And zero at 50nl.

Sent them a mail - the games are really bad and I can't bring myself to play against 20BB scum

Very true, and that's where I'm going if FTP doesn't fix this fast.

pokerstars does not have deep tables. They do have 50 bb min 100 bb max buy in tables though.

BTW all of UB and AP tables are 40 bb min 200 bb max.

Yeah, but....UB and AP.

nope not a SSer, try again
also , why is everyone so poopy about this as I think the venom needs to be directed at having more tables that are not just 20BBs deep. Most everyone plays those deep tables as a semi shorty (ie playing w $25 instead of 50) I get it you must buy in for more and that part is good, but do not claim it is anti shorties, as well 85% of players on those are shorties too.

Update, in the last hour or so, now it's happy hour, there has been zero 10nl FR deep tables... and zero now

I'm going to read the SS stickies

ftp,

I love your site, its the best software in the world imo. And I've put up with the tougher players/lack of bonuses and 27% rakeback because your buisness model is just so awesome. The death of deep tables may make me change my mind however , and that would really suck.

It's not a truly free market when regular tables are essentially being subsidized by putting them at the top of the list.

wow i didnt think all short stackers were fish.

Funny thread.

FTP will probably listen and accommodate. But they should not. In the best interests of FTP they should shut down all deep tables - besides nose bleeds because at that level it does not matter for the poker economy.

Then some notes:

- As most of you arguing, it would be better if you give the fish your account number and they deposit direct.

- Shortstackers have no mathematical advantages at the tables; but decent shorties have strategic and tactical advantages over some laggy full stackers.

- FTP could lose your business without tears. Assuming you are winning players, you don't contribute to the poker economy. The money come from losing players and as deeper those play, as faster they will be gone.

You are wrong on so many levels Sodom. Oh my lord.

+1

lol sodom...show me some losing players who generate 10k + of rake every month

lol wtf is this.

Drunk?

You clearly don't know how poker sites make money but the above poster gave you a hint.

you must be unaware of this one interesting concept known as rake. large volume, winning players pay alot of it. plus if they leave they cash out their rolls too; lots of money to lose. you obviously know next to nothing.

anyone else hate how the lobby looks now? I liked it better the way it was, also there are like no deep tables runnying. Im playing at stars until this is fixed.

Actually the best thing for ftp would be if there were no winning players and everyone was exactly the same. In that case all the money would eventually go to rake. Winning players pay a lot of rake, but they also win money and take some of it out of the game. Sites have to constantly attract new money if they are going to stay in business.

In any case, the min buy in is not that important. If the min buy-in on all tables was 50bb people that couldn't afford that would just play a lower limit. What I don't understand is why the hell regs are starting games on the regular tables. Regs are the ones that tend to start new tables so why are they starting them on regular tables? I want the games mixed again, or at least put the deep tables on top instead of banishing them below the cap games. That would make more sense deep > reg > cap, the lobby is generally ordered by putting the higher limits on top, at least stay consistent.

This is exactly what we are trying to get fulltilt to notice. I bet they don't even know that this update just killed the deep games.

the house dosent care or need to care about who is playing and winning/losing as long as games are running. also multitabling regs pay extensively more rake than 1 tabling fish, and you probably arnt thinking that a winning regs bankroll is in the hands of the house as is a bank account to a bank. yes they take money out, but thats a small price to pay for the massive rake they generate from having the reg/fish phenomena, which without there would be far less games running.

i dont even know why i bother arguing with the zoo peanut gallery. ive always wondered how threads here get to be 80 pages long; now i know.

+1

shortstackers must account for one stack size (theirs). fullstackers must account for two two stack sizes (the other fullstackers' and the shortstackers'). if you don't think shortstackers have a mathematical advantage, you're an idiot.

how come someone from FT has not come on here and explained themselve. FTPDoug were are u ?

I assure you, they know exactly what they did.

lol found this gem in another thread.