNGs.

ooh, what a world it could be