The ideas the sites have had so far have been horrible(segregating player pools, kicking out big winners etc...). Anyone have better ideas?

I have one that I'm not sure yet but might help.It's a mandatory bankroll requirement for all games. They could even sell that as a responsible game feature and not be lying.
So for example with a 10 buy-in requirement if you deposit $500 you can only play NL50, $50 SNG or $50 MTT or lower. If you start losing you have to move down. If you start winning you can move up.For $10 buy-in or lower anyone can play at anytime.
That way the fish won't go bust as quickly and will keep the games running. This will probably be bad for the high stakes games but there will always be the rich fish who deposits big and the luckbox fish who runs hot and hits a big tournament score.

What do you think of this idea?

BTW Pokerstars this thread is not for you please just keep everything as they are.

that is an awful idea. The reason why the glory days were so profitable was because of fish degening huge amounts of money in games they had no chance of winning. This would just create more casual average regs and break even players, as well as turning a lot of recreational players who want to gamble away from online poker, and towards online casino or live casino/poker. WE FEED OF DEGENS WHO GAMBLE EVERYTHING AND YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT AWAY?

s'wrong which u
Worst idea by far.

I think the best solution would be to make every player buy in 100+ big blinds deep and add an ante or multiple blind structure that has the same effect. This way people will have to play poker to win money. No longer will people just be able to sit in games and kill seats by sitting and waiting for the nuts. What do you think?

The current standard blind structure is not enough in my opinion.

The stacks also need to be deep enough so that players can profitably play that 67s or 66 and bust the nits raising it up with only TT+ and AK.

Believe me, I'd much rather if nothing changed but pretty much every site not owned by Stars is taking measures to "punish" big winners.

To the OP: it probably doesn't change anything, or much. If someone is willing to put all or most of their current account balance on the table, they're probably the types who are willing to redeposit if they lose it.

To iOWNyou: have the sites not tried running tables with higher minimum buy-ins? If so, perhaps these didn't generate the rake that a short stack-friendly game would (or does). All in all, though, it seems any room -- virtual or B&M -- would want to create a situation that a) gets more hands to the flop and b) sees bigger pots when doing so. It seems an ante would achieve this, and yet I haven't seen or heard of many games with an ante.

Anyone who times out more than x number of times and is multitabling gets a kick in the nuts. So annoying for the recreational players to have to wait the full time bank for some ******ed bad reg nit to fold his hand or check or whatever...EVERY SINGLE HAND. Seriously give them sort of a penalty, warning or something.

Make minimum buyin to at least 100 bb.
Player only allowed to sit at 6 tables at the same time.
Player only allowed to join 6tables for an hour.
Get rid of HM or PT, fishfinders etc. any 3rd party tool
don't give promos to the winners
maybe rake only the cashouts
All these things would be much fairer for recreational players who want to improve and skilled regs and could be healthy for the so called "ecology" (my ass) than what PP and Revolution network are doing now.

I don't really understand the question. Improve the poker ecology for who? The house, winning players, or losing players?

Most players have x amount to gamble with per whatever increment of time. The more "bad" a poker ecology is, the more of that amount ends up going to the good players as opposed to the house, and the less time that it takes for a losing player to lose. Is a good player doing better to win x in one day and then not play for 6 days, or to win x-y after playing for a week?

The bottom line is that there is only so much to be had and a lot of people trying to get it. A lot of people assume that bad players will put more money into a game where they lose at a lower rate, but that isn't necessarily true. For a lot of players, x doesn't change, and its just a matter of how long it lasts and who gets it.

Poker is a get-it-while-its-hot kind of game, and a lot of things just aren't so hot right now.

lower the damn rake ez game

The best way to improve the ecology from the sites' standpoints is to create incentives for players to play way more tables to increase the amount of times the recreational players' money gets passed around. The best way to improve the ecology for players is to reduce the number of max tables for everyone.

Bring in some ecologists as consultants.

I'm joking, but maybe that wouldn't be a half-bad idea?

Quick idea

1. Pot limit pre
2. Charge each player a 1 bb tax, separate from the pot
3. Evenly distribute the "taxed" money to all players who VPIP regardless of the outcome of the hand. The players who fold pre forfeit the tax rebate.
4. Raise min buy in to 50bbs

More action, more variance, and more fun???

This times ten. I don't HUD and play very few tables recreationally. Slow multitabler players like this are exploitable as mostly they suck but it is just so irritating to play them that I stopped playing cash altogether. This means I play far less now as a quick 20-30 mins tournie is called losing and I don't like the lack of continuity of rush formats, I enjoy trying to suss out players rather than just play two cards.

Why would anyone want to log on and play for half an hour when most of it is waiting for some fool to fold 72o UTG before the guy UTG+1 makes you wait again..........seriously even if you promised me a winning 30 minute session every single time I just don't care, life is too short...that's why rec players are so few, they are outnumbered by 16 tabling "regs" grinding for pennies of rakeback or bonus and acting so slowly that anyone not playing too many tables and so jumping from action to action is bored.

- Maximum of 8-tables at a time.
-Food and drinks at the table-(like in the old days of paradise poker)
- Optional Country-Exclusive SnG's/Cash Games if you want to play against people from your own country to make it a chattier game.

#0 Eliminate Heads-Up tables.

start running 500BB tables with 100BB the minimum BI
charge ante instead of rake
lower the rake
get rid of 3party software

get rid of all the nits that play 24++ tables make it 4 max and watch how different games are

A running win rate and the amount of roll one has at some level and game per X hands (like 100k). When it's high enough, one is not allowed to play at that low nor lower limit anymore (except when on a shorter roll having lost at a higher limit) but must move up or play another site and come back a year later to play another 100k of hands.

That's what I do myself also, moving down if the roll gets too much down and move up when it gets plenty and when I can do okay at a higher limit also.

This gets more or less rid of heavy multitabling so that the site gets less rake. The lower games will be softer, and the higher games too will be softer; all games will be softer. Maximum number of tables is to be four, that's fine at higher limit, and will not all produce less rake as the rake is hitting in faster at higher limits, but all in all it's a good way to drop the rake amount the site gets.

get a job moran

I'd eliminate all promos/bonuses/rb etc for NLHE and shift them all to the other games.

Ban huds. Limit players to one table.

Maybe even take out hand history files. Actually definitely not maybe.

I know I'll get flamed for this but whatever.

Shoooooo!

1-Time rake.no more per pot rake.(pre pay per 1/2 hour dependant on stake)
and raise the min buy ins at all tables.
2-Add ante and or deep tables.(100 min bb at each)
3,4 & 5-Increase ratholing times and make it so its all tables at that stake.(cant double on 1 table and sit at another)(I despise hit and runners more so than bumhunters)
6-offer name change the way CAKE used to (dont really like this)(it does make HUDs kinda useless)
7-Ban Table scanning software
8-Limit spawned tables so that players can only sit waiting at 2 max.
9-go back in time 1000 years to when noone could make their own decisions
10-make all tables play money,But with a rake.(so at least we know were being screwed)