U see fish complain about multitablers all the time. They type in ZZZZZZ repeatedly in the chat whenever a masstabler lags every hand.

yea its very annoying, I usually just take my money to the blackjack if there is any multi tablers

nonsense if that was the case those players would choose zoom

reducing rakeback to 3% and a table cap of four forces regs to intensely table select and this takes up wayy more time and slows hands down way more than adding a 5th or 6th table

Have you ever thought with your little brains that some players don't like zoom and prefer the reg tables? And amazes me that people are still moaning about the rakeback. You don't play stars for rakeback.

Right, many times when I do a search for people that take a long time they are playing one or two tables. They are probably catching youtube or checking messages on the phone or whatever.

But I play mostly cash games, maybe on MTTs where there are people who still play 12tables+ on several sites that skews more to multitable players. I don't see sites restricting mtt multitabling though, where the timebanks are much larger and people take more time on average.

U can still search on Stars? Wut

if they prefer speed and type zzzz why do they prefer reg tables?
i get that regs like reg tables to table select but we are talking about recreationals here.. read over that with your little brain? (singular)

With any of the fast poker I dont really want to be always only playing poker and when the hand keeps coming up its hard to do anything other than focus on poker. I play for fun and on the weekend I like to have 2-3 regular tables in the top 1/3 of my screen and whatever I am reading about online in the bottom, then when a hand pops up I might take 3-4 seconds to act. I don't like the fast fold games on any of the sites I play from 10nl to sometimes 100nl as the games are obviously tougher.

i get that so you are mixing in your phone or other pc stuff while playing poker

so you are not the player that types in ZZZZ when things go slow, in fact it might be the other way around because the phone is too distracting

i started with 'if they prefer speed' and since you are reading in between speed is apparently not that big of a deal for you, otherwise you would have likely skipped reading and play zoom

I did type in "seriously" when they gave some European guy 100 second clock to post his blind (on ACR), but yea I guess usually I don't complain but it can be annoying if I am only getting 40 hands per hour since I am only playing a couple tables. I think thats actually why I started browsing twoplustwo and other websites during play because some players would take a long time.

PS was sold they gave every reason to us believe they do not care about what their customers think or like but I want take this off my chest .

It is sad that now I can not go broke anymore as this new rule make it impossible to run it up bankrolls from nothing to decent sizes in weeks or months.

It is true that fish complain about multitablers. i used to play many tables at PS and many times fishs were writing zzzzzz wake up play fast .

that being said do you really think this new rule will fix this problem ? Will be slower because now instead of playing my 20 tables at PS I will be playing 4 at PS + several other tables at diferent sites. And playing only 1 site is fastest. Or maybe I keep only PS with zoom + 4 normal tables. Whatever I choose, I will not playing only 4 tables . Every pro who plays normal tables nowadays at PS are doing other things at side: zoom, HU, other sites. I will repeat: EVERY pro are doing this.

there are people (both fishs and pros) who enjoy more normal tables. Zoom kills a fun part of the game (metagame) it is slight diferent dinamic than normal tables. Btw nobody plays online game to make friends but it is nice to play same table with same table mates for 1-2hours session. it is very difernt from zoom.

Fishs do not get any wins with this new rules. Games does not run faster and won't be softer.

Ok games are ridiculous soft right now but it takes small time until other pros see this and fill the gap.

What makes me very pissed is the reason they are doing this.

If they want people playing less tables because many tables are slow action then why they do not cap tournament tables (like I explained above, would not make diference because pros go new sites)? Why you can play 8 tables at zoom playing 1,2k hands per hour and can not play more than 4 normal tables playing 200 hands per hour ? reason is obvious they want cap profit from winners. it is sick it is hard trust a site that try change the final result like that.

I could acept if they cap all formats to play maximum 4 tables. but they do not this. Tounrnaments fishs playing 20 tables and ring games playing 4 tables. LOL

Or at least if they were honest ''we are capping number of ring tables because here some players win too much and others lose too fast. at zoom and tournaments this does not happen so you can still open how many tables you want'' I would respect that decision if they were transparent.

table caps are good for poker there is no arguing this

Can you give 2 reasons why you think table caps 4 max are good for poker ? I heard often 2 reasons games faster and softer games. Do you have other reason ?

