oh dear

lol

What the f*** is this s*** ??

Encouraging short-stackers surely, now every c*** is going to buy in for the minimum to take shots and the poor f***ers who have to max buy-in every day.

What a stupid idea this is, well for players yes, not for PokerStars, now the regs like myself are flipping for bigger stacks with other regs and creating more rake for PS whilst the recreational players sit with 50% on a Friday night and take pot shots at all the big stacks at the table all night till next weekend, ffs PS just make the min-buy in BIGGER to eradicate the short stacking leecher c***s, IF that's indeed what you're aiming to do with this crap but I'm a cynic, it's clearly a rake grabbing exercise.

Paging AlinMC - we need a GIF immediately.

I'd do it myself, but honestly I have no idea what he's talking about.

Stop rat-holing in one go by making all table buy-ins between 75-100% of table max, rat-holing is dead.

This is about forcing regs to play full stacks everyday, it DOES NOT stop rat-holing, pokerstars say this ..

Buy in obligations are an innovative rake generation measure put in place by PokerStars, it does not stop rat-holing, it actually encourages it.

In what way does it encourage it? You could buy in for the minimum before these measures, and you can still buy in for the minimum. Nothing has changed there. The number of times you can rathole and rebuy for the minimum has been restricted.

So, the number of times you can buy in for the minimum has not changed, the minimum buy in has not changed, and the number of times you can rathole and rebuy for the minimum has been reduced.... in what way does this encourage ratholing?

... because now, on average, there'll be bigger stacks at the table, you have more opportunities to double your 20/30/40bb short stack, especially in full-ring games, they'll just have a day off (24hrs) between sessions.

Just make all tables 100% buy ins if you truly want to rid the site of rat-holing.

This is about getting regs to battle each other with bigger stacks and generate more rake, particular at the micro stakes where I'd estimate less than 20% of players buy in at 100% table max.

It's a direct attack on the regs, BRM and table selection.

It would take more modelling than you are doing to calculate how rake is affected. Rake is capped such that at many stakes, two 40BB stacks going all in generate as much rake as two 100BB stacks, and the 40BB have far more all-ins than the 100BB stacks. On the other hand, less hands end pre-flop with full-stacks. You are just making bad guesses based on poor and incomplete assumptions.

Furthermore, every reg I know who has expressed an opinion is very much enjoying the changes, so claiming it is a direct attack on the regs is nonsense too.

If anything it will probably lower the rake stars collects, 100BB players won't play any more/less than before, but some 40/50BB regs will play shorter sessions, lower stakes, on different sites, etc.

Sick comeback.

Yep, the hypocrisy of your own post just blew me away kid.

Ok, what is it exactly about Melea's post that you don't understand?

F*** me, I remember why I don't come here too often, full of f***ing ******s.

My post makes clear and perfect sense, and highlights the basic error you are making.

Your responses are strange and don't make a lot of sense. I'm sure others are equally puzzled over what you're trying to say, what you can't comprehend, and why you are reacting as you are.

You accuse me of making bad guesses based on poor and incomplete assumptions, then quite clearly you go ahead and do it yourself !!

You assume that 2x40bb stack at micro stakes pay the same rake as 2x100bb stacks yet you dismiss out of hand my assumption that there'll now be bigger stacks on average at the tables.

Then every reg you spoke to loves this idea, yet within this very thread you're proved to be wrong (again)



... and now you're looking as if you're too stupid to even understand the hypocrisy within your own post

Like I said, in the main, this place if full of ******s, adios ******.

a guy with the same IQ as a loaf of bread calls other people ******s
A+

I shouldn't waste my time correcting you, but I will.

[1] As an anal mathematician, I'm careful with my wording- as I was here- but you still haven't read it right: I wasn't naming a complete list of influencing factors. I pointed out a couple of examples both 'for' and 'against' your claim. I clearly stated that far more modelling would be required. Hence, there is absolutely no hypocrisy there.

[2] I absolutely did not dismiss that fact. It is accounted for in the bold above. (I am well aware that there are people such as yourself playing at baby stakes.) Where do I dismiss out of hand that there will be bigger stacks on average? That is hardly rocket science, and of course it is the case.

[3] Where did I say that I spoke to any regs about the changes? I have spoken to none. My statement is based on the many postings by regs in the SSFR Pokerstars Regs thread where there have been universal support for the changes. I haven't looks all through this thread, but I'd be surprised if anyone didn't support the changes. (Other than yourself that is.)

As a side note, I was actually the person who came up with the idea of the limited daily amount of short buy-ins solution, back in March 2012, at the Stars meeting on the Isle of Man. I, and every sane full stacking reg, are very pleased that it has now finally been implemented. Sorry your pussy hurts.

I have no horse in this contest, as I don't even play ring games. I just feel a little embarrassed at being exposed as a ******, as I'm also unable to see any hypocrisy in MeleaB's post.

I guess one of us doesn't understand what the word hypocrisy actually means! No doubt it's me who has it wrong though.

You hypocrite.

so much broken english itt.... oh and that guy above who has the same iq as a loaf of bread is a babbling idiot

When I play with 50BB Zoom poker I hit the buyin obligations after about 4 re-entries.

- I played a session at $2 6max Zoom shortly after the BIO's were introduced, it went fine IIRC.
- Playing .5/1 FR Zoom I am forced to buyin for >50 after 3-4 re-entries every time, always >24h apart and with no other 50-100BB games played at all.
- Tested out .5/1 6max just now, same thing, after four re-entries I had to buyin for the smallest amount I left with.

Playing regular tables works fine and I can use all 8 new tables.

I contacted support weeks ago to let them know there is a problem, but they were totally useless. Hopefully a Stars rep can read this and get it fixed.

Fixed? Looks like it's working

The games have changed for the better since the BIOs were introduced. This seems to be the consensus among those of us that play these games regularly. As well as tables breaking less often, the quality of games has vastly improved. No doubt recreational players will also be enjoying their experience far more.