Na they are like changing everything from wat I have heard, things like the 100/200 --> 100/200 w/25 ante --> 200/400 jump in 18/45 mans and other things like that

Don't think they are going to kill off games tho execpt maybe the $7 180s ($6.50 180 would be cool) and the 90s like u said. Also heard maybe DONs were getting axed but obv that isn't true since they make so much rake from the SN/SNE ppl.

Wish they added another $12 180 (2 at a time would be amazing and doubt any regular would disagree since they would def full up about the same speed they do now). PS would make more off it and regs would love it, win win imo.

IamPro - This is absolutely not the thread to be asking about freaking SNG structure changes.

Question:

Are FPPs going to be congruent with the VPPs at these levels? like 10 VPPs and 10 FPPs per $1 rake or is it 10 VPPs and 5.5 FPPs per $1 rake?

Everyone keeps begging for a double VPP week, but Stars seems reluctant to do this promo again. So why not just do 2x VPP's without the 2x FPP's?

Most of us realize Stars is probably not going to do the 2x VPP with 2x FPP promos again, or at least not for a full week. They probably figured out they were losing money from all the extra FPP's, especially from SN and SNE's.

So why not do Double VPP only for a couple weeks or even a month? It would be much cheaper for Stars, and most of the grinders would grind almost as much as the old double points promos.

Yes it matters... SNE's, and probably Supernovas as well, will be making more than 100% rakeback during double VPP/FPP. It matters a lot to Pstars.

+1
who called for a change in sng structures anyway ?

It seems to me that this is directly linked to those things you want us not to discuss in this thread.

SS tables led to less rake which led to the rake hike led to less players led to look how generous we are micro players here is a small fraction of the extra money we are taking off you back.

yeah right, for a month. if i remember corectly Jorj95 got something like 200K VPP's in that week when Stars made it 2x. That's like 1/5th of SNE. imagine 2x VPP's for a month. people like he could achive SNE in a month lol. don't think it will happen ever

Obviously I know that, the point was that people who arn't playing at these lower trafficked hours are not playing because it is an inconvenient time (aka very late at night/early in the morning etc) and unless you're a hardcore grinder you are not majorly alternating your schedule for double fpp's

It would still attract more players from the non US to play at that time since it is not such a bad time for them as it is for you.

Bingo. When I read the thread about the rake hike, my first immediate thought was that Stars was losing rake due to their new tables because 50bb max naturally don't make as much rake as 100bb max PLUS most players have to drop in stakes if they want to keep playing 100bb (less fish, tougher games) which in turn generates less rake PLUS many players like myself simply left Stars for other site(s) which means less rake. Now that this promotion is here, many of our thoughts are that this is directly a result of backlash from the unannounced rake hike.

more bull****

the 20-50 bb games have been generating just as much rake per hour on the levels I play. Actually, it's been more.

If you take the exact same player pool that plays 20bb to 50bb and put them on a 20bb to 100bb table, the 100bb tables will generate more rake for pretty obvious reasons. This difference would be even more pronounced @ 40bb to 100bb tables for pretty obvious reasons. When I had to drop down from 200NL FR on Stars (like many players) because the fish were playing 50bb max and play 100NL instead, I was generating LESS rake for pretty obvious reasons. When I left Stars last month to play @ Tilt, Stars has lost $3k of rake and counting for pretty obvious reasons.

Even if those reasons aren't obvious to some people, I went the extra step of actually PLAYING both sets of tables 50bb max and 100bb max (before I left) and I had to ADD at least two extra 50bb max tables to generate the same rake that 20bb to 100bb tables had been giving me.

So, I stand pretty strongly by my assertion that 50bb max generates LESS rake than 100bb max tables.

I don't think the reasons why 20-100 tables would generate more rake are obvious at all. In fact, I think it's obvious that the 20-50bb tables should generate more rake with the same player pool.

I think you both actually DO get it, but I'll indulge you and spell it out. The more money available to the player in his stack means the higher the pot can get which means more rake. Let's look at it from an even more basic level. Do you agree that 100NL generates more rake than 50NL? Ok, well 50bb max @ 100NL is basically 50NL with only two forced bigger blinds.

LOL
you leaving makes PokerStars money
your rake is jack squat... you were taking money out of the system

It's not as cut and dry as that. 20BB stacks are much more likely to get it all in preflop vs each other and be committed to call than 40bb and 100bb stacks which can push each other off of marginal spots PF and therefore generating no rake.

nope
the shorter games have a much larger 'went to showdown'
see, the deeper games have fewer big pots as the leverage of stack sizes is used and the hand ends.
the short games go to the end as no one hesitates to put it all in there.

At 50NL, there has been no vpp/hand difference between 20-100 and 20-50. There have been more hands per hour at 20-50.

Gets it.



Definitely doesn't get it.

It IS as clear cut as that because 20bb stakes would STILL be 20bb stakes in 20bb to 100bb games. But, 50bb stacks cannot be 100bb and that extra money NEVER gets in the middle. As far as 40bb min games, if you took the EXACT same 20bb to 50bb game pool and instantly put them all into 40bb to 100bb games, it would still generate more rake. Yes, 40bb wouldn't get all-in as often as 20bb, but it only needs to get half of it in over the same number of hands to make up the difference PLUS you get all the full stack money in the middle which can NEVER happen in the 50bb max compared to 100bb max. Fish and casual players are not going to get LESS of their money in at the same blind levels. They are going to get the same amount in, but NEVER more in the short games if you don't allow them to buy-in more or NEVER more if the sharks don't have an opportunity to cover them.

Yes, we can both agree you don't get it

Which is exactly why one should think the table with 50bb stacks would have higher average rake (regardless of the fact that 50bb stacks actually CAN become 100bb stacks on such tables and frequently do of course)

20-50 bb obv rake more

cmon MB this is not the thread to be having this argument


joking please don't ban me

BAN!!!!!!





Yeah, if he's not going to let it go he might as well at least be told that his claims of "obviously" are not correct. But actually I kind of forgot which thread I was in as I was also reading the buy-in discussion thread at the same time.

lol at people who cry cos all there fish are down at the 20-50bb level...

Would you like stars to send peoples deposits str8 to you before you are happy?