I was going to say something like that a couple of days ago. Just about any thread that lasts 500 posts or more seems to contract ebola. I'm wearing a HAZMAT suit and largely steering clear, because it's utterly pointless to try and discuss the issues when clueless people (whether they are fanboys or angry trolls) get involved.
FWIW, I don't agree with everything Melea or Thrash say, but their opinions hold much more weight than those of random posters, and they clearly have every right to be thoroughly pissed off with the way Stars is treating them. If I was a multiple Supernova, I'd be ****ing livid.

Actually Spin and Gos are a great format for recreational players. The variance created from the spin wheel gives a fair bunch of a them a much more reasonable shot at some short term winning sessions. Variance simulations as a whole really don't show the losing ones are losing all that much more on average either due to the increased rake. Also note even though they may be raked higher they are hugely popular right now with other recreational players so the game conditions for them are much softer than your standard lesser raked hypers. no ICM mistakes, etc.

I don't deny their popularity nor their relative softness which is due to the rake being high enough to deter many pros. But the fact is to be profitable at this game is dependant upon hitting the jackpot. Many recs don't stick around long enough for the variance to help them.

As for the ecology from a poker standpoint it's horrendous. This game has driven players away from SNG's/Hypers which has toughened those games and when a player hits the 1 million jackpot he withdraws and that money never gets put back in the system. The reason the game is raked so high (8%) I believe at the low stakes is Pstars has accurately determined that this game type isn't self sustainable for players without hitting the jackpot. Since so few will hit it the people that play these games are all going to lose and Pstars wants to ensure they get their share of the pie.

I don't think this thread is filled with SNE, that's kind of been a point i'v been trying to drive home (maybe being satirical or trying to get a response isn't the best way to do that) that trying to say that PS are ruining poker because a very tiny percentage of the players are having their rake back reduced majorly (no one seems that interested in talking about Platinum being reduced by 10% or SN being reduced by 0%-28% or whatever it is) seems like a bad stance to take, in my personal opinion.

Well good news, your SN status that you quit obtaining isn't being reduced for 2016.

I don't agree with that at all.

If you can cite a source from PS talking about that i'll take your word for it.

I read the article and listened to the podcast and it seems more about getting more players to actually play poker (while trying to explain their reasoning for the changes) but I can't argue about how you personally interpret something differently than I do especially if I don't know exactly what you are citing.

Honestly I think you are starting off with a pretty skewed point of view so it actually makes it hard to argue with you without just saying you're wrong, but let's continue.

Well, that's a valid argument for sure, I certainly agree.
If you listen to the podcast, Pokerstars Matt actually addresses that exact point.
He said pretty specifically that they will evaluate the games as the VIP reward changes are being implemented and that some to rake rates and game changes are going to happen (if you want me to find the exact spot where he said it i'd be more than happy to find it, or you know you could just listen to it).

So saying that it isn't up for discussion seems pretty assuming, but you are more than likely correct that they aren't actually up for discussion and that PS will just make the changes as they become obvious.

I'm not sure where you were going with this one?

My general point was that if that broad changes to the VIP system were bound to be implemented, at least they can cite a reason even if no one agrees with it.

My problem in the last couple pages have been people misquoting our beloved PokerStars Matthew to further their own agenda.

If you're so confident in your positions, why blatantly lie about what the man actually said?

Makes a bit more sense to cut rake back at the nose bleed stakes than to cut rake back across the board.

I know that everyone thinks their rake back system was already flawless, but it's changed now sorry guys.

What if they actually did what they say they are going to do and increase the player pool?

He didn't talk about promos? He didn't talk very specifically about multi million dollar initiatives specifically to increase the player pool?
We must of been listening to different podcasts, that's the only thing I can imagine.

Again, not sure where you are going with this one. How would actually cutting off how much anyone can play help anyone? I feel like you are taking the actual final end result of a bad decision and trying to figure out how you could have made it way worse in the first place, not much sense in this paragraph to me but still, maybe a point.

Well, it's hard to come to this conclusion for me when everything leading up to it doesn't particularly make sense, but that's just my own personal opinion.

I acknowledge the validity of your feelings though if that makes you feel better.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...postcount=1357

I've not been posting in this thread because I haven't seen anything constructive being said in it, but i've been keeping an eye on it. But for someone to take this extreme of a tactic to try and make someone unpopular is beyond belief - very sad. Pocketducks, I do not like you but I feel for you here.

