It sounds like you think all recreational players are morons, that dont understand they can win/loose more at higher stakes. There's still plenty fish who play the 60s, why wouldn't there be enough fish playing the 100s??

And I don't think pokerstars is not introducing them yet bc they dont want fish to loose money to fast, if that's the case why would they have other high stake games? like someone already mentioned .

Spin and Gos might be different, but there's a huge interest factor in the high stakes of many games.

The HS cash games played on FTP and PS (and UB years prior) in the 2007-2010 range for example. That drove so much interest in the games.

Also quite a lot of rake is generated from professionals playing above their rolls/taking shots. HUSNGs have proven this for years (particularly since the division/cartel systems of the last few years).

I think it boils down to attracting new players/catering to current depositor wishes. How many more players (professional or not) will play $100s that don't already play $60s? How many frequent depositors are clamoring for $100s? My uninformed opinion leans towards eddy's conclusion, though I hope I'm pleasantly surprised and we see some $100s.

high stake games are a relica from the past

on fish losing money faster, im more worried about casino games being more advertised and easily accesible.

Yeah, I think it's a valid concern in the Stars/FTP case in the short term because they've been known and promoted as poker sites and are only starting out as casinos and bookies and it will take years for them to claim decent shares of those markets.

At sites that have been holding sportsbooks and casinos for ages (longer than poker), the effect is reverse - some punters and casino gamblers treat poker as yet another pit game And so it will be when Stars and Full Tilt do start bringing in decent numbers of new initially non-poker gamblers.

Hi, could someone please tell me where could found the custom stat for the information box : chipev/tourney
thanks

amt_expected_won / cnt_tourneys

Oki perfect thanks

this no one wakes up and goes 'im gonna grind the $3s forever and never hope to move up

starts should take away the $5 POS 1 millys and make the $100s a mil see the rake they generate then

how much EVchips/game one needs to make in 60s to profit without the big jackpots? I've heard 40chips/game but coffeyay has a profit with 35chips/game

discuss

27 with all tiers,
34 without the top tier,
36 without the top 2 tiers, and
38 without the top 3 tiers.

So including all the possible jackpots I need to make at least 27 ch/game to make a profit right? I this including RB or no

does not include rakeback

alright, thanks man

7$*spinning x 10 (70$).

First hand of the match:
Hero (btn):1010
raise 40
SB reraise 140
Hero All in.
SB calls: AA.

1. Should my shove be considered less good (bad), due to the population tendencies becomes a lot tighter when spinning something of worth?

2. Does the expectation of him having (atleast) AJ+ added with the tightening of ranges when higher spins lead me to give up, du to the possible 50/50 factor added with me knowing I'm in most cases better than my opponents in the long run.

Or maybe I'm just TILTing haha.

seems like you should contact support because you weren't dealt any cards

Any cards except TT as I suppose. TT is not really a flip against two overs so you are happy to ship it preflop agains almost any resaonable range.

A non-all-in reraise (but bigger than a minimum reraise that could be made by a clueless fish not knowing how to set up the right buttons in the software) is usually made with really strong hands as a trap - they can afford to let you call and see a flop It's scarier than an all-in reraise in the first level (the latter is made also with pretty any Ax and pocket pairs as a semibluff avoiding watching the flop out of position), and anything but premium hands (JJ+, AK) should be folded imo.

The prize multiplier doesn't really matter - regulars play almost identically regardless of it. (It goes without saying that you should try to detect regs - do player search on both opponents - at the start of a Spin to find out at how many tables they're playing or whether they're opted out of search => at least already know their way around the software a bit).

Folding TT while playing HU on 7s with a random guy is so dramatic terrible...

And calling a big reraise 'a trap' is also not really reasonable imo.

Quick question about the the s&g's if anyone can answer. Are the prizes fully distributed back over an infinite sample size and the players lose just the rake or is there an additional loss?

I.e. if we count up all the multipliers does it essential come back to a winner take all 3 handed sng, as in 171$ for $60s (60$ x 3 - 9$ rake) or is there an additional loss on top of the rake, like the multipliers not adding up to 100% minus the rake.

no additional loss

dave is correct, but approaching an "infinite sample" in this case, will take, a while

Adding up the total prizes with frequencies from the stars site does not equal the same amount - rake for me?

I took the 30's, as an example, but since rake is 5% it should be the same for 15s and 60s.

doing 90k + 30k + 30k + 75k + 150k + (180 * 7500) +(120*21366) + (60* 70518) comes out to 8520000$ prizepool per 100k games.

Doing 28.5 x 3 x 100k comes out to 8550000$ per 100k games. So it seems players are losing an additional 10cents in *extra* rake per game? Or am I missing something?

Im thinking about getting into spins. Have played like 300 and am down a bunch, but have a chip ev of 67 per spin. So if avg pool in 5$ is 13,65 does this mean that i should make 4,65/500*67= 62c profit per spin and have 7,5% roi? or am i thinking wrong?

That's not exactly correct because you haven't subtracted the rake. (If you won zero chips net on average, then you'd lose exactly the rake, $0.35 per game. Each chip is worth $4.65/500, you're right with that.) Your profit is $0.62-$0.35=$0.27 per game; now add VIP rewards (incl. freerolls) and subtract life expenses (or the extra hour salary, divided by the number of games per hour, you're missing out on if you have a job).

Oops, I thought he was talking about the first hand of a $7 Spin & Go, i.e. 3-max (as witnessed by the phrases 'Hero is the button', 'SB reraises', i.e. SB and BTN were depicted as different players there). I don't think a random $7 Spin player has a balanced non-AI 3-bet range in 3-max. Those who do balance (which is not that necessary) usually push their entire 3-betting range into button regs. Given the chance of BB's coldcall, playing a marginal hand in a bloated pot OOP, sometimes 3-way, is unattractive. I'd rather have JTs here (flat, see the flop and fold if whiffed) than TT.

But taking into account that Hero had 1010 chips... yeah, it seems like a HU then and 4-bet-shoving TT is correct, and BB might be 3-betting NAI wider than AJ+ and with some marginal hands as well.