ROFL, GL with your one man stand against pokerstars.

he isn't even close to alone here

3x SNE

0vpps

3 man stand apparently.

Going to try out 888 I think.

I rly hope this "oh, we dont look at data bc we care only in cs and product" was just a big bluff bc otherwise I scares me a ton that a multi million (billion ?) dollar company doesnt run some simple excel calcs before making major changes to their business model.

I actually don't doubt this is/was the truth. Their company is really poorly ran and they make mistakes and release things and take them back a few times a year. Luckily for them, their business is just printing money.

But They are always extremely late in releasing changes and info. I think they just wing it most of the time.

I can site some very specific examples but I don't really want to be that much of a dick.

I'd say that was an exaggeration by krmont. They hadn't done many rake change specific data analyses, but poker room managers seemed to have done a ton of different things with data in the past (I'd often ask questions and they'd know answers within a few %) and were pretty quick at building complicated models

I've played a large amount of cash, just not on Stars. When I say armchair quarterbacks, I'm referring to people who have not seen anything near the amount of data the reps did and who have no idea about the situations they had to deal with / proposals that were made and discarded. I'm not sure what leverage you think the reps had -- it was always going to be a pat on the head + a token decrease. Did you really think they were just going to drop the rake in micros from 15-20bb/100 to 5bb/100, or something? The most promising thing is the assurance of further meetings, because with further meetings comes the likelihood of additional positive changes.

What would you have done differently, if you were a rep? Why did you not attempt to become a rep? Maybe we should send you to the next meeting, hopefully you can lobby for games that are 2% less rigged.

No, pretty impossible to predict something like that.

The one PM you sent me asked me about my upcoming strategy in the leaderboard promotion. I'm sorry I didn't give you a polite reply of "I'm not telling you that." I should have, sorry.

Why I voted for you chisness - thought you understand CAP games and have you word to say to make games healthier (especially CAP nl50-100). How you feel paying 5% rake every move you make CAP nl1000?

In your viewpoint you get a little rake decrease, free trip and probably increased your changes to get stars pro. WP.

Next time not making this mistake again for voting selfish SNE-es.

+1

If someone thinks lowering the CAP from $3 to $2.80 does anything to help 50NL and 100NL they are clearly misinformed. Might as well just be uncapped.

If that player is a CAP player themselves then they are just taking the piss.

Keep your personal attacks to yourself, and quite obviously you have absolutely zero understanding and experience of real world business.. that must be why you think anytime someone moves a little bit in negotiation and promises you another meeting that they are doing you a huge favor.

Try get out of your mother's basement or something and ever get a real job where you are sitting in useless meetings all day being presented absolutely meaningless data and spreadsheets and powerpoints by upper management in companies as big and powerful as Pokerstars(and yes, some of us have worked in companies bigger than Pokerstars even and we know exactly how big business negotiate and present "facts"... part of the reason why some of us chose to quit the corporate BS and play poker in the first place..) then maybe you'll start to get an idea that this is how big business work to bull**** their customers and employees.

And lastly, once again, why the hell are you trying to tell Pokerstars cash players how they should voice their concerns? We play cash on Pokerstars for a living, you don't. If you have concerns about SNG's rake I would be perfectly fine with you voicing them even if they don't concern my game, but you just can't do the same.

Hmm. don't know if I'd call it strategy, but I thought I sent you a 2nd one though but according to my sent folder I didn't. In that case I was misinformed. I sent a nice guy in where I wanted a shark!

50,000 VPP's

What would you have done differently as a rep?

^

Demand PS to either drop the rake or abolish the game at any stake where it's practically unbeatable. Several people have correctedly pointed out that 50-100NL CAP = unbeatable for at least 99% of players right now with no one showing longterm profit while Stars takes 6+bbs/100. That cannot continue.