I found Spin n go a really poor developed "new game". They are being popular I agree with that but i think a card room with the money that PS manages could really do something better than just a low bb, high rake + lottery game.

I didnt find zoom games really attractive when they come out neither. I really dislike the segregation of player pools on very very similar games. I think that they could develop a new way of start tables, some list, and maybe some rewards to table starters (but who knows maybe with the new policies they ended up punishing table starters).

Coming back to Spins, I think stars has the potential to make some R&D and develop a new "NL Holdem". A new card game that balances skill with variance and stop with money grabs like zoom and Spin & go's

I was cautiously optimistic when Amaya bought Stars

I would have said there was a sub 1% chance Stars wouldn't be the biggest online poker company in 10 years. If Amaya manage to destroy their market position through greed which is looking increasingly likely, they will only have themselves to blame.

C'mon mods, do your work here.

So they decrease rewards because they are too motivating for the grinders and remove rewards at high stakes because they are not enough of a motivation for those players?

Said they looked at the percentage of reward to rake back and it made the most sense to cut the rake back from nose bleed stakes in the podcast PS Matt did

If a reader thinks a post should be deleted or edited, they should report it in the normal manner. The mods and admins who receive the reports then act as they, individually, see fit. It's not up to mods to read every post and decide if any action is required.

I don't have the time to go through all 100+ posts from verycrooked and xxpocketducks itt right now, but I may try that later

The pokertracker4 is banned now?

i was about to play zoom, is this true?
i see only 26 players are playing 2.50/5 zoom is this why or are people not lying zoom today as a strike kinda thing?

I am just curious, maybe somebody already post it before here..

Could it be,that all this change and adjustment made because FTP/Stars is gonna entering US market..?!*

*Maybe the regulation to enter there is the reason what happened right now..OR they just do it now to gain some money and more in the future if US player merge..

Just a thought

Sent from my Mi 4i using 2+2 Forums

https://www.pokerstars.com/poker/room/prohibited/

No, it's not banned. What led you the the assumption that it is banned?

old versions of it are now banned yes, just update to the latest version, that one is meant to comply with stars' new rules (no more than 3 colors on hud etc.)

Wait...what?

/thread

When Amaya spout **** about the changes being for recs but carry on promoting games such as spins with a ridiculous rake if you don't hit the jackpot, how can they be taken seriously? They don't care about the recs at all.

Not sure precisely what is meant by "highest jackpots". As a worst-case scenario, for the $0.50 games with 8% rake, if you never hit 10x or higher the rake is about 11.7% (so only hitting 2x, 4x, and 6x in this case).

SuperNova is still the same for 2016, SNE is the only thing being abolished (still 45% rake back for 2016, 30% cap after that) as far as rake back.

Different VIP system changes, different bonuses being condensed into their new StarCoins system so I think the total $ value is different but i don't know compared to the previous system.

From what i'v read you earn something like $6-7k+ grinding to supernova, but everything is in StarCoins now.

If you listen to the pod cast, Pokerstars Matt says they are going to be changing the rake rates for various games, just a matter of time.

On the other hand, I agree with you, but spin and goes are entertaining, and most people looking for entertainment or trying to hit a jack pot are probably more worried about fun value with the chance to hit it big.

Code for 1) This sounds like something you want to hear and 2) We'll be raising it in the future to make sure that nobody is profiting too much off the games.

First off SN is not the same for 2016 and not by a long shot. (how u can post itt and not even come close to the facts is beyond me)
Second Matt didn't say they'd lower rake... he said it would be considered.

Did he mention in that podcast that the money saved by SNE's/SN/Platinums was going to be spent on a new initiative to further lower conceivable winrates for these players?

I highly doubt that spin and go rake will be lowered, however, the issue isn't that the rake should be 4% instead of 5%, it's that if you're not hitting a jackpot your effective rake is like 12% or something stupid for a hyper. The jackpot money gets withdrawn from the few winners and the rest is gobbled up by Stars, how is that trying to increase the longevity of either the poker ecology (or whatever you want to call it) or the experience for the recs?

The biggest problem has been allowing such a brutal hunt of the fish for many years. If you go fishing with a rod, you will eventually catch a fish, however if you have a boat with a massive net and lots of crew (HUD's, seating scripts, high reg/fish ratio etc.) the fish will be caught so much quicker until there is barely any left. Any change Stars makes now is going to be too late IMO, when you have regs battling at $7/15 HUSNGs or 10nl, times are bad.

This.