-1

Hyper-sats are popular, and as long as there is demand for them they should be available to whomever wishes to partake. As we have seen with Spin & Go's if a game is popular Pokerstars are not in a rush to remove it or make changes.

And, as others said, that T$ has to be used by someone.

The only ideas ive seen you post ostrich is some garbage about mega path sats, sats that u always grind wenevr u play so this makes u self serving scum too?

Im sure my idea would not make sat grinders quit sats, but it would do a world of good for mtts and sngs.

Probably close to 100% of players who sell t$ won from sats are regs so preventing $t sale won from mtt sats only hurts regs, which is a good thing.

Totally agree with Bridler here. Make it so t$ cant be sold and must be played through. It would do a load of good for mtts and sngs. Much better than people just selling and cashing out. Do the right thing Pokerstars!

This idea is bad for recreational players too. The $T sale thread is evidence. So many guys in there selling their $11 storm ticket that they won from fpp's so they can play other things.

Sunday storm fpp sats are sngs, my arguement is for $t won from mtt sats not allowed to be sold

I've made dozens of suggestions for all manner of games itt, all of which I either play or would be interested in playing. There's nothing wrong with offering feedback on games you understand; on the contrary it's to be encouraged. It's also perfectly understandable that most people are offering suggestions that would benefit them personally.

The "scummy" aspect (wording prob a little harsh, so I apologise for that, but I still say it's morally questionable) comes when you start suggesting placing restrictions on other players for your own benefit, and dressing it up as a positive move. You know quite well that your suggestion would discourage a subsection of winning players from satelites, whilst also forcing a subsection of losing players to spend money they've won playing tournaments they would prefer not to play.

If I'm wrong, and you're not as smart as I think you are and had completely overlooked this happy side-effect of your proposed restriction on the movement of T$, then I humbly apologise for any offence caused. Perhaps the years of breaking even in micros have made me unreasonably cynical.

+1

i don't get the argument about not hurting the hyper sats grinders. why should they be able to grind for T-money and not the mtt players? it makes 0 sense. fwiw, it's much more likely someone who won an mtt sat to play another sat/tour and actually use the T-$ rather than the hyper sng sat grinders.

i think the system is fine as is with the T-$, although for all i care, i wouldn't mind even if they made the 1st ticket "must play" (but i'm not sure if that'd improve or hurt the games).

this got v strange indeed

i dont know exactly what bridler means about the $T exchange restrictions but less freedom<more freedom and i see no reason to restrict things needlessly, if it aint broke....

also just have to voice my opinion that...

must play is bad!
i dont want to be forced to choose between playing every sunday or knowing 1 full week in advance whether i will feel like taking the upcoming sunday off and as consequence taking a full week off satelites, that sounds awfull,
i work enough sundays, the ones i decide to ****off and do something else spurr of the moment are the best ones haha, dont take that away!

switching to tickets and not $t is also bad
last sunday i used the $T from a sunday million seat to play both the 82 PSKOs and had alot more fun than i wouldve playing the mil, i want that option.

Usually im happy to +1 bridler's suggestions and they are nothing but obvious improvements stars should make but ive gotta -1 this set, options are good

well must play doesn't mean that you play it the following sunday, it's just a ticket for that mtt exclusively. still also disagree on both must play and not being able to trade t$ for actual $, imo it'd just hurt the turnouts and the system as of right now seems to be working pretty well.

It's not about the quantity, but about the quality. That's still 0. For once someone posts a good idea ITT and then you even claim it's only in self-interest.

appreciate the feedback on my posting quality, you set the standard pretty high so I have a lot to aspire to!

If it were implemented the ticket is the way to go. But I agree that it shouldn't be done as T grinders are important to get sats even running in the first place. True on Sundays they're not needed but on a Tuesday night for example many SM sats wouldn't even run without T grinders being the first to reg. Other tourneys satellites are far more dependant upon regs.

This is an incredible statement from someone that exclusively makes contrary and poor suggestions.

Hello,

Just wanted to say that we have deployed some 6 max Hyper satellites for the Micro Million, with blind levels based on number of hands instead of time.

Currently, they are available for event 2 through 6 + the Main event (#98).

We settled on nine hands for the first two levels and then have 100/200 go on indefinitely. This can easily be changed if we see the need, however.

Thanks,
Baard

Good job, thanks for letting us know

Would really like daily satellites for the 265 ko. a combination of 82 hypers/22r/33r + whatever else might work

+1

change sundays €2k ept players choice sat to a €1k imo, i imagine the average runners would be more than 2x the 2k, plus give opportunity for more recs to play

agree, not as many players to start a satellite game with these days. ban $T and you drive people to spin&go, lol. before long, we got sats during weekends only. generally speaking, selling $T is a rather stupid idea EV-wise, but that is personal choice.

Sat grinders aren't racking up T$. The T$ that you win from one sat is just used to buy in to the next one. For rakeback pros, profit comes in the form of FPPs and milestone cash, not T$. The T$ just gets recycled back into the same games. The sats also award small cash amounts for 3rd place, such as around $5 for the $74s and $181s. So before you even start accumulating T$, you'd have to win enough PRE-rakeback to cover all your 3rd place money. There just aren't many players doing that.

+1. At the current state, satellite system does not serve one of its most important factor: making (target) tournaments softer. Option to turn seat to T$ (with no expiration day) is fine otherwise, but selling / buying it should not be allowed. Tournament players does not seem to see this and this is one of the main reasons why I play virtually all regular satellites and tournaments in other sites.

If you don't like playing tournaments, then you should not be playing satellites either. For casual players Stars could offer Sit&Go's with FPP buy-ins and cash prizes.

Saturday majors could use a bunch more sattys... 320 ko, weekly 6max, weekly turbo etc

Definitely agree, especially the SKO.
It's a tournament i'd absolutely love to play!

How about 82 Turbos as well as 82 Hypers?

Also, seems today the 82 Hyper isn't accepting Step3 tkts? That should be changed imo

What you forget is that the format, which is a satellite, could be easily copied by making the first places the same amount. Just call it a T$-Tournament if you need to give out the cash in T$. Otherwise call it a equal prize SNG/MTT or something.

You can make 1.5$R 3x-Turbo to 215 T$ or a 6max Hyper 9$ to 27$ without adressing it to specific tournaments. Since there are more than one 215$ and also more than one 27$ mtt in the complete schedule, it's easier for people to join the games they like.

I don't wanna play Sunday Million as I have to get up too early to beat myself up with little sleep because I can easily get so deep there that I end up with less than 3 hours sleep but need a lot of luck to get further than a mincash..
rather I'd play a 215$ turbo or split it into 3 Hot 55$ + some spare change.

So if you say satgrinders are the worst, you are just saying that people who prefer a fixed payout ladder rather than a increasing one are bad somehow.

Anyone know if PCA seats are direct entry or T$?