At SSNL, absolutely. It's not like fish are going to stop swarming to the shallow tables. But the 50bb cap certainly will discourage regulars. They've played 100bb's for years, do you really think they'll switch now? No. All Shorstackers got was a higher % of fish to play against at every table.

I apologize for putting words in your mouth, I should have phrased my post as a question not a statement.

As for your question, of course I would not be in favor of all poker being 20bb's, because I know many people do not want to play 20bb poker. But many do. I'm in favor of people having the option.

i'll reserve judgment until I get to play under this system, preferably 2 or so months. I think the shortstackers will be in for a bit of a surprise though, and the player pool has gotten bigger for 100bb stacks across the whole spectrum of stakes. The shorties' vpp/hand will be drastically cut at every level due to their push/fold strat winning them more pots without a flop, and that's where most of these players profits come from. (Think of all of the 5/5 shorties out there).

slightly varying skill levels...
in deep stack nl its gold
in short stack nl its air

You couldn't be more wrong.

Apparently we have differing opinions on the definition of slight. It takes a pretty significant skill advantage to overcome the rake at most stakes.

Oh really? If 6 phil ivey's play eachother who wins? The house. ****ing moron.

I agree that the labels should reflect what the games actually are!

20-50: real poker-risk a little to win a lot, can't wait for the nuts, can't setmine, have to put people on ranges

anything higher-nut peddling
wait for set over set
go busto instantly

don't let the door hit you on the way out

Steve said either Tuesday or Wednesday of this week.

If 6 people are playing optimally (same skill), and all of them have a full stack but one (who has 20bb), the 20bb player will win money in the game. The full stacks, in order to play optimally...have to play optimally against the other big stacks, which allows the optimal playing short stack to exploit them. You cannot play optimally against a full stack and short stack at the same time...you lose less by playing optimally against the other full stacks. ****ing moron.

yeah well...

in deepstack a slight edge is like "this guy can turn his tpgk into a bluff in this river spot".

in shortstack a slight edge is like... "this guy 3bet shoves QTo when his opponent show 35% steal from CO".

I'm wondering if the lesser vpp/hand rate at the new shallow tables might kill off a bunch of breakeven shorties.

I know that a lot of people are worried that the fish will gravitate towards the 20-50bb tables more at first, and this was also my initial concern, but after some consideration I think that the new dynamic will prove to be rather undesirable for most recreational players. The shorties will be 3bet/squeezing each other tons and lets face it, fish like to see cheap flops with suited junk and 'try' to hit a draw. I'm going to be optimistic here and predict that the fish end up looking at the shallow games as a crapshoot.

I was really hoping for 35bb minimum across the board like on the Euro tables but this is at least considerably better than the current system.

I'd say your sarcasm is well placed and hilarious.

but you know... that would be sarcasm.

Just a suggestion but maybe having a separate tab to differentiate the games would be a good idea so players can choose what they want to play a lot easier. But I suppose we'll have to see how the lobby turns out when it's updated.

also, another point nobody likes to acknowledge:

if 6 20BB stacks play each other, who wins?

There are a ton of Limit games taking place right now on PokerStars alone. Just eye-balling it I see at the 3/6 limit game about 20 tables of full-ring and 25 tables of 6-max. At 2/4 I see about 15 tables of full-ring and about 35 tables of 6-max.

So I would hardly call that "invisible." Obviously NL has a ton more tables than that all over the place. But I remember stuff like in 2004 when everyone on here was freaking out that Party Poker topped 30k players all logged on at the same time and everyone thought that was incredible.

With people only being able to play 4 tables max back then you probably had the same (or fewer) total number of tables running at those stakes as you would now.

It's all about perspective. I can't help but laugh when people claim that the games are somehow dying (UIGEA or whatever) when just ONE site regularly has over 200k players logged on at the same time.

Far more people prefer NL these days. So what. There are still a ton of limit games going on for anyone who cares to play those.

thanks for pointing out something completely irrelevant.

THANK YOU POKERSTARS.

The doubling of the rathole timer is subtle, but delicious.

I popped wood at the thought of 200BB deep fish playing antes. My LAG game just got better.

Even if the 200BB tables rarely happen, I'm simply stoked for the fact that shorties are being slapped. This looks like an all-round good change for the better, and I say 'better' not just for me but for poker on pokerstars. Absolutely nobody likes being hit-n-run by shortstackers over and over.

That's blindingly obvious. If you could play poker instead of 'shove', you wouldn't shortstack.

QUOTE=Mickyb;18150596]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.[/QUOTE]

Of course you like playing vs deeper stacks. I'm sitting there with 160BB and I open from LP with 65s, and you shove from the SB. I have to fold, and you take a profit from my correct play by exploiting the relative stack sizes.

Eat a dick, shortstacking scum.

nano - Obviously there is already the filter thingee there that anyone can customize. If you are saying that a more easily operated filter specifically for the different types of NL games might be worthwhile then I guess I wouldn't disagree. Just mentioning the filter thing that is already there though in case you weren't aware of it.

at the moment on full tilt 1/2 FR:
~27 regular tables
3 shallow tables
222 ppl on rush poker

I should learn how to use the software more =)

Good news the only problems I have is I think 20-50 is too wide and I think 40-100 should be default tables. 20-35, 20-40 sounds better, but in general, great fixes.

You know they have these things called sng's already.......but good rationale because cash game poker should be exactly like shove-botting sng's

please read stars