Quote:
Originally Posted by *******
For the abusive ratholers that's certainly true.
Me and others though also have the integrity of the game as a competitive sport on our side. 20bb poker is a very bad representation of what the game can be with regard to competition, and that's one aspect of this argument that for the most part the ratholers don't even attempt to defend.
I'll defend this aspect of it.
20bb poker does have fierce competition and strategic elements. The only difference in this regard is that when you are better than someone at 100+BB poker, you screw them harder and faster. How is that good for the game?
Limit players mention all the time that NL is bad for the game because it knocks out fish too quickly and punishes them too much. 100BB punishes fish way faster than 20BB.
If you really cared about the long term health of the game, you'd be playing limit poker.
You seriously think 20-50BB poker is a "bad representation of what the game can be as competition" but 100BB is excellent? Please. 100BB poker doesn't represent live casino poker (where you can buy in deeper) where more fish play, nor does it represent tournament poker (where the most crucial decisions are made under 50BB) that's so popular on television.
100BB poker is about the
farthest thing from what would represent the competitive elite in this game, except in one area: 100BB poker online.
Quote:
Originally Posted by *******
Also consider this:
What do you think the poll results would be if the question was "Should PokerStars drop 5-card Draw?"
Or "Should PokerStars drop NL 2-7 Triple Draw?"
Nobody likes those games, but nobody would want them dropped. You can just choose not to sit at those games and they don't affect you at all.
20-50bb on the other hand, is a cloud that rains piss, and it's hovering over all of internet poker and whether you sit at those tables or not, 20-50bb is still pissing on you. That's why people want it dead.
The only reason this is true is because 20-50BB poker is popular. If 5 card draw became popular, it would affect 100BB NLHE games in exactly the same ways as 20-50BB NL does. If anything, it'd be
worse, since some players who play at 20-50 for awhile "move up" to 100BB, whereas if one of those other games became popular, it'd be less likely for them to move over.
I wonder if there was this same kind of uproar when turbo tables were first introduced. In many ways it's an identical situation - 20-50BB moves faster, with higher variance and less edge for a pro. Should we get rid of turbo tournament tables too?
No matter what else you say, it boils down to "but the new game sucks because now my old game isn't as popular!" 20-50BB poker doesn't break the game. It doesn't kill fish faster. It's just a different twist on the same game, like Pot Limit, No Limit, antes, rush poker, or whatever else.
This is like a car company complaining that motorcycles are a horrible idea and should be illegal.
People do things because they enjoy them. It turns out people don't enjoy your favorite thing as much as you do, so you want to take away what they enjoy so they'll come back and you have someone to play with. Grow up.