Hello,

I'm a regular High Stakes player on GGPoker, can you add me to the discord group?

**** GG. You love to see this.

Gl. I remember the pokerstars boycott didnt work. Its a shame poker has come to this. Wish we had proper guidance in the poker world, biggest hurdle being government regulations around gambling and poker makes this industry slowly dying (harder to get money on sites, slowly increasing the rake)

If we dont do something about that. This industry will slowly die out

With your logic gg should just raise their rake infinitely, to maximize their winnings. An empty casino doesn't make money. In the top #50 losers on gg, 15 of them are pros and they clearly paid way more rake and on top of that have lower rake back the fish in that list will clearly rake less and have more rb.

This does seem like reasonable GG strategy. They likely look it on much larger scale than if X less players play atm then we win less rake so it's no bueno.

I remember of an MTT regs boycot after rake increase on Stars and then first sunday 20%+ of the boycotters just stepped in to play mega soft fields and obv everyone followed.

Better known in history as 3 days boycott.

Tl;dr from Nick air ball fan lol
0% chance that sn has a clue obv

The rational thing is to play where you make the most money. Same as live where most of the good action is in private games even though they often have higher rake.

Until now game quality on GG was good enough to warrant the higher rake. Some very smart people calculated the numbers to figure out that's not the case anymore with the new rake structure.

Mod note: This is an important issue to a lot of people who are active on 2+2 or have been active here in the past. There's no reason to post walls of text if you've never played high stakes poker. We have enough low content threads in NVG if you have an opinion on everything.

I'd expect more of an in depth analysis from a high stakes winning player such as yourself.

But this may be the issue, that high stakes players sometimes can't see the wood for the trees.

As a previous poster said, a similar "strike" was tried by Pokerstars players a few years ago. It had no chance of working which was obvious from the start.

This strike has some chance of working, but only if GG raised the rake just to test the waters. If they did it to get rid of pro crushers then the strike won't work because that's what they want anyway.

To earlier posters' points:

They won't keep raising rake infinite but they will raise it as high as recs and whales will stand.

It doesn't matter that there are some big losing pros on high stakes on GG, it is the net across all of the pros that GG are interested in. Obviously some pros will still lose because of variance or playing badly, but collectively the pros are taking a big chunk of the recs' and whales' money.

I have played some high stakes poker, just not a reg.

I had to post a fair bit of text to explain why GG would be doing what they are doing as a business model. I'll keep it brief from here on.

I'm just a 50nl scrub and I'm fed up with these games as well. What network should we move to?

I don't understand the get rid of all the crushers and loads more recs will play logic being applied here. Its not like the games are ever going to be 6 recs, in that scenario obv the crushers would still play even at 7bb rake. The crushers will still stay and the weaker regs will be the ones forced out. The recs aren't going to lose any less money, they are just going to get recked via rake rather than by players. So how does this increase the rec pool?

^ it doesn’t. You need a mix of recs and regs to keep a sustainable poker ecosystem.

NikAirballfanclub says the players are missing the forest for the trees, but imo it’s clearly GG doing so.

Edit: also, lol at just making some random guesses at effect of rakeback #’s for a major poker site for “argument” sake. Let’s just RNG some random revenue to prove our point.

I agree, the recs will lose just as much money, but they will lose it more slowly than before. I agree that this may not organically increase the number of recs quickly, but GG are good at procuring new recs to open accounts.

Mixgrill welcome to the world of everyone playing under 500nl for years. Not sure why anyone would care that your rake has increased. The vast majority of players have no interest in getting to highstakes so it wont affect them.

RIP for us Short Deck players, as GG is the only site that has running games on high stakes CoinPoker, time to add back Short Deck!

How can a player lose at -30bb/100 slower than losing at -30bb/100. Makes no sense.

Spoiler alert

In for this, mostly curious if GG keeps their '**** winning players' attitude they had since the beginning.

I think this is completely out of line from you. He argumented well and had good points, it doesn’t matter if he has never played high stakes poker.

This is coming from a guy who has played high stakes + 10 years.

Because if current rake for a rec/whale is 4BB/100 and they have a negative playing edge of 26BB/100 against the current player pool
that has all of the crushers in it targeting them, the crushers are then removed either voluntarily or through constructive dismissal,
the rake has gone up to 7bb/100 but the recs/whales negative playing edge has improved to less than -23BB/100.

So instead of taking millions upon millions of hands from regs willing to battle at 4bb/100 rake, you now have close to none for now.

It’s all about how much the volume of their total hands raked gets cut. If they lose more than half their volume at these stakes (which they should if this boycott holds true) then it seems pretty obviously brain dead to me.

Time will tell is the only actual answer right now.

somebody tell linus

I'm glad to see this. However the chances of them rolling it back are slim, I think. If they do that, they open themselves up to future boycotts that will be even stronger, because the regs will see that its an effective tactic. GG obviously has disdain for winning players... So them admitting they were wrong and giving into a boycott is wishful thinking, but I do hope it works out. It would be a good precedent to set.

Has anyone asked the sponsored pros, such as Negreanu, for comments?

BTC