first time i have ever agreed with you

When Lock made the High Stakes Segregation Shane said:

Now two weeks later they are changing it again. What's to stop Lock/Revolution from changing it again? Once again Lock/Revolution show that they have no real clear plan.

By the way:

Any news about this yet? Or are you going to blame this on Intertops too like the player segregation news?

No doubt, people will probably try to game the system if/when it's discovered how it works.

Multi-accounting could also be an issue.

yeah this completely encouraging multi accounting and gaming of the system. i don't see how anyone could be blind to that.

Copied your post on page 5 to family/friends to explain how ******ed this decision is. Thanks.

Let me know how this works out for you..... LOL @ Lock Payouts

Like ChicagoRy posted, the worst 20% probably never play against the best 20% anyway, because of the hierarchy of stakes.

This will be about partitioning the winners at each stake from the losers at that stake.

I wonder how many new SNs we'll see at the tables in a few weeks.

As it has been explained to me so far every single winning player is not going to be in the top group. This isn't about winners vs losers.

Everyone is so focussed on the possibility of getting screwed over that they just cannot believe that poker room ecology is a real thing. I honestly feel like Al Gore talking about climate change. Despite the fact that several rooms are trying thing to better balance the ecology and improve the experience for recreational and depositing players the first assumption is that poker rooms want more rake and are trying to find new ways to screw over players.

If we wanted to make more money we would just remove our rewards structures and strip back what we give to players, that would be the quickest way to achieve that. I dont hide in any way our interest in growing our market share but that isn't a quick grab to make more money from our existing players, its about creating an environment that brings in more new players and grows the overall player pool which will obviously be more beneficial to us in the long run, but at the same time it will also be beneficial to our players with increases in liquidity and increases in funds moving up the chain.


I came at the NBA comment as a Knicks fan, I often have bets on season results with one of my friends who is a Warriors fan, at the end of every bet he of course complains that it wasn't fair since he is in the west. If you are in the Eastern conference your win rate and your chances of making the playoffs are greatly increased because you play the majority of your games in conference and therefore against weaker competition. You then of course have to go against the winner of the stronger conference to take down the title.

yeah, this is clearly just a matter of people not understanding what an awesome idea this is

you care so much about the poker ecology that you will create different sets of rules for different groups of players in order to pay for those benefits with no expense to yourself. no one would have a problem with you creating a better experience for casual players if it were coming out of your pocket instead of theirs.

Shane,

When you say Lock players will be in middle by far, do you mean regs on other skins will get shafted and be all put on the high tier while their fish be put on the low tier??!?!?!?! I don't see how else Majority of Lock regs will be middle when its 1/3 1/3 1/3 split.

Shane,

I understand your frustration, but nothing you say is going to help here. People love to complain and overreact. Everytime a site does something new, people are going to overreact and say that the sites are being greedy, etc. Just explain the situation and the details as well as possible and thats all you can do.

Honestly, the number one thing that will help Lock is to improve cashout times to under a month for checks. Until that happens, people are going to be more suspicious and complain more when new stuff like this happens.

Are you guys finally admitting there are liquidity problems?

These changes would be a lot more accepted if they happened AFTER you shored up the cashout problems. Now we have to deal with cashout issues and being in the 33%. I'm guessing almost everyone here making a big stink is a winning player and we will surely be in the top 1/3 since only top 10% of players win or something like that.

Stop with the Lock has more losers than other skins. How exactly does Lock having more losers help those of us that will be destined for the top 33%?

I hate making these posts since we don't have any of the details. However, you aren't making us feel much better with your posts. Is it going to affect all games and limits? If not please give us a general outline of which games will not be affected. Their was a rumor that it was just going to be 1/2+ and HU. Is that true? If so, then it's probably best to post it since it would calm down a few people.

I'm sure the top 33% feel like they're getting screwed, but even fish are against this, I suspect just on principle.

Virtually everyone has goals of eventually making it to higher and higher stakes, through years and years of hard work and study.

That's the beauty of poker, everyone knows the rules, everyone knows the stakes, we sit down and have a battle of wits, may the best man win.

It's a disincentive now to get better, because you're going to be singled out and punished for becoming a winner.

Obviously the ecology is a real thing, and steps probably need to be taken if it's at risk of failing. Even granting that, this just seems so fundamentally unfair on its face.

Obviously, we'll have to wait and see what the implementation brings, it could be benign or it could be terrible.

How dare you compare discriminating against winning players to al gore's efforts to spread information about climate change?

This is like incredible to me.

tbf he's actually comparing people that don't like this change to people that are too ******ed acknowledge science. much better, right?

I couldnt have said it better. Its a small player pool, why would you ever mess with this?

Shane you cant possibly believe this. I know its your job to feed us this **** but come on man. You can say the move is to improve the "poker ecology" but it is 100% clear as day a move to create more rake. You even said it yourself Lock will see more money its its pockets.

Obviously its terrible for Lock to have droolers play against good regs bc theyll loose their money faster. If they play against other droolers it creates more rake in the process bc no one will be good enough to win. This helps Lock's pockets, therefore this is to improve the bottom line.

Of course you could strip all promotions, but thats something every player would notice right away. This move was trying to be done very quietly and Locks plan was to hope no one noticed for awhile, but unfortunatly it got leaked. Just like how Lock segregated 1/2 and up, didnt say a word until players found out.

You guys took Party's idea and are trying to implement it into a player pool that is significantly smaller. They can do this and create more rake, but still have enough games going that it shouldnt effect most players too much. Obviously its not ideal but shouldnt kill games ect. The player base on Rev. is not big enough to sustain games higher than 100nl with this and I bet Lock knows this. The hope and plan is that all higher stakes player now become breakeven, create rake, and no more large withdrawals.

Id be willing to bet that almost all of the top 33% will be at least 100 if not 200nl regs and up.

Tell me Im wrong till your blue in the face, but im not.

Ok, i will direct PokerStars to this thread so they will know how to run a successful poker room.

By the way, i have worked in the environmental field for over 10 years and al gore is full of ****! Hid "movie" is based on half truths and lies.

just like most of shane's posts.

Shane is just an idiot puppet. He doesn't make the decisions he just dances for us.

Someone is mad because he can only profit against the worst of the worst. Sorry z32!

I see why now.

No Im not saying we have a liquidity problem, and yes we agree we need to get the cashouts sorted and that is our main focus. We have already seen huge strides in ROW cashouts, WU is has taken a leap forward in the last couple of days and checks will follow. We still have this as our number 1 priority.

If it were up to us we would have waited till they were totally under control first, but the network wants to get this out there so we have to get behind it now as well.


Everyone keeps talking about becoming a winning player and being cut off from the worst players as if the second you become a winning player you can no longer play against losing players. This isnt how its set up.

We will have a clearer picture with the release of the full FAQ on Tuesday but for now to better illustrate how how it should play out I threw the following graphic together.



Its the size and width of that middle band that make this a success as it really then just protects the very worst from the very best and still allows a broad range of skill sets from interacting at the tables.