lol, i haven't seen this amount of whinging in quite a while

you must be new to the internet

cannot due the normal label
it would bring up the default issues that many claimed were a problem in the past

Does 'default buy-in' = minimum buy in?

You mean the "default" buyin? It's 70BB on FTP.

Nope. Notice the actual buyin amounts conveniently located to the left.

why not make the normal tables like the euro tables: 35-100bb.

and the short ones 20-35. that would be perfect imo. but thats to late i guess.

The fish are more likely to play on the tables without any special labels, which defaults to 35-100bb at FTP. This is why so many posters here want the 20-50bb tables to be labeled as "shallow", to dissuade the fish from playing on them.

It's hard to predict what will happen on Stars since the tables are equally labeled with min-max buy-ins, but I envision most fish will migrate towards the "dominant" table type. If there are a majority of 20-50bb tables at a given limit, I expect a majority of fish to follow.

big surprise--I'm the one who gets ****ed out of his preferred game
Can some of you figure out why I was so vociferous in the past now?
I saw what was coming, and saw it would be horrible for me.
I played deep on 20-100 games. Guess what? Over half the players in those games were deep. Now, we are all kicked out of our home.

Now, I have to change everything about my style of game. It's not my fault most 2p2ers were too lazy to figure out what adjustments to make to succeed in 20-100 games. Instead, PokerStars has taken all of the complexity out of it, so that the multi-tabling 100BB HUDbots can play their simple strategies without adjustments.

On top of this, shortstackers still exist. So much for the 2p2 hate of shorties. Nice job in really sticking to them by arguing for a preserved game for them.

sigh

What's going to happen in 12 months when the regs see how crappy the 40-100 game becomes?

Stars, never mind, please change everything back so MT2R can play his preferred game. Thanks.

Yeah, this is the kind of drivel I usually associate with Cardinals fans. Let's get this straight - Stars are "total morons", "stupid", and don't "understand poker at all" because of your thoughts on the way poker "should be" played. The idea was not to stop shortstacking altogether, it was to reduce the 5:1 BI ratios that were allowed in the past. I don't see how this is going to be the end of internet poker the way some people in here are claiming.

This, and that's why I would have preferred 20-40 tables, but the changes are good. Either way, we'll see how/which games are running to evaluate.

Definitely looking forward to some spewtarderie 250bb deep

this +1

Stars, you disappointed me.
I'm afraid this won't kill the ratholing.......

LOL
the number of guys playing the way I played outnumbered those playing in the 50BB min games

You're trying to make a point that they would just be catering to a minority of me. It's clear, however, that they just catered to the minority of professionals on their site. Your attempt at cleverness reveals how flawed your position is. That's really funny.

Did you even read the OP, idiot? Stars got input from a ****ton of people.

They also read every one of your 134624577 nonsensical posts on this subject.

You're busted, and you STILL won't shut up with your babble.

What I'm going to do next has been way too long in coming and I'm going to savor it for a moment...

PLONK

This. Sigh...Really disappointed with Stars

lol

lol at the number of people complaining in this thread. Stars did pretty much exactly what they were supposed to do. If the fish vote with their wallets and play a particular game type now then that's too ***** bad.

i like these changes. i play fullstacked and look foward to buying in for 250bb.

what would have been better is 20-40bb LABELLED AS 'SHALLOW/SHORT', 40-100bb and then 100-250bb w/ante.

but this is pretty good. shortstackers can now play against people with 50bb but NOT against the 100bb fullstackers. this is progress.

i honestly think the shortstackers will be much worse off now. their edge has been cut in half or more imo.

people just don't open as wide with a 50bb stack as they do with a 100bb+ stack. so the shortstackers will have less opponents raising with 45s to shove over imo.

the main question here is: "where will the fish go?"

i believe the 40-100bb tables. maybe not even for the first week or so as they try out these shiny new 20-50bb short tables. but once they realise it is less fun they will turn to the 40-100bb tables.

let's be honest people........... not many of us thought stars would do what FTP did or go even further. stars likes shortstackers from a $$$ point of view. they want to try to keep them. these changes could be a lot better but they are a massive improvement imo.

fish will see sense.

Pretty dissapointed in these changes as a full stack player as I'm sure most are. The only saving grace is that the games really couldn't get any worse, so these changes won't make things any worse. Like a lot of other players I was very optomistic about the changes thinking Stars would match if not do even better at fixing their NL games then Full Tilt. Despite having the advantage of FTP acting first and then looking at the results Pokerstars totally dropped the ball, very sad. They are usually a top notch room and to see these lack of changes is quite shocking.

Biggest Problem- THE LABELING!

Just wow. Really going to label the games in BB? You really think casual players refer to everything in big blinds??? Guess this is what happens when you have a panel of players who refer to everything in BB's making the suggestions. Try to actually go to a poker room, people don't refer to things in BIG BLINDS!!!

- Shallow
- Regular (no label at all!)
- Deep

You don't even need to use those names. Call shallow "small stacked" or whatever you want.

Secondary problem. The bottom range is too wide

20-50bb is to wide. Will still alow the shortstackers an inherent advantage. Plus the buyin is at a nice high enough number for the casual players to chose this option first.



It seems Pokerstars made these changes to try to passify all the complaints while at the same time trying to keep their huge market share of shortstackers they now have.

Shortstackers have won this battle after losing the battle at FTP to even the score.

-1

using a term like normal or regular is incorrect. If theres labeling a term like medium would be more diplomatic. Players can then choose without any influence then.

However i think labeling by big blinds is fairer still, just use icons or something.

+1

I have changed my opinion and feel my earlier statement was likely just a knee jerk reaction.

What sort of players are going to sit at the 20-50bb tables the day this change is implemented? Fish and rat holers. Now imagine a fish who has nothing but guys playing super aggro pre and hit and running him for 20bb at a time. They'll have close to zero chance of ever running up a big stack and they'll obviously never be getting the thrill of winning a big pot, running a bluff or really enjoy poker in any way besides getting it all pre, almost always as a dog, and hoping to suck out. It's just going to be a consistent slow grind of their rolls, 20bb at a time. They won't even have a chance to ever 'win it back' as the ratholers will scurry away to the next table.

Let the rat holers have the fish to themselves and do their thing - they are pests and will kill themselves off as long as we let them. The second people start 'full' stacking these games giving the fish chances to bluff, win big[ger] pots, and just generally enjoy poker - we screw ourselves. Let the fish learn to hate rat holers as much as everybody else already does (including the ratholers themselves) and the 20bb tables will come to a rapid demise.

Yup. Should have been done.