Hopefully I haven't missed anything below, but please let me know if I missed something or anyone has any questions etc. they'd like me to answer..
Quote:
Originally Posted by blopp
Thanks Chuck Bass for a quick and long reply. There is no PLO specific rep this time so I think the reps going need to speak on PLO (and other games) behalf, even if their main game is something else (and Im sure you and all reps would do). Lots of PLO issues have been discussed in length in the community so the opinions should be easy to find.
Ill wait with casting my vote to see if any other reps want to address my post.
The first thing is in response to a few posts, and about mostly PLO (and FLHE, etc). I realise that it seems like it's unlikely a PLO player is going to be elected this time, and as blopp said it would be good if the elected players still represent PLO and bring forward the ideas and suggestions. I agree completely with that and of course would be willing to do so, however I think it's very important to keep in mind that any discussion by reps who don't play the game themselves, and aren't aware of the game climates, conditions etc. simply aren't going to be even close to as productive or effective as actual PLO players.
This is why I would recommend encouraging Stars to either have specific PLO reps, or have meetings for PLO exclusively like they did last time. I think it's a good step that they had the PLO meeting (regardless of what the results for).
I'm just being honest here when I say that fighting for things we don't understand isn't ideal, this is based off the fact that on numerous occasions at the meeting I went to similar things happened, engaging in discussion and giving opinions on matters and questions is one thing but actively fighting for something is another. It would also help a lot if people bringing up suggestions would be willing to give some explanations etc because for example, even though we brought up the ideas from forum members about PLO 50BB, when it came to explaining why, I honestly just didn't know since the game is different to NLHE (my main game).
That being said community support is very important for convincing changes, if it's clear a lot of people want certain things to happen such as a PLO 6-max tourney on Sunday etc then a chance of at least a trial is likely imo, based on the meeting discussion and also changes that Baard has made/implemented/tested after getting feedback in the SNG thread for example. I'm sure the PLO promotions will be discussed including the success of the PLO week.
Iirc table starter rewards was unlikely, this is one thing I don't remember the exact details on but I will follow it up..
Anti buttoning system has already been implemented, this issue was discussed in quite detail (mostly as a result of a lot of MSNL guys bringing this up to me) and they said they would improve the situation. Natis_finest in his report followed up on this from the meeting after.
Quote:
Blind Abuse
For the Blind Abuse topic discussion Steve flew PokerStars Mick in from London to join us. Mick is in charge of the ‘Blind Abuse’ team, they conduct the investigations for all players who are reported or suspicious of blind abuse (such as grimming). During the discussion Mick showed us the system they use to conduct these blind abuse investigations in order to determine if a player is in breach of the Terms of Service or not. Although the system Mick showed us is not what I expected to see, it is a very efficient system that provides a clear answer as to whether or not a player is abusing the blinds.
Prior to the meeting PokerStars didn’t have any sort of general guidelines in terms of how many warnings a player got or how severe of a penalty a player found guilty of abusing blinds would receive. It was more or less based on how the Blind Abuse team viewed the severity of each individual case that determined the penalty. During the meeting we discussed different options for how to go about punishing blind abusers. We weighed options on how many warnings a player should get before being severely punished, and how severe the punishments should be. The reps were very happy with the agreement we came to with the PokerStars Staff. As Steve confirmed in his report, it is now standard procedure that a player will receive one warning if he is found guilty of abusing blinds. If PokerStars finds that a player is continuing to abuse the blinds after the first warning PokerStars will then ban that player from the site for life. There have been a few threads on this forum showing that Stars has already started enforcing this protocol. It is really great to see PokerStars is starting to crack down and be a bit more proactive on this type of play. Personally I was very pleased with the outcome of this discussion and is something that came out of this meeting that I think most players will be very happy to hear.
Regarding this topic I think there is one important point to note, especially for LHE players. Mick mentioned during the meeting that they receive several complaints on a daily basis suggesting that a specific player is abusing the blinds, and then said that just about all of the cases they review are on the players who have been reported to support via email. I know that blind abuse was one of the main concerns from the LHE players prior to the meeting. During the meeting I asked Mick if he receives many complaints from LHE players, he answered by saying that he actually receives very few emails from Limit players reporting players for blind abuse. So given blind abuse is a big problem in the LHE games I would recommend the LHE players make it known within your community that players should start to email support to report the blind abusers. Once PokerStars is made aware of more LHE players suspicious of abusing blinds through your emails they can then start to take against those players in order to clean up the games a bit.
Source:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28...inest-1355246/
I've mentioned the scripting stuff multiple times. Waitlisting is a new idea to me but will keep it in mind.
I'm not sure about live events but I think extreme offenders already get banned from Stars if they offended FTP and vice-versa, I know of at least one case.
And yes will bring up the multi-accounting issues, especially in cases with pretty clear evidence.
The EPT story is definitely something I will bring up, followed this from the start and know a LOT of live tourney regs and travel to some myself (not all EPTs) so I am aware of the seriousness and how "scary" this is for both pros and recreational players etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingDutchman
Whoever can convince PokerStars (Stefan) to add 5-card Omaha games to the Home Games gets the vote of everybody in my Poker Club. There is no logic why we don't have these games yet so that should be possible.
If you can do that you show the whole forum you are the right candidate to go to the meeting.
Especially Courchevel could help slowdown the decline of the poker market, because it is so much more fun and we should get as many people as possible to try it out.
Based on my interactions I am very confident this can and probably will happen, shouldn't be too difficult either, no reason any games offered on the client wouldn't be also in home games.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Do it Right
Right but that's not really addressing the issue. Stars is taking an obscene amount away from losing players and then seems confused about why they don't stick around to play in some random promotion or try to get some "stellar rewards"?
Giving more back to them is really a non-solution. Ultimately any sort of incentives/promos for these players can be broken down into effective rakeback. Taking the $100PLO data, for instance - Stars would have to give roughly 50% effective rakeback to losing players just to get losing players onto the same baseline of rake that regulars are paying. They're not going to do that.
Of course greed is an issue you'll also run into when considering alternative rake methods, but I think giving more back to losing players in the form of rewards/promos can simply be basically scrapped from the get go. The fact that Stars disproportionately over-rake losing players means to make anything more than a token effort at "giving more back" to losing players Stars would need to basically offer them promos/rewards that dwarf supernova rewards.
Apologies if I misinterpreted what you are saying but do you think the first step is to rake them less? I don't really see why this is necessarily much different to them, their experience, how likely they are to continue playing etc. compared to more rewards. Often they enjoy the option of non cash rewards more anyway and a key idea at the meeting I went was giving them "something you can't buy" enjoyment, experience etc. (excuse the cliché). Obviously VIP store stuff is technically purchasable..