Demand PS to produce stats of all games across all stakes where they can show an acceptable(as deemed by for eg. the 2p2 community) % of players with significant volume achieving profit... this way you identify immediately just which games/stakes are being raked too high/unfairly where players no matter how good they are, just can't profit. They have these stats, they can show them. If they aren't willing then you know that they know there are some games that are being raked to the death.

yeah like:

663366: Pokerstars i DEMAND you to drop the rake.
Pokerstars: NO
663366: ahh its problem.

I think you don't understand that you dont get to make demands since it's THEIR business and they do whatever they want with it. If they want to rake 20% per hand then they do it, it's up to you if you want to play under that system or not.

cap idiots

While I generally agree with you I think it's the wrong direction to demand the site set a quota for winners per game. All of those sort of ideas are so esoteric, complex and susceptible to certain sorts of manipulation. If we just had simple rake than everything would be so much more.. well... simple.

For instance something I have suggested already is simply charging a table fee. You pay 4bb per 100 hands, prepaid for as many hands as you like. Some people have said fish might not like such a system but look at Vegas - tons of tables run on hourly/half hourly table fees and they're loaded with fish. A guy who deposits $50 fully expecting to lose it isn't going to blink at spending a few bucks payment for hundreds of hands. Similarly for the guy who deposits $5,000 dropping a few hundred.

It's simple and would help ensure games that suffer more heavily from per-hand rake, like PLO or cap, can continue to run and thrive for years to come. It would also help the games immensely as so much more money would be allowed to flow upward. And it's certainly not a bad deal for the site. That means they're earning 24bb per 100 hands at a 6-max table, 36 per 100 hands at a 9-max game. Given they've dealt 70billion+ hands, that is an obscene amount of profit for them. Good for the site, good for players, and extremely good for the health of the games.

simplicity makes everything too transparent, and therefore harder to rip people off.

Think law, or tax codes, or business in general. Confuse the masses: Reap the rewards.

If it was simple they wouldn't be able to pull these smoke and mirror games OR play dumb when people see through the BS

Why are the reps getting attacked? Funny how silent Pokerstars is these few days after the announcements lol. They are actually using some free employees for communication here, nice.

because there are some idiots that think they could've cut a better deal.

no because they went from

"wow the rake is rediculous" to "well some people actually do win so its fair"

yeah just this.

They wouldn't be being attacked if their position didn't do a 180. They don't even sound like player reps when they speak. They sound like pokerstars reps.

They fed into whatever they were told and are now telling it to us. The problem is, we aren't morons. We see that they are explaining things as a %, and not bbs. We see that there are unbeatable games pre-rakeback. We see that plo is getting robbed blind.

So because we tell the reps that incessantly regurgitate the fact that this is ok because, 'some people win after rakeback. Or it is 'industry standard'. Or PLO is inline with NL.' We will keep telling them that they sound like stars reps and not player reps.

At least I will.

I'm still not sure why all this hassle towards the reps?
A system was in place then Stars changed the rake method to WC and this hurt people. The reps went there and discussed the matter and now Stars have made a number of changes to rectify those losses.

We know there will be some things that players arn't happy about but surely the job of the rep was to find out the details and discuss it and thats what they did.

The reps cannot make changes. Stars will do what they want but at least they bothered to have people over there for a whole week of talk then made the changes.

We all know that CAP games are very bad to play in. We all know the 5 handed rake isn't right. Loads of people have complaints whether it is 6x multipliers or SNG players or LHE players. But those are issues that can be discussed later. It was not the job of the reps to ensure these things were changed. I've no doubt they pointed out all the facts to Stars, but Stars made the changes they wanted.

I think we should be looking at the state of play on 31st Dec against the stae of play on 1st Feb. Thats what the main discussion was for reps and I think they have done a pretty good job in getting the January rake issues closer to what they originally were.

well when they write articles about some massive win for the players. And they keep defending stars over and over and over. I mean what do you expect. At first I was like meh, whatever.

But the more some of the reps (not all) post, the more I just shake my head and think WTF. I mean they definitely don't represent me. And I am fighting for changes in games I don't even play.