Like I said above games won't be faster because nobody (pros) ever play only 4 tables. Everyone - literally, 100% of pros - who plays below 25/50 are playing 4 tables at PS + side action (zoom or other sites).

Softer games: look at any PS table . Theres 5 regs and 1 fish with 5 more regs at wait list. If its big fish theres 10+ regs at wait list. If you have 10 tables running the line up are still 5 strong regs and 1 fish. Theres one diference, it is fishs play with diferent people. But ''diferent'' ? Most regs play very similar when playing against fishs. Sure there are groups of lags and nits but most lags play same vs fishs and most nits play same vs fishs.

Fish thinks he is playing vs ''diferent'' people and this is actually true but in the end his winrate (loss rate) won't have any big impact.

Only good reason is not having a mess lobby with same 2 guys sitting from 25/50 up to 200/400 making the lobby looks bad. But lets be realistc, fishs who still play nowadays are aware they are being hunted and lobby with 0 games running and 2 guys sitting out and table filling before 1st hand being dealt... lobby is bad anyway.

Another important point: 4 tables is ridiculous small . PS capped at 4 trying to kill this game thinking everyone will move to ZOOM. 4 tables its impossible to grind.

I think they made a mistake forcing so much... cut to 8 tables.

Saying for myself and few others small/medium stakes players I talk: we would not go to new sites with 8 tables cap. Our action would be slight slower but we would acept. At 4 tables cap PS force us to get new site. PS know this and I think they do this because their database suggest this won't change the action because what I said about Wait list and number of regs .




ps: I play small/medium stakes but in the same day PS capped tables I was taking shots at highstakes. For the 1st time ever the end boss from 10/20 25/50 and 50/100 were sitting alone at zoom trying to get more tables running. Have to admit, wise move from PS trying to force zoom. game did not fill and this guys stop sitting.

BTW PS did closed all 25/50 tables and made zoom only during few days or weeks but the games did not run often and PS re-installed the normal tables.

urubu is right, there is no arguing that table caps are killing poker (at least to 4, something like 8 seems more reasonable)

They probably want to concentrate more people on zoom instead of reg tables, since in zoom the winrates are lower on average and people pay more rake hour per table played.

They don't limit mtt tables because that would cut the guarantees, and some mtt's could nosedive with limit of tables played. They are thinking about their profit, not recreationals or regular players.

I already talked about this when RIO launched but they could limit number of tables per limit. NL2 only two tables, NL5 three and so on. If Otb_Redbaron wanted to play 24 tables at a high limit it should be allowed. This would protect beginners that play lower limits from those 24multitablers that play NL10 or NL25 cents for example.

This would work of course if their consideration was protecting beginning players, but as we know that's not the priority.

+1

Its pretty obvious why they doing it and its also pretty obvious why a company doesnt communicate openly why they are doing it

We doing this for teh ecosystem+longevity sounds alot nicer than we want you all at mtts and cut ur winrates and max out rake at zoom.

Every reg knows why they doing it and fish who read about it will think ohh how nice

But srsly after PS scammed SN/SNE-s for millions why is anyone playing cash games still playing on PS unless theyre playing Z200/Z500+. Its been super clear where the company is heading. TimStone is right, they dont care about the eco-system and never have from the moment amaya took over.

Because most of the other sites/networks are really bad and allow unscrupulous player practices (botting, RTA, collusion) to go unchallenged. At best, they have no HUDs/HH and tiny player pools.

Because the games are good perhaps? Games run pretty much 24/7, client is close to superior compared to other clients, withdrawals are instant. There are plenty of reason even with the current management. And let's say you play small stakes plo and want to use a hud/tracker to play where do you go? Or if you play any stakes zoom and want to use a hud/tracker where do you go? Stars can do pretty much whatever they want and most of the pool will stay there because my guess is that most of the regs need those two things and other sites do nothing to make things better.

Alright guys, fair enough.