Why do they make this so confusing?

Let's say I earn 100,000 vpps. I am entitled to $5,110 in the first year. However as I'll be earning more than 7,500 per month, would I also be entitled to $310 (rising to $382 after the first month) in addition to the yearly $5,110 or must I choose between the $382 per month and the $5,110?

Here's the site I am referring to.
http://www.pokerstars.co.uk/vip/tiers/

Also are FPPs separate to vpps?

Yes FPPs are separate to VPPs.

Yes the stars VIP system is confusing.

I'm going to move this to the zoo where you'll probably get more detailed answers.

You earn points through Stellar Rewards, Milestone Cash Credits, and by turning FPPs into VIP Reward Bonuses.

http://www.pokerstars.co.uk/vip/stellar/
http://www.pokerstars.co.uk/vip/milestone/
http://www.pokerstars.co.uk/vip/fpp/

Another way to view this...from the client software: Go to cashier-->VIP store-->VIP Rewards - 2012. It's a list of all these different bonuses you can earn.

NOTE: You earn FPPs at a higher rate as your status increases. Since FPPs can be turned in for cash, you will be earning more cash AFTER you have become Supernova, which is why the 2nd year is more profitable than the first.

The $5,110 is the value of all rewards received combined.

The three videos in the middle of this page explain the basis of the program pretty well. Let me know if you still have any questions after watching them and I'll be happy to answer.

http://www.pokerstars.co.uk/vip/

Just use this: http://www.fpppro.com/pokerstars-rakeback.php

Those values do still need to be adjusted. It seems the majority of players are seeing an increase in rake charged at Stars following their recent changes so you should dock a point or so because of that. They also use weighted contributed. If you're a winning tight player you need to dock 20-50% off the listed values. If you're a winning loose player cut 5-20%. If you're a losing player you can generally add around 5%.

Also, if you don't plan to save up and spend all your points only on $4,000 bonuses (which at lower to medium value would take months) then you need to also dock several points to many points for that. In general the rewards system at Stars sucks especially for lower stakes or lower volume players. If you're going to play there do so because you like the software / game selection and aren't so concerned about getting good value for your money.

It is just a smokescreen to hide the real value you get back.

Hint: it is ****ty, unless you are supernova or higher.

you missed sucks ballz off the title op

Just to confirm this is true...

Let's say I make platinum each month and also grind enough for the first supernova level at the end of the year...I cash out each month the $382. Does that mean that I will not qualify for an extra $5110 at the end of the year as I've been cashing it out gradually each month?

It is absolutely absurd that FR players earn more VPPs than 6max players for the same amount of rake paid.

.

Let's put it in simple words. If there were no rake in the game and Pokerstars would only charge a fee for every cashout they would be charging you around 60% in every cashout you make. The VIP system is just a way to hide that it's being done.

I'm afraid you're completely missing the point. As has been said, there is no monthly rakeback. I make it that Supernova (or 100,000 VPPs before 31st Dec) is worth $5,200, which you would get as $1,200 worth of Stella Rewards as and when they are earned (obviously averaging a little over $100 a month if you get them all by the end of the year) and then a $4k cash bonus that you can buy once you reach SN, using the 250k FPPs that you will have earned along the way (well, if you are platinum every month, if you aren't platinum the first month you'll need a few more VPPs to get enough FPPs for your $4k bonus).

Hope that makes sense.

I realize you're trying to be hyperbolic but the interesting thing is that that would actually be a better deal for the majority of players.



This is the data for the top 50 winners at each stake on Stars. So though at $200NL, for instance, the average big winner 'only' pays about 50% of his winnings in rake, for the other 99% of players who are not top 50 earners - they pay much more than 50% and 60% even as high as $200NL.

You're going to need to aim higher than 60%. As is the top winners at lower stake games barely get to keep more than 30% of what they win on the tables.

Those figures were also taken from before Stars recent rake changes which have resulted in many players paying even more rake. Those values are padded somewhat by the VIP club, but at lower stakes where the rake is most brutal - the VIP club provides very little.

I couldn't agree more.

For a site that talks about fairness in the reward system you think they would give 6max 6x.

Terrible analogy, as people who never cash out also pay rake.

move up to where they respect your rakes

Something else that may not be clear from this diagram is that if you're not in the top 50 players you are way way worse off than this. In fact I think this diagram is not at all useful.

Perhaps a better way of presenting is to say that rake is typically 10BB/100 for NL 100[*]. If you're a 10BB/100 winner after rake then you are 20BB/100 better than the other players and you pay 50% of your winnings in rake. However if you are a 1BB/100 winner after rake then you are paying 91% of your winnings in rake, despite being 11BB/100 better than the field.


[*] Not accurate, just round figure for example

Holy ****, I was being too optimistic saying it was around 60%. Crazy stuff.

How come I have never seen this for none uk players../?


Really good videos for noobs BTW!

Seen what exactly?

that link

With the three videos on pokerstars.co.uk/vip

Never see nthis before in my life

Really usefull and helpful I would say!

Ah, the videos are also on their .eu site, but for some reason not on the .com(which I wasn't sure even existed until I just checked it).

hehehe yea I was amazed when I just discovered these videos! WoW

They truely hate the .comers