PokerStars statement on min/max buyin on big bet tables - Page 77 - Internet Poker

Two Plus Two Forums Online Poker Sites & Marketplaces Online Poker Sites Discussion of Poker Sites

PokerStars statement on min/max buyin on big bet tables

Closed Subscribe

...

Page 77 of 107

First

27 57 67 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 87 97

Last

Page 77 of 107

First

27 57 67 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 87 97

Last

03-31-2010 , 11:36 AM

#1901

gorgeouss

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 1,225

Quote:

Originally Posted by my4betyoufold

Imagine a full stacked fish. Big stacks play very profitable against this full stacked fish because of the exponential growth of the pot what makes mistakes on later streets very expensive.
Wat would you say if the fish starts to complain that it is not fair to have so much money behind because the Big stack reg has a tactical/strategical advantage because of this fact?

The fish would write emails to PokerStars asking to lower the maximum buy in because this is not fair and destroys the game because "his" tactic doesn't work that good with 100 BB and he wants to play on 50BB max tables.

You would say this is ridiculous, right?

Replace the protagonists in this example and think about it.

fish don't think about big blinds, they think about dollars.
if the fish is uncomfortable with putting up 100$ on the game, he moves down to the 50$ game, where he feels safe.

I actually remember myself doing this exact thing when I was a fish (when=now) - a pro friend told me when I started playing to always buy in full, so when the 10$ tables scared me I went to 5$ and felt super happy.

03-31-2010 , 01:52 PM

#1902

ima2+2er_lol

newbie

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 36

Quote:

Originally Posted by FutureInsights

Um, not that I short stack (feel free to peruse the lengthy stars debate, lol at Bobo Fett) - BUT:

I have an entire entry on my blog devoted to how the min buy in on FTP is workable with proper Bankroll management to Annie Dukes opening essay (via UB) of not losing more than 30bb. Per Chris Ferg's Bankroll Building Challenge - you enter the table with no more than 5% of your stack (however, modern BRM theories advocate anywhere from 25 to 50 Big Buy Ins for a given nl level), and when you double to 10% (YEP THAT'S DOUBLE YOUR BUY IN), you have to get up from the table (THAT'S RIGHT, RATHOLING - IN FACT, ITS PART OF A CHALLENGE ON FTP - YOU GET POINTS FOR IT).

Having played ring games and Rush after the change (in fact, Rush started with 40bb). the FTP forums were filled (and here of course), with folks buying in for min (regardless of game), doubling or more, and leaving. However, the importance of post flop play sort of erodes in Rush, unless you have a multi way pot going. Many bought into the 10nl game (the lowest at the time) from $4, $5, and $8, and doubled, cashed out, and then repeated.

As to ring games, 35bb is still doubling and leaving (part of many challenges on FTP - you ought to check those out - before you go bashing away, but then again, banging heads abound). In fact, I've played Stars at 50bb buy in, doubled and left (especially the microstakes Omaha hl pl).

Conclusion, no matter what the min buy in, you are still going to see the hit and run. Its part of building a bankroll. If you only want to see full stacks at your table, then you will need a table with only ONE BUY IN. That would be appropriate to switching levels up, and then buying into to the shorter tack tables where essentially everyone has the same stack. Otherwise, I would rather shove my $5 with AA against your $10 KK, just in case you get a K on the river, and lose my $5 (instead of getting into a preflop war with $45, which this hand happened with, and losing it all).

Sorry, its my cash, and I'm not in the donating mood.

where can i find your blog?

03-31-2010 , 03:41 PM

#1903

SNE2010

adept

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 787

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmillerdls

Just for the record Stars, 30bb min is not enough.

If you want to ensure that this problem never gets brought up again (put all the emails and threads behind us, forever), then make the tables 20-40bb (or 40bb cap), and 40-100bb.

lol. There you have it, Stars. Do exactly what Jmiller wants, and you have his personal guarantee that nobody will ever complain about buy-in structure again.

03-31-2010 , 03:49 PM

#1904

jmillerdls

veteran

Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 3,485

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNE2010

lol. There you have it, Stars. Do exactly what Jmiller wants, and you have his personal guarantee that nobody will ever complain about buy-in structure again.

Yeah, I'm the only one that wants it...besides the several short stackers in the thread that preferred this change and the countless others who have pushed this to be the most popular choice.

Let me ask you...how many threads have been started about the Full Tilt buyins since the change?

If you, as a short stacker, don't like this buyin setup...can you explain why?

03-31-2010 , 03:55 PM

#1905

pokerbiker

veteran

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 2,589

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatriceMilev

Yep that's why average number of shorts (~20bb) at these tables is one/third the normal or less. I've just checked how NL100 shallow tables look right now this is the list of stacks:

as shortstacks rathole its clear that there cant be so many at the table, normal players stay longer at the table and keep their stack there.

03-31-2010 , 04:10 PM

#1906

AirmanSpecial

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 1,597

Quote:

Originally Posted by my4betyoufold

This is not the same thing. The solid big stack has an edge over the fishy big stack because the solid big stack is solid. (obv) It's not because they're deep. A bad shortstacker only keeps his head above water because he's short among big stacks.

The fishy big stack who wants to play short is more than welcome to play the soon to be created short tables. Perfectly fair and everyone is happy.

Also, sucking at poker is not a tactic, it won't work at 100bb or 50bb tables.

Last edited by AirmanSpecial; 03-31-2010 at 04:11 PM. Reason: Why on earth am I posting in this thread?

03-31-2010 , 04:12 PM

#1907

SNE2010

adept

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 787

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmillerdls

ah man, I was just teasing you about your silly claim that the buyin debate would be put to rest forever. I even started it with an 'lol'!

