yeah on ftp their 5c/10c rush ante game has under 10 players around the clock



will be one or two shorthanded games at every stake

but still a fun game if you don't mind one tabling every now and then

i'm glad we have the option for the novelty factor at least

+1

Are the actual table types better for anyone than all tables being 30-100bb? Unfortunately this would have produced unfavourable comparisions with Full Tilt's 35-100bb tables, but not splitting the player pool definitely has its advantages, especially at higher stakes where the player pool is smaller, and it would make the lobby less confusing for new players. Likewise, I'd like all tables to be one speed; Does anyone actually find the "fast" tables too fast? The timebank is there for tough decisions, but if you are routinely keeping the tables waiting as long as the "slow" tables allow then I suggest you should be playing fewer tables.

I'm not sure the 1 hour ratholing time is necessary under this scheme either. If all tables were 30-100bb as I suggest then it would be justified.

Buddha says Middle Way

Goldy Locks says Middle Way

LDO

That being said, I do not know what these changes will do for The Game or for my game.

There is no denying reality.

All of the players who like to play short?

Just because you don't like to doesn't mean the option shouldn't be available for others.

I know that steve said they would wait till each of the old tables dies before it goes away.
I dont know why they wouldnt just do a server restart(kicking everyone off) at 5am est and then just have all the new tables.
This is going to be crazy with all these new tables and with a bunch of 20bb-100bb and maybe 50bbmin-100bb tables holding on for days and days. massive cluster F

I think I will have to see this implemented before making any decision on how effective it will be. I think Stars should follow the labeling and sizing solutions offered in this thread though.

Ultimately, I am disappointed that we can't just get rid of this SS nonsense completely. Tournaments and Sit n Go's seem to offer plenty of opportunities to play short already. I think the vast majority of people, regs and fish, want to play 50bb+ poker. I don't understand why we can't have one area (cash games) where we can be be assured of playing multi street poker.

Haha, no offense, but are you ****ing ******ed?

Everyone, who thinks the same way like you, need to stop, seriously just stop. Just because someone is bad at poker, doesnt mean he is a moron. As a matter of fact, a lot of people know computers just fine, some of them got even more money than most of us. Dont try to patronize them.

I think labeling would be good, but you guys need to stop acting like you are some sort of superior race, that knows how to use poker software.
I think depositing money is harder than filtering those tables, so dont act like a ****ing jerk and your games wont dry...

This looks good! i hope this includes OMAHA HILO.

This is all we're asking for

So you want to force players who like to play shallow and are willing to be isolated on their own unique shallow tables to play fullstack because that's what YOU prefer?

I like it, lol. If a bunch of players do this then the shortstackers will not want to waste 1 of there 24 tables(Im assuming that is the max. I play 16) playing 3 handed or with most sitting out. So they will leave.
Might need to get table full of people sitting out, then do a simultaneously exit to get it to shut down without a short stacker sneaking back in to preserve the table. lol

All NL/PL games (believe PLO8 is one of them).

+1

big·ot
   /ˈbɪgət/ Show Spelled[big-uht] Show IPA
–noun
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

I didn't like the fact that games existed where you could loophole an unfair advantage with your stack size. That wasn't right

Personally I could care less whether fish play short or deep tables I know how to play both games.

If I'm playing a deep table I want to be playing DEEP POKER though, not worrying about tweaking all my opening ranges and getting hit n run constantly.

Do this and I am fine with it.

so whens Rush coming out





j/k




Looks like i'll be spending alot more time playing at Stars...........

Why shouldn't we express our entire opinions on it? If we don't like the changes we should just stfu? I mean w/e I already said earlier I already voted with my wallet and I can see people doing the same if it doesn't work. Obviously they're not going to change it before they implement it so I'll see how it turns out and I hope I'm wrong but look at how successfull FTP's changes were. Most people were hoping it would be like that so obviously when it was different people are going to be upset. But yeah I'm sure a good business wants its customers to just stfu and not give them any feedback on their changes, right?

I'm a shortstacker. I like playing short. I also like having greater choice of tables and playing vs deeper stacks. Overall, I'd prefer lots of 30-100bb tables rather than a few 20-50bb tables.

yeppp

Steve,

Am I correct in assuming this means HU tables will now consist of 20-40BB tables and 40-100BB tables? If this is the case, please reconsider.

If these changes are being made because most players don't like playing against short stackers, I'm not sure why the solution for HU tables is to lower the max on the shallow tables and lower the min on the deeper tables. This just makes no sense and is the completely opposite of what I expect to see to counter the unpopular sentiment against short stackers.

Please correct me if my assumption is incorrect. If what I say above is true, could you please explain the logic behind the change?

Thanks Steve.

Boy change sure is scary for some people!

Even if it's not the perfect or final solution, Stars is taking a huge leap forward with this.

MTTR keeps complaining that they are taking away choice, but it seems to me that they have added a lot of choice. There are now more game structures to choose from.

If you are upset that the fish won't be playing in your preferred structure....learn to beat the regs!

For my next request....how about some 4-max tables?

This is hilarious. Of course you like playing short against deeper stacks - it gives you a huge advantage! You've been taking advantage of a loophole in the rules and now it's gone - adjust.

Can you explain why that structure is better for the overall player pool than the actual structure thats going to be implemented?