When is the server restart?

Who cares... there's only a few of them running now.

As for the changes I think that they were very welcome by the normal stackers but the cappers situation is not bad either. They have a good number of tables running, they don't have to rathole anymore so although winrates might be smaller I believe that they hourly rate will maintain at least because they a lot more hands /hour.

I really think we achieved a natural equilibrium with these changes.

Even though 50bb max games have dwindled down and have virtually no effectiveness to funnel fish because the remaining few rarely have open seats, I was still disappointed to see them in the lobby when I woke up. Ah well, maybe later today or tonight? I'm not well versed on server resets, but I thought everyone said they were done weekly like clockwork, but I don't remember a specific time being mentioned. Anyway, someone report back here if the server reset is done.

you still don't understand the issues at hand
take comfort in that you're not alone


Of course, there is a short-term boost to the juiciness of the games. In the long run, it's a poor move IMO.
I was also quite sad listening to SteveD on the pokercast as its clear there are some misconceptions there. LOL @ saying the fish didn't prefer 20-50 yet the site is keeping 40-100. Declared preferences are not the same as revealed preferences. It's very clear that the fish preferred the lower buy-ins. Fish like flops, showdowns, and the ability to build a small stack into a big one. Guess where that happened more? If the argument is that the fish disliked hit-n-runners, but we also know they hate what 50BB min games have become, why not find a way to keep the lower buyin and eliminate the 20BB hit-n-run artist?

If SS'ing was bad, why is it around at all?

30-60 BB games FTW.

LOL @ the 100BB defenders who have made their game a 3bet/4bet math based one that rarely is all streets of poker anyway. If they were in favor of 'real no-limit', they'd want 250+BB minimum buyins. The fact they don't shows that they've somewhat recognized the trade-offs in place. Most of these big, tough 100BBers are among the first to rathole when they get to 200BB+ and a competent player has position on them. It's the same principle that gets them in a tizzy over 20BB players in the past.

Once again, catering to the multi-tabling HUDbots and destroying the feeder system.

My recommendations:
30-60BB buyins at 200NL and lower
250+ BB buyins at 400NL and up
8 table max at cash games per player
Keep changing little things to crash PT3, HEM, etc HUDs.

Come on man, if you didn't have 34k+ posts, I'd think yours was a gimmick account.

1)Recreational players can play a game that they are accustomed to, and that's 40-100.

2) Just because shortstacking is around dosen't mean it isn't bad, ducy?

3) A good fullstack reg isn't going to leave a table because a tough reg has position on him 200+bb deep.

4) Close to 100% of players that play for a living are "multitabling hudbots" in both player pools, assuming you mean 12+ tables with a hud.

5)Your recommendations would assuredly end online poker. Those aren't good for anyone; not the site, not the recreational players, not the fullstack or shortstack regs.

6) 20-50bb tables are not a feeder system for 40-100bb tables, this is the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while.

7) iirc, you play for a living, amirite? Bet you played the 50bb max tables are now you're butt-hurt they're gone? Also, how many tables do you play and tell us if you use a hud or not. Since you're advocating 8 or less tables with no huds, you should do it yourself.

you're kidding right?

So much fail ...

It's amusing to me how people use one set of flawed logic to support their argument that fish "prefer" 20bb to 50bb and then completely ignore that same flawed logic now that fish are playing 100bb max. News flash: if they liked 20bb NLHE so much, they'd play CAP. If they loved 50bb max "NLHE" so much, they wouldn't have complained. Today's cash game structure allows ALL NLHE players to play in a quality game. There's nothing missed from 50bb max games. There's nothing you can't do in 50bb max games that you can't also do in either CAP or 100bb max NLHE games. Good-bye, 50bb max! Don't let the door hit you on the way out. It happens a HELL of a lot more in the wonderful, new and improved 100bb max NLHE games than it ever did in 50bb max games. Breaking news ... this just in: They DID find a way to eliminate the 20bb NLHE hit-n-run artist and keep a lower buy-in. It's called 40bb minimum buy-in NLHE plus 20bb CAP. It's the PERFECT, correct decision. Shortstacking is NOT bad. Buy-in for 40bb's at NLHE tables. What's stopping anyone? The only thing that is bad is when you try to combine two different games into one game AND/OR allow a group of players to cheat, leech, and angle-shoot the system. Ratholers have been leeching off NLHE popularity for years to play CAP. Now, they can play CAP on CAP tables and NLHE players can play NLHE on NLHE tables. There is nothing wrong with the system now and NLHE games are good. It sounds like you have a problem with the NLHE games and CAP games. Perhaps YOU should find something else to play because your system of 30bb to 60bb is so ridiculous trying to eliminate both full stackers and shortstackers so YOU can get the game YOU want - a game type literally no one else has asked for. Translation: I can't beat NLHE. Translation: I can't beat CAP, either. Translation: I think I could beat THIS game, and screw what anyone else wants, because I want it. Oh ya, this situation comes up ALL the time ... you're just making stuff up and have no proof or basis for any of this. This type of suggestion shows, just as many of your other posts in the past, that you lack maturity and have little credibility on this issue or anything else.

