If regs remain the same, and fish increase that would actually increase the # of tables (over 100), and not decrease them you realize? But the point is mute, because the avg. # of fish per table is not going to increase without an increase in fish on the site, only the distribution might change.

And as much as i'd like to see just 1 structure, 20-100 is just not it as it's too faulty of a structure, and Stars appears too committed to keeping 20bb poker. Therefore, 20bb CAP and 35-100 address many of your points as Phatty explained, and is the best current compromise to give both groups the game they want to play.

Obvious, if the fishes want to play 20bb CAP, all right, I will never say something about the buy-in structure on Stars (if they change it with CAP & 40bb-100bb).

The thing is for the change to actually stick - the cap games have to have a level of success. If they don't what would stop stars reverting back to 20-50bb poker.

Otherwise stars will not view it as a long-term solution. I think the minimum is a retaining of the existing volume of rake in the cash games.

fwiw I have been trying out the cap games and they seem to have get some fish playing and not just regulars - with somewhere like 12 tables 50NL FR at the slowest overnight times and something like 35-40 at the peak US times.

fyi I play both fs and cap

I'm so glad I stopped posting in this thread. I'm pretty sure at this point I could adequately answer 99% of all posts accurately just by quoting stuff that's already been said.

SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOON

When did Stars make 20-50bb tables, and 40-100bb tables? Not more than a year ago, right? Anyone know the exact date?

You wouldn't agree with anything short of fish directly transferring their rolls into your account tbh.

You've had this explained to you. Hyperturbos and DoNs appear on the same tab as other STTs, even though they're very different to play and have different rake structures. You basically don't like it not for any principled reason, but because it means shorties can make money.

CAP is not different from NLHE in the same way stud is from NLHE. You know this because your insistence that only one particular way of playing NLHE is "real poker" is based on that being how you make money, not on any genuine principle.


The fish will love CAP imo. I remember starting out at poker and being terrified that I might lose 100BBs in a single hand. A game where you can build a decent stack through "skill" and can't lose it all to some nit who setmines you? They'll love it. This is why some of the bsers here want CAP on another tab or hidden away.

It was mid April 2010...I don't know the exact date.

one fundamental characteristic of no limit poker is the ability to bet all the money in your stack (ie I'M ALL IN). Cap does not allow this whenever a person has >Xbb stack.

-----

unfortunately fish will like that everyone has the 'same size stack' approximately and won't be intimidated to play the game ... unlike 100bb tables when people have huge stacks relative to their own.

in hindsight, sites allowing 20bb buyins the very first time was a huge mistake. It should have been kept at 35bb :/

I'm beginning to think CAP might do ok if it's not hidden away somewhere casual players are unlikely to find it, the 50nl CAP games are getting decent traffic even though they're competing with 20-50 and 40-100 right now.

For me being able to remain seated is all I care about. Trying to 24-table and constantly leave tables when you double, and join different tables wastes a lot of time. Instead of being 100% focused on actually playing, you have to devote all this energy to shuffling around tables constantly. Of course by doing this you lose volume.

I went back to playing Full stack because it was easier to play. Join 24 tables or whatever and remain there. unless the table turns to crap or completely breaks down you can stay there all day.

CAP is brilliant, you avoid the constant table shuffling and get to keep 20BB in play and not above that. I hope the fish prefer this game.

it's a damn shame we have to compromise in the 1st place with the ridiculous bastardization of poker that is 20bb cap. Imagine going back 6 years and telling everyone that in 6 years the main game that would compete with 'regular poker' was going to be 20bb cap. At least sites are doing something to stop the ratholing (that was a product of their creation)

:/ spilled milk I guess

wasn't the main game 6 years ago 20-50BB on Party Poker?

At pokerstars.fr they have only 35-100BB tables, I like that, even though it would be nice with CAP tables aswell.

Yep, but back then you didnt have massive amounts of proffesional SS ratholing 24/7.

If a rake change is made at CAP in good faith to offset the difficulty of beating the game, I don't have a big problem with that. If it's some underhanded attempt to get more people to play it versus NLHE or more funneling, obviously I'm against that.

As for CAP being on a different tab, I personally think it should be because it's a different game that doesn't really resemble no limit any more than limit does and limit has its own tab. And, if they get or need a rake reduction, that's even more evidence it's a different game. But I'm not going to go to war to make it so as long as everything is properly labeled is my main concern.

As for the popularity of CAP versus no limit, if a change is made to the structure like people are saying it will be, I play no limit and I like my chances

Very original... you come up with that all by yourself?

Yea, and those weren't the best of analogies no matter how good 'you' think they are. CAP IS different from NL in that... let's see, oh yea, there's a CAP! And NL stands for you guessed it..... NO LIMIT. There is a pretty substancial difference in 20bb CAP and risking/being able to put 200bbs all in. It is really kinda between Limit and NL, and since when did limit holdem get a rake cut? (or get put on the same tab for that matter)

There is also no rake break for CAP at FTP. If Stars considers CAP so different from NLHE to need a rake reduction, then Stars is also saying it's fundamentally different enough to be put on another tab just like limit holdem. Oh... and they'd have to give limit holdem a rake cut as well obviously. But really, it would just show unfair favoritism amonst holdem games imo.

I also just find it funny that a random Monkey on the internet just 'knows' what all my principles really are or aren't. Do you have trust issues or something?

I'm sure a lot of fish will love CAP. It sounds like you still think the same way as when you started, so I guess you would know. BTW, I feel obligated to tell you that there is more 'skill' in deeper play than shorter play, but apparently a few 'nits' that stacked you have scarred you forever.

FT doesn't separate cap from NL so you probably should stop comparing Stars and FT if you want to prove that you are right.

The reason the rake would be lower at 20 bb cap than regular NL is the same reason why Hyper turbos have lower rake than regular turbos. Edges are smaller. FT has 30 bb cap which is a much different game and more beatable than 20 bb cap.

And, like you just said after that, FTP has 30bb cap, which plays a lot more like NL than a 20bb Cap game does.

Then why doesn't limit holdem have lower rake? It's the same holdem game, only it's 'capped' to minbets on every street. Why aren't people ITT that are bringing up hyper turbos arguing for lowering limit holdem rake first?

Don't know much about hyper-turbos but it seems to me that they are a pointlessly dumbed down version of the game as well. Why you people want to lower your skill edge is beyond me. If Stars wants to lower the rake they should lower it everywhere. If they only lower it for games that are easier to master then that creates a problem. Take shorties for example. These are people who lack the skill to beat normal 100BB+ poker. They dumbed down the game by removing postflop play and are now scraping by on the VIP rewards. If you give these people lower rake so that their game has the same winrates that the normal game has then you have just made a situation where the less skillful are rewarded more.

the truth...

it was 50bb for a little while then went up to 100bb. Zero ratholing shortdonks.

the problem is that the site(s) did not respond quickly enough to the problem when it first started. They must have been licking their lips at all the breakeven shortdonk grinding rake machines.

It's this nitpickery that makes you guys bitching and moaning about a positive change look way worse than most shortstackers/ratholers. At least most of them are at least waiting for the changes to roll out before they come on here complaining.