03-31-2010 , 04:15 PM

#1908

jmillerdls

veteran

Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 3,485

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNE2010

ah man, I was just teasing you about your silly claim that the buyin debate would be put to rest forever. I even started it with an 'lol'!

...and I'm saying that it will. All buyins will still be accepted, they will simply segregate those who are currently getting an edge by their stack size. What is their to complain about? As I said...no one is complaining about Tilt and this change is BETTER than Tilt.

03-31-2010 , 04:24 PM

#1909

SNE2010

adept

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 787

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmillerdls

okay then. All complaining about buy in issues will forever cease. As I can't see into the future I can't be sure you're wrong so I'll leave you to your opinion. Sorry for the derail.

03-31-2010 , 04:26 PM

#1910

HSB

veteran

Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 3,027

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmillerdls

Personally, I would like the 40-100bb tables to be more like 40-150 or 40-200. That, imo, would be excellent.

03-31-2010 , 04:39 PM

#1911

SNE2010

adept

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 787

Quote:

Originally Posted by HSB

Personally, I would like the 40-100bb tables to be more like 40-150 or 40-200. That, imo, would be excellent.

Get my point yet, jmiller?

03-31-2010 , 05:08 PM

#1912

jmillerdls

veteran

Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 3,485

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNE2010

Get my point yet, jmiller?

He has a different preference on the change? Lots of people do...the one I suggested has been the most widely excepted proposal, by short stackers and full stackers alike. I don't see him complaining about short stackers if the change I suggested was implemented.

03-31-2010 , 05:10 PM

#1913

wharfratg

grinder

Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 337

Dear Stars,

I'm sure you stopped reading this thread many posts ago. However, in the unlikely event you are still considering input:

0-40BB tables labeled: ___/___ nl Short Stack
40-100BB tables labeled: ___/___ nl
100-200BB tables labeled: ___/___ nl Deep Stack

03-31-2010 , 06:05 PM

#1914

bebek

centurion

Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 178

Quote:

Originally Posted by wharfratg

03-31-2010 , 06:12 PM

#1915

Vedast

old hand

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 1,307

Quote:

Originally Posted by wharfratg

+20-100bb tables

Why deleting them?

03-31-2010 , 06:19 PM

#1916

SNE2010

adept

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 787

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmillerdls

Sigh. I said it was silly that you suggest the buyin debate will end. You said, 'it will'. A few minutes later a guy comes along wanting something different from what you want in regards to, wait for it, buyins. Illustrating what was my only point all along. That different people want different things, so no matter what changes you make some people will be unhappy. Seems beyond obvious, seems absurd that I'm having to spell it out like this.

You know, it's not a sign of weakness to try and see where somebody else is coming from. It's not a sign of intelligence to stay forever on the offensive.

03-31-2010 , 06:29 PM

#1917

jmillerdls

veteran

Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 3,485

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vedast

+20-100bb tables

Why deleting them?

They are garbage and the whole reason this is being discussed.

03-31-2010 , 06:32 PM

#1918

jmillerdls

veteran

Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 3,485

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNE2010

Of course people are voicing their opinions...they haven't made the change yet! Once the change is in place and everyone can still buyin for what they want (like Tilt right now), then people are not going to have this issue to deal with anymore. This is blatantly obvious and demonstrated very clearly by the endless threads started about PS buyins and none about FT since their change.

03-31-2010 , 06:33 PM

#1919

jmillerdls

veteran

Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 3,485

Quote:

Originally Posted by wharfratg

This is clearly the best solution.

03-31-2010 , 06:42 PM

#1920

SNE2010

adept

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 787

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmillerdls

Alright, man, send me a PM if you're ever wrong about anything

03-31-2010 , 06:55 PM

#1921

gorgeouss

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 1,225

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNE2010

Alright, man, send me a PM if you're ever wrong about anything

passive-aggressive par excellence

I don't know if you're aware of that or not, but seriously, you are like 1 bad comment away from running into somewhere with a MAC11.

03-31-2010 , 06:57 PM

#1922

1nsight

adept

Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 821

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vedast

+20-100bb tables

Why deleting them?

location: Spain
need i say more

03-31-2010 , 06:59 PM

#1923

SNE2010

adept

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 787

Quote:

Originally Posted by gorgeouss

passive-aggressive par excellence

I don't know if you're aware of that or not, but seriously, you are like 1 bad comment away from running into somewhere with a MAC11.

Okay, I googled MAC11. Sorry, not into guns. So, is this like a threat? I didn't really think I was being that offensive. Notwithstanding my general confusion over your post (is it a level, maybe?), I am sorry you took it that way. Um, please don't kill me???

Seriously, I thought this was all light-hearted, no???

Last edited by SNE2010; 03-31-2010 at 07:05 PM.

03-31-2010 , 07:16 PM

#1924

gorgeouss

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 1,225

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNE2010

the reference is to the crazy kids who show up at school one day and kill everybody..

however, the passive aggressive part still stands and I think you'll do better by stating coherent arguments and not posts to the lines of "well ok, I guess you're the genius here and you know what is best for everyone!

".

but ok, enjoy yourself

03-31-2010 , 07:23 PM

#1925

SNE2010

adept

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 787

Quote:

Originally Posted by gorgeouss

".

but ok, enjoy yourself

Alright, I still don't quite get it but I'm glad it wasn't a death threat! I understand what you're saying otherwise, tho, and I see your point. I'll try to refrain from indulging my frustration in that manner, it is kinda pointless...

Page 77 of 107

First

27 57 67 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 87 97

Last

Closed Thread Subscribe

...

Page 77 of 107

First

27 57 67 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 87 97

Last