There was a real life experiment. We saw it. Originally, when I participated in the SS illuminati thread, I was for creating only a 40-100 game. Then, I saw what happened the last few years.

The fish, en masse, preferred the 20-100 game over 50-100 and the 20-50 game over 40-100. It wasn't close. In retrospect, this made perfect sense given humans loss aversion, the thrill of the close loss, and so on that we know from behavioral economics. In poker terms, fish love seeing flops, seeing showdowns, and the ability to grow a small buyin into a large amount. They feel losses big time (which is why we don't have 500BB buyin games across the board).

The real world experiment took place. We found what the fish liked due to their revealed preferences. I, and many other max buyin players, realized this. We bit the bullet and played the 20-100 and 20-50 games to follow the fish despite it meaning having to tolerate the shortstackers. Of course, I'm at home playing against mediocre shortstackers, so it was cool.

It turns out we also know that fish don't like the hit-n-running 20BB artists as asked in PokerStars surveys (declared preference).

So, what would you do combining what we know?
We know they dislike the 20BB artist. However, we also know they prefer that group over the 40-100 or 50BB min game.

My recommendation is to take both inputs and create a game that works out of those. I try to include everything we know. I don't let the 100BB buyin standard (which incidentally is the 2nd iteration of online buyins after PartyPoker's very successful 50BB max buyin games) distort my recommendations. 100BB is an arbitrary setting from the past. If one was for 'real no-limit', the buy-in would be way above 100BB. Hell, with all the 3 betting these days, most hands postflop are a SPR of 4 or less at 100BB even. Some deep stack.

I'd take the facts that the fish liked the smaller buyin games and that the fish dislike the hit-n-runners to create one game. Why not keep both the beauty of the 50BB game and eliminate the hit-n-runners. That's how I come to 30-60 BB games.

I make the other suggestions to set up a larger point. The PokerStars survey on this issued assumed its conclusion. Just look at the way the questions to the recreational player on 20BB players was phrased. Can you imagine if the survey asked recreational players if they think other players should be allowed to play 10 or more cash games at the same time (note that is less than half of the current limit)? The fish would vote that down by a huge margin. Can you imagine if the survey asked the fish about HUDs and showed a prototypical HUD used by a max buyin grinder?

If we're going to go with the recreational players' declared preferences, where do you think it leads? This whole listening to the players, blah blah blah, is a massive charade. The conclusions were assumed before any study took place. If anyone thought the long-run 'solution' would not be whatever caters to the short-run view of multi-tabling regulars, you haven't been paying attention.

and, you are absolutely incorrect on point #3 above. Watch the tables. The max buyin regs rathole all the time at 200BB when it's only a competent player that has them covered.

Regarding #5, my recommendations would not end online poker. They are designed for the long-run. The 20-50 game was the game at the explosion of no-limit on Party.

#7. I do many things in the gambling world for my living. I hadn't played the 50BB max game in months and played it infrequently before that. I saw the writing on the wall and moved to other places to acquire my currency.

I could translate all of your posts as well Phatty to:
I don't like what other people prefer so I'll ignore all the evidence of our experiences the last few years.

LOL @ saying there are more flops, showdowns, etc in a 40-100 game compared to a 30-60 game.

This is in no way obvious so could you please explain why you think there would be more post-flop play in a 30-60BB game.

I have "maxed out" my knowledge on the NLHE cash game structures from $25NL to $200NL fullring. And, unlike others, who ONLY have the Stars' perspective, I also have the FullTilt perspective as well. I've said many times why each cash game structure was most popular at Stars and Tilt and none of it had anything to do with "fish's preference" and had everything to do with where fish were funneled and players following them to that game to win more money. At this point, assuming nothing changes or reverses, I correctly predicted that 100bb max NLHE would be the most popular game type and why. You seem to have your head in the sand and think fish "chose" to play in 50bb max over 100bb max. IF that were true, the most popular game at FullTilt would be shallow games, but they are not, not by a LONG shot. Keep ignoring that point, though, if you feel it supports your belief system. When you're at your keyboard trying to type a rebuttal, TRY to forget the fact that shallow games WERE NEVER popular on Full Tilt, because remembering that fact is very bad for any arguments about 'preference'. Lol that anyone would compare a structure that exists with one that doesn't and never will.

What exactly did the surveys ask? If I'm remembering correctly, the one I got simply asked which buyin structures I would prefer. I don't remember seeing a question along the lines of "do you like players who play with 20bb and leave immediately after they double up?" If the fish got the same survey that I did, they simply voted no for 20-50bb.

