yo dang smartest guido evar i swear

lol son i got no clue wtf u sayin and u prolly ******ed

just think about it

a fish deposit $100 into stars

u think hes gonna buyin into .5/1 game with da $100 and grind with u boring nits for dolla pots and get bored and out nutpeddled

or will he go buyin $100 at da 2/4 20-50bb games and flip with da PLAYAS dat go in every other hand and try to run it up to like 1k mad fast

lol die boring nits u ruin dis beautiful game of poker

No, that's the point of a PL cash game. And nobody plays that.

If you are American don't worry about it.

Yeah


It's gonna hurt me to fight over the play money short stack pros on Stars.


I'm still holding out hope that the Reid bill does not pass.

went to go play 6 max 50 PLO and 17 0ut of the 20 tables are 25/50 bb tables.. this is sick. why not just make all plo tables 35/100bb and deep tables are ok. pokerstars really needs to look at this for PLO

lol @ calling Bruut a son, i bet you've made more money than him playing poker.

i wouldn't mind playing against all 40-50bb stackers who try to run it up, but i mind playing against 20bb shortstackers who instaleave when they double up (i play PLO) and i think shallow tables would be much more fun w/o shorties.

i agree that recreational players have more fun playing 40-50bb deep, but i don't think they are enjoying fact that on every shallow table there are couple shorties, who leave table with their money in a seconds when they double up.

girls just want to have fun and shorties ain't part of that fun, that's a fact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYD68zL1Npk

this is a step in the wrong direction.

You can't have 20bb stacks playing with anything above like 30-35bb stacks. The smaller stack has an inherent advantage and forces the bigger stacks to play at their effective stack size.

I think the bigger problem is that every fullstack reg is playing 40-100 whereas they used to be split between 20-100 and 50bb min.

a) all 20-100
b) 20-50 and 40-100
c) CAP and 40-100

Given that it appears 20bb is not going away, 20-100 with an amalgamated player pool with the intention of diluting the concentration of fullstack regs is by far the lesser of two evils. The changes they made mid-year were clearly a step back so I'd say changing to 20-100 now would be at worst a lateral step with prospects for improvement rather than a step in the wrong direction. Yes you have to deal with shortstacks that have an inherent advantage. But you no longer have to deal with completely reg infested games.

edit: and I agree that Stars should separate 20bb stacks into CAP games. That would be a step forward. (See below). Option C would be ideal.

I know, it's like stars should make separate tables where most of the players have short stacks or something.

Would shortstackers be so opposed to replacing 20-50bb with 20bb cap?

They wouldn't have to rathole anymore, no timers no ratholing. Anybody who wants to shortstack and play with shortstackers will know exactly where they can go to do that. 20bb cap. It's the exact same game shortstackers are already playing, it's just defined more clearly.

Is this something shortstackers would oppose? If so why? Let's hear it.

i wouldnt oppose this fwiw.

would still prefer 20-100BB tables again tho.

i also think you should be able to >24 table cap games as it would be ridiculously easy.

Of course.

Allow the SSers to play 69 tables of CAP, remove the 20-50bb tables, keep 40-100bb and EVERYBODY will be happy :

- Stars making a lot of rake,
- SSers making 20k VPPs/day,
- poker players playing poker...

I wouldn't oppose it. It does change the dynamic slightly, but frankly, it'd be much easier to masstable.

The only thing that would potentially suck is if the game didn't have any fish. But that's fine too, I'd simply go back to playing whatever the fish are (presumably 40-100bb).

Return question: One of the most common complaints other players have is that the shallower waters of 20-50bb are keeping the fish from them. If 20bb cap games were introduced, would you then be satisfied, even if all the fish currently in 20-50bb move to CAP, leaving deep stack games in their current state?

If a majority of the 20-50 fish moved to cap and only 40bb+ NL were offered, I personally would shut my mouth and accept it as just being reality.

20bb cap games would 100% legitimize what shortstackers do, so I'd have no choice but to accept it if people chose to play there. So yes.

just move to Full Tilt and play REAL poker... f.ck RakerStars

why not take a look at the lobby. 20-50 is just as popular if not more popular than 40-100.

keep it.

Poker is officially dead on RakerStars. Don't play there.

This, why would should they stop offering a popular format. Just because it's unpopular with people who want to play 40-100bb games?

Well 40-100bb poker is unpopular with me and everyone else who plays the 20bb games, so how about we drop the 40-100bb games? Or would that be selfish of me?

Shortstackers would certainly oppose the cap tables. All one has to do is look what happened at Full Tilt when they introduced the shallow tables and upped the min buyin on regular tables to 37.5 bb. Fish stayed at the normal tables. Shorties did not want to play other shorties and lost the inherant advantage of playing short against full stackers.

So all the ss ratholing POS ran to Poker Stars to ply their trade. Full Tilt tables got soooo much better once the changes were made.

The reason short tables failed at FT and succeeded at Stars is because at FT they were hidden away in their lobby, whereas short tables at stars we offered on a equal footing to the 40bb+ tables.

If FT had gone about things the same way as stars did then the short tables would have been popular there too.

They weren't hidden away on FTP, they were just labeled properly. People saw the label, read the explanation, properly identified what the game was, and for the most part decided they did not want to play shallow poker.

On PokerStars, the only way the labels could be less prominent and less clear is if they didn't exist at all. It's one half-step above no labeling whatsoever. People didn't decide they wanted to play shallow poker, PokerStars decided it.

And because of it, PokerStars collects more rake per hand, the skill ceiling is lowered so achievable winrates are also lowered (amounting to even more rake because each dollar is in limbo a little longer), and PokerStars gets to hold everybody's winrate in their hands personally by making most of everybody's winnings run through the rewards program.

This doesn't say anything about popularity. The only thing it says is that most SSers 24 table while most 100bb regs don't and therefore there's more tables at 20-50. I guess you could say 20-50 is popular with SSers.

The shallow tables really are like a carnival game in so many ways. And you guys who support them just keep buying the tickets and bouncing the ball off the rim over and over again.

Imagine how much better you'd be at poker right now if you didn't spend all this time trying to figure out how you could break even with a 20bb stack.