This, stars waiting list are ridiculous compared to Euro sites

I agree with the other posters who are asking for higher stakes. I am loving zoom so far and I believe that zoom is much better than regular cash games.

Please protect the zoom games from shortstacking and ratholers. There are already several professionals doing this at the .5/1 limit and I'm sure if 1/2 and 2/4 many more will come with dreams of making SNE playing zoom. Players should not be allowed to buy in for 50bb then sit out and rejoin with 50bb after winning a pot.

party poker is so much better.

5 people sitting on 5/10 table, all sitting out and waiting for a fish to join.

there is no reason for not to make ONE buyin per stake!

from the software improvment thread (beside the fact that its 50bb, not 40bb)

I agree with the one buy in per stake idea... Why not make it more like a tournament and just have everyone buy in for 100 BB and then you can play until you want to stop. However, I disagree that players should be allowed to rathole with any size of stack. Part of the fun of zoom is watching players get big stacks and trying (or hoping) that you can get the biggest stack in the player pool. Please don't kill the fun part of the game!

Pls +1 this post in stars improvement thread, unless you have a better idea. (or unless this idea is terrible, which I doubt it is)

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...ostcount=14567

oh, haha, that's exactly the post poker biker quoted above from sugar nut.

Good posts regarding the buy ins. A mandatory 100BB buy in would be excellent. When you leave, if you come back within 2 hours you should have to buy in for the same amount you had when you left.

Other than this, zoom poker is pretty good.

lol one buy-in per stake. Keep it as it is. You guys want to ruin that whole format so people play with 54bb instead of 50bb...

i say... l2p

ruin? format? what?

By doing this you will make ratholers stopping playing zoom poker and going to normal tables. What Stars want is a good pool of players. With that you're scaring a lot of players => they leave the pools => less players => no good for zoom.

The big difference is you can only play 4 tables of one game unlike normal you can play 24 and table select every one so it's pretty ridiculous to wipe out half the player pool (those half stackers who will leave).

I'm a full-stacker, i'd gladly play vs full-stack noobs as opposed to half-stack noobs if they would all stay, but they won't, it will reduce the player pool by a big % thus reducing game quality overall.

ratholing is ok and fair at zoom!
yes, it is, because it is not one table, it is a large pool.
but shorstaking is not and should be stopped!!

make min-buyin 60bb or even 70bb and problem is solved.
50bb is too low, but something higher would make the game not solvable exclusive by shortstacking strategy.

(i'm 100bb player. i like playing with 100bb min effective stacksize.
if i would decide i'll make: min-buyin = max-buyin = 100bb
i always buyin with 100bb and "automatic-rebuy-to-100bb" is on.
BUT i also like to quit when i want and immediately rejoin the pool with min-buyin.)

stop asking for banning ratholing at zoom.
ratholing is fair, because you actually are moved to another NEW table each hand.
in rush ftp there was NOT any "rathole limitation" regarding "forced to come back with whatever stack size"

it is a shorstacking/min-buyin issue, not ratholing!
they are 2 different things.
please don't make confusing propaganda and ask to "+1" unclear posts and request.

pretty sure all the people asking for options to stop ratholing haven't yet really understood the concept of zoom and how it technically works.

Are you trying to say 50bb poker is close to solved or solved or something because 15bb HU poker isn't even solved so please PM me if you are willing to share details on this solution to 50bb poker.

i'm not trying to say anything you implied and i did not solve anything.
i just meant that as higher the min-buyin, the less shorstakers will have...

Nah 50bb is really fair seriously it isn't like it was in the past where 20bb or 30bb ship vs your iso over and over again.
As long as they don't separate ZOOM player pool into CAP and non-CAP games it is fine.
So one player pool with 50bb-100bb buy-in is fair.
The problem is that with ZOOM buy-in being like that the standard games will literally got crushed cause MSS will move to standard tables (cause the smaller the buy-in is the better for them). That will force regs from normal tables to also play ZOOM.

Following your reasoning we will ban 100bbs in the near future because everybody will solve the game. You reasoning => its problem xD

Just look the tendecy. The begin was 20bbs and it was banned and after 40bbs and it's banned and now you want to ban 50bbs. There will be always people buying for the minimum no matter the number of bbs and you will call them shortstackers when they do it for 70bbs. Believe me, you can't stop this unless you make CAP tables for a X ammount of bbs wich => you would split the players => its problem.

How about a 100BB CAP option on the regular Zoom tables??? No regular pool and CAP pool arguments. Even the rat holer argument will go away for the most part. Many fish/rec. players just at some point get antsy about their stack size and a leave/re-join to get back to a "starting stack". Get these fish/rec. players playing a 100BB stack every single hand. No more fear or antsy feelings. They will start to see and feel the game the way it way meant to be played. I mean geez no limit is called by it's 100BB name instead it's blinds like in limit.

Get people thinking about it as a 100BB game, you will be surprised how many fish/rec. players will click this 100BB CAP option if it were available. It would just top the player up to 100BB every hand or bottom them down to 100BB every hand which ever was needed. Seriously a ton of people would be using it. Zoom would be full of 100BBers.

This split the player pool => problem.

Re-read what I wrote....

It isn't a split of player pool, it is a menu option for the regular tables. Everyone is in same pool, you can just choose this "play exactly 100BB EVERY hand" option. Just like there currently exist a "top up" option this would be combined with a "bottom down" option to have someone playing exactly 100BB every hand.

In my opinion separate CAP tables should never have existed and split the player pool. This type of CAP on regular tables options would have been way better.

Since Zoom is new to Stars this is a great time to implement this idea.

Yeah, I get the point. But if you do it to 100bbs only then it will impact the player pool as I said because all the 50bbs players will stop playing in the pool and will go back to normal tables. What you want in Zoom is a big number of players to have a pool running smoothly.

ffs id rather leave things as they are than bottom down wtf. just rathole if u rly rly want to but fu for suggesting stars should make it an option for u to 'bottom down'
and ppl complaining about 50bb sss must just be terrible at poker, b/c at 100FR the 40bb ssers are ****ING TERRIBLE and the 50bb ones at zoom will be miles worse

Why the flip would 50BBers stop playing? It is a menu option...option. You can still play 50BB. And not only is it an option but I believe it is an option many players would lean towards doing. They'd get comfortable playing 100BB because it is 100BB every single hand even if they win a big hand. There is no more having to leave rejoin, etc.

Going bottom down is not a bad idea because that's exactly what many players are doing right now manually anyway.

I understood you were meaning to go bottom down to 100bbs and keep the minimum 100bbs.

I think the worst online poker idea of all time was the creation of CAP tables. Splitting the player pool was a disaster. Furthermore, the bottom few stakes of CAP are criminal in terms of being a rake trap. And the fish/rec don't understand the rake trap, but that rake money gets sucked out of the poker community in a heart beat going to buy a PS executive a boat or 2nd house.

I was simply suggesting that if some type of "no limit protection" was to be afforded fish/rec players it should have been a menu option to play every hand at exactly 100BB on normal tables. Saying it tops you up or bottoms you down is just a way of descibing it.

If you build it, they will come. It is my opinion that if such a menu option existed a lot of fish/rec would use it. And any reg that complained that "my tables are full of people playing exactly 100BB every hand", would be out of his freaking mind.