What would be the point of PS asking them about things which they are never going to lower/ban (the max number of tables and HUDs)? That's never going to happen obviously because they'd lose massive amounts of money. They asked questions pertaining to things they CAN change without destroying their profits. Your hypotheticals are pointless.

All I know is that 25nl now seems to be a better, juicier game than 10nl has been for the better part of the last year.

I'm speaking from a micro players' perspective so please keep that in mind, but I never really understood what motivated shorties to ss the micros to begin with in the 20-100bb days because playing a nitty full stack style was certainly more profitable than shortstacking and really not that much more difficult to learn compared to reading a shortstackers push/fold chart.

To all you shorties out there.

1) Try buying in for 100bb
2) Learn to flop sets
3) ???????
4) Profit

Seriously, it isn't that hard and none of the decent fullstack regulars are really going to mind that you're there because while setmining nits can be profitble in this new era of online poker, they're basically just free blinds that allow us to isolate fish all day.

+1

dudebromanbuddyguy...

this has been discussed ad nauseam..

the only thing we know the that the rec. players 'prefer' is not getting rat-holed.

short stackers constantly create new tables..

Which in turn, creates the illusion of popularity.

30-60bb poker?
faceplam.gif
great - another divide in the player pool.

honestly it sounds horrendous.
might as well add a timer to the blinds.
no offense - i've heard you advocating this idea for a year now - idk why - idk what is so bad about playing all streets.

this current solution is the nuts..
and a compromise at that.
if ya wanna play push/shove or whatever play hyper-turbos or Cap.

in regard to a higher level...
i, for one, would be in favor of a 'Hella Deep' level of 250bbs - 1Kbbs.

*before you say "that would be another divide in the player pool u hypocrite" i think there would be very little of the population playing them that they wouldn't have an overall effect - compared to the idea of having 30-60 with an overlapping buy-in.. which i think would be AWFUL. and would most likely lead to increased ratholing. which they just helped fix.

whether or not it's proposed, i am currently very pleased with the plan Star's has implemented.

no huds? personally don't care...
i think the idea of having Stars have their own hud you can use is still an interesting proposal..

idk /rant hope that didn't come off too douchey.

Around 50% of my play came with more than 30bbs during the last calender year, and Pokerstars completely removed my option to initially play with a 30-40bb stack. Most other sites have a lower buy in limit of 30bbs for their most popular non-CAP games, and there's really no reason not to offer the same on Stars. Simply because Pokerstars changed the table structures doesn't mean they should be prevented from doing so again in the future, and the change for a 30bb minimum buy in would be great for everyone who likes to initially play at those levels.

Dear +EV Plays

Thank you for your email. We at Poker Stars are always looking to improve the experience that our customers have on our site and will continue to review the game structures and formats on an ongoing basis. Your opinions and concerns will be taken into account in future decisions.

Please understand that the recent changes to the buy-in structues for No-Limit Hold'em cash games were made to improve the experience for our customer base as a whole. We realize that we will never be able to please everybody, especially ratholers who can no longer rathole.

As an FPP pro, you may want to consider browsing through the PokerStars Vip store to order some books to aid you in your transition from ratholer to NLHE player.

There are also many other alternatives at your disposal including but not limited to:

1) Play CAP - its only a 10bb difference from the 30bb you are requesting and you don't have to worry about ratholing.

2) You could learn to play 40bb. If you were to sit down with 30bb, it is entirely possible that you end up being 40bb deep anyway. Perhaps even 60bb or god forbid 100bb deep. Unless of course it is your intent to rathole when you hit 35bb. If that is the case, then please strongly consider option 3.

3) Apply at McDonald's or GTFO!

Thank you, have a nice day.
PokerStars Staff.

[ ] This email was helpful.
[x] The truth hurts.

am i the only one getting seriously tilted every time a midstacking bumhunter acts like they are better than a mcdonalds employee?

i actually have respect for guys that wake up every day and go in to work their asses off flipping burgers. not everyone was born with a silver spoon in their mouth and actually working a low paid job to make it some day is commendable imo

probably although you are not the only dbag on 2p2 so take that fwiw

also MT2R - nice posts imo

micro-donk irony.

i find it too funny that a microstakes player is telling some1 to go work for mcdonalds... LOL

who says he hasn't worked his way up and has a real job

sorry i dont understand this post?

Let's see... you call standard 100bb players midstackers, and you agree with MT2R. You don't play NLHE cash games do you?

I like MT2R's posts a lot too. Doesn't mean I always agree with them. But I think he explains his reasons, and I can understand how he arrives at his conclusions. Your's are often good, too, Generik, which is why it surprises me that you are always down on MT2R but say nothing about the bazillion nonsensical posts that happen to be anti SSing.

I mean, there are people in this thread who seem to consider posting a picture of "House" as being a reasonable response. Cut MT2R some slack, at least he's using words.