This looks like it was written by Amaya. Unless they thought of everything in it themselves, that's the only way the information used in the article could exist.

If the results they posted were actually accurate then Pokerstars will be begging and pleading for all of them to come back (well, ok if they actually were still on strike as I suppose many have come back...).

I certainly would be interested in knowing how they tracked every game type so exactly including Spin and Gos which even the Russian PTR is having difficulty tracking. The figures they tossed out there should be easy to document if true since they are so exact such as

In Spin&Go, the reduction in the rake collected amounted to $318K, which was distributed in the following way:

$30 — $38K — 12%
$60 — $88.5K — 27.8%
$100 — $191.5K — 60.2%


Their report has a ton of exact numbers, but no detailed explanation how they got the numbers. Moldova was down 4.4%, Switzerland up 12.5% (neutral impact), 30.2% reduction in 400NL traffic, and a total loss of rake of over $2 million.

A bit more detailed how the numbers exist would certainly help, and I guess the next strike is another week long one in a few weeks, which is a curious approach (strike on, strike off, strike on, strike off).

Anyway, time again will tell whether the published results are genuine or not. If they were genuine then Stars would be talking to them and giving in on pretty much everything right away to avoid complete failure in the near future.

"This time, the fraction of Supernovas and Supernovas Elite among the protesters was very high (about 30% according to wearepokerplayers.com). The reduction in traffic took place in rake-intensive disciplines where a regular is almost always at least a Supernova."

Many of these Supernova and Supernova Elite players on strike are professional online poker players. It's fair to say while your numbers presented represent a significant drop in the reduction of traffic to many formats/games many of these striking players rely on online poker for their livelihood and cannot afford to strike indefinitely. PokerStars knows this and while it's impressive you organized a mass strike I don't think PokerStars expects anything other than a reasonable percentage of these players to return back to the game in some fashion or the other more sooner than later, most likely dropping down in stakes, playing softer games, yet a higher rake % in the process.

I've just been checking out the impact reported on Spinlyzer against a random sample of 10 declared Spin players from the list in post 104 (Yes - I know - lol sample size - if you have the time to check with a better sample size, I'd be interested to listen to your results) .....

Of the 10 players I looked at, just three players didn't record any games between 1st and 7th January - and two of those didn't record any games in November or December either! (probably they play below $15, games which aren't tracked on Spinlyzer). So it looks to me that just 1 player from 10 (or 10%) of the declared list in post 104 respected the strike.

Whilst this sample did appear to show some decrease in volume, the macro numbers on Spinlyzer did not show any decrease (apart from on 1st January and 31st December - which I would suggest is for reasons other than the strike). I cannot see any evidence of the strike having had any impact on Spins.

My information is in the charts below - I haven't named the 10 players in my sample as this isn't about naming and shaming, but I would expect any 10 random players you pick to show similar results if you wanted to verify....

Really really really doubt this. I myself have already mapped out only doing 200k vpps this year for the sole reason of the 5 million VPP bonus and am instead going to take advantage of multisiting. As someone else posted there are a lot of regs that might not realize it yet but will be forced into quitting within the next 6 months. People get accustomed to a lifestyle, it's hard to go from 50k to 30k a year, it's hard even to go from making 100k in a year to 70k. Not to say everyone has options outside of poker but those who were struggling to begin with last year will just be treading water this year.

It's not that hard to go from 100k-70k or 50k-30k unless you are trying to keep up appearances are are just plain stupid with your money. And yes this comes from someone who has taken such a hit switching careers in the past. It's not an income issue, it's a spending issue.

I went from 120k to about 75k simply because I was miserable in my career and wanted a change. I made a few adjustments but things went very smoothly. I was making 120k but wasn't spending anywhere near that much.
I understand that there are families struggling to make ends meet and that a hit of $30k would incur some hardship but that really isn't the demographic that we are talking about here. If you are struggling to make a living playing poker and are having a hard time putting food on the table earning 50k+ a year your problems are a spending issue, not an income issue

If your dumb enough to make 100k and spend 100k then or make 50k and spend 50k then your troubles are bigger than the pay cut you are taking anyways. You need a basic life lesson on how to budget properly and live within your means

So many people have so much crap that they don't need and blow money on stupid things, new cars, new ipads, new phones, new tv's etc etc. At one point my wife and I were making almost $250k per year and friends of ours who made about 1/2 that always drive more expensive vehicles than us and live in a house that cost about $100k more and they are always complaining they are broke, I wonder why

Not if u live in Eastern Europe

It's not just about people who make 100k and spend 100k.

It's incredibly easy for a family to earn 100k and spend 75k or to earn 50k and spend 35k. In both those cases they are saving 25% or more of their income which is awesome. Both of those families are now in the negative.

I am personally content with the results, they were close to what i expected knowing that we had around 1700 players.
Unfortunately we went below crusial 1,8M mark but that was obviously unreachable with that number of players.

It isn't pokerstars job to provide people with a living. They a platform for which that is possible but no more than that.

Poker isn't a job in the traditional sense and elite players are not employees.

If you cant beat a game without rakeback, then you aren't at the top of the game anyway.

Guys in this situation have 3 options.

1) suck it up and keep playing
2) find a different site (goodness knows there are enough to choose from)
3) get a real job

None of which is pokerstars problem

I didn't mention poker or Pokerstars at all.

I was just commenting that losing 30-40% of your income is pretty damn significant even for those that are responsible with money.

this isnt true in some games.

Nor is it the players' job to provide the folks at PokerStars with a living. I think that the boycotts exist to remind PokerStars of that.

This entire post is such garbage

LOL. Good counter-argument. Must have been difficult coming up with that pearl of wisdom.

I see little point engaging in a back-and-forth with people who are either uniformed, haters, or obvious trolls, but I'll bite.

No legitimate professional player is saying that. The argument has never been 'PokerStars should provide people with a living.'

Off topic, N/A

Also not a point being argued in defense of the players

Completely false and shows this poster has no idea how certain game types/ecosystems work.

In order to beat a game, a player must not only be a % better than his/her opponents, but enough to overcome the amount that is paid in rake. In $15+ Spins, for example, having a profitable cEV means that you're beating your opponents for x amount, however unless it's over 27 chips a game, that player is losing money because of the rake.

The HS 6m Hyper satelite community has a very small set of regs, most of whom are incredible players and they have extremely thin edges because the structure only allows for so much and field itself is very difficult. A top player in that game could actually have a (gasp!) negative expectation before rakeback.

If it isn't possible for the best players to make a living from poker what is the point in even playing at any stake or level. Without that chance of reaching the moon, why bother... even the worst recreational needs to believe in the dream... There are things far more entertaining then poker...

Even though this problem doesn't affect me personally as I am not SNE, I have noticed my will to continue dropping... I am guessing I'm not the only one. It's not even a boycott anymore for me... It's true apathy...

Well, the comments that i see again and again are that players were able to make a living off rakeback before, now they can't, and they want it back. So in effect they are demanding that Pokerstars provide them with a living.

If you can beat your opponents but still lose money because of rake then you need to find a more profitable game or site. The game is unbeatable.

Quite simple really.

Edit: this is in response to acbarone's post.

No, the problem is that Stars advertised a program/rewards system that was effectively a 2-year "contract" and now have decided to pull the rewards after players have done their part by paying the necessary rake over the course of year one.

No one is saying "I need my rakeback living." While I wouldn't be happy about it, Stars is allowed to adjust prices for their product (raise the rake). But this is something entirely different, even their figurehead (DN) admitted as such.

There needs to be winners and losers. If there are no winners, there is no poker. I think it's pretty obvious that the people running Stars these days do not have a clue.

If they did this and their stock was performing, at least it would make sense. It seems like they are just doubling down on stupid over and over...

If it is the rake that is keeping a reasonable number of players from making a profit then the problem is with the rake, not the players. If a site ultimately gets all, or nearly all of the rake from a particular stake then that game is no longer poker, it is a casino game.

There has always been a fragile balance in regards to rake as to whether a poker game can be considered a game of skill or a game of chance. Rakeback is a way of keeping the rake low enough particularly at the higher stakes, where the skill gap is very narrow, that players can still make a profit through skill.

Poker should be a beatable game. Since some players are always going to be better than others, the beatability of the game can always be controlled by the rake charged. The site is always going to make money because the harder the games become to beat the more rake the sites take in, which makes it possible for the sites to give more of the rake back to the players in order to maintain a healthy ecosystem. We may come to realize that a corporate structure and poker are simply a match made in hell since a corporation might lack the flexibility to make the fine tunings necessary to maintain that healthy ecosystem.

PokerStars has every right to increase the rake even to the point of taking all of the deposited money if they so choose. But the players have every right to voice their disgust over what might clearly be seen as money grab.

What PokerStars doesn't have any right to though is to renege on the rewards already won for 2016; and that includes what was to be the exclusive million dollar freerolls.

Yes, but it wasn't a "contract" was it? It was a loyalty program that became unfeasible for Stars to continue. Sure they made some "promises" but where is the contract?

I agree it was unethical but the reality is that it could have been pulled at any time as allowed for in their TOS. If you can show me a legally enforcable contract that states that Stars guarantees SNE rewards for a specified period of time then I will concede that they owe the players a living.

we don't need a 'contract' thing to have reasons to boycott. pokerstars make games unbeatabable cause they CAN. we boycott this trend cause we CAN.

No, it wasn't a contract. It was an advertisement to purchase a product/play at their site where the fruits of that labor could only be redeemed the following year, at which point Stars rescinded the offer. Even if there's nothing legally binding, it's just plain scummy. That sort of behavior should be publicized, so even if the strike has no effect other than bringing attention to their unethical transgressions, I'm happy to participate.

Once again, no one (except you) is saying that players are owed a living. Thread is being clogged up by so much misinformation and utter nonsense.

But don't you think the the players should take some responsibility for their own actions? If they decide to base their livelihood for a two year period soley on the advertising of an online poker site (without any back-up in the form of a contract) then whose fault is it if it goes wrong?