http://www.pokertube.com/poker-news/...-on-pokerstars

Looks like the spin & goes might be a quite a controversial move by PokerStars indeed - the analysis of the format by a long-time successful sit & go professional leads him into launching a petition against the format, seems like plenty of players are following his lead.

I get the point there and I agree - no one doubts that Spin & Gos are in the long run as or maybe even more profitable than any other format - the problem lies within the fact that in Spin & Gos you could easily be unbelievably more off the expected winrate than in any other previous poker format, can't imagine playing those for a living.

spin and go's should stay. there is a market for them, people who like the potential of playing for big money with a small investment. If you dont like them, simply dont play them. Also, the frequent arguement that "spin and go's are killing my games is simply selfish. There is already many formats of poker, adding another game shouldnt be frowned upon at this point, it should be expected and embraced as a way to entice new players into the game

Signed

A lot of us have been discussing this over in STTF (SNG Forum).

While the addition of these might be detrimental to the long term health of the games, my main problem is with when they were added. Adding a game that disrupts the SNG ecosystem so drastically in the 4th quarter when your VIP rewards system is incredibly end heavy is a scumbag move. Ive raked over 300k in my time on Stars and am seriously considering moving to another site next year.

You need to play a couple million of these to find out your real winrate. Nice

You can probably get close to knowing your expected win rate with 10k games, by calculating it from your cEV winnings. It could indeed take a LONG time to actually collect.

Maybe you so called "supernovas and supernova elites" should stop procrastinating and actually grind throughout the year instead of waiting until the end of the calender to decide to get dem vpps. Just a thought (albeit a good one)

I would think it could be derived more quickly and simple than that. After a reasonably small sample you should be able to have an accurate win percentage that can be extrapolated across the expected payouts.

What is "so called" about it? Why is the default scenario laziness on their part?

+1
"OMG these jerks are offering an ever increasing variety of games and the fish are playing the new games instead of the game that I prefer. We should get the government to mandate that PS only offers sit n gos that are 6 max hyper turbo satellites to the sunday million because some of the fish are losing their money to Mrgreen at head up sit n gos and I don't think it's fair that fish are allowed to choose games that I am not as good at."

GL with that. The only VIPs to a site are net depositors, they are the only ones the site makes any money of.

Yep, my point exactly! Anybody who has a problem with spin and go's are either on tilt or thinking about this from a selfish point of view

so-called meaning they are the cream of the crop, the grinding community of stars. its pretty common knowledge that plenty of the grinders half-ass all year and then put in sick sessions at the end of the year to reach their milestones.

888, Ipoker, Party? Gl with that.

I started playing this format as soon as it was released and it's fun, so far I have probably broken even at them but have played a few hundred already... In my opinion (and this was something I realised almost immediately) the spin n go format would never have happened under the original Pokerstars ownership and is clearly an Amaya thing to introduce more of a slots/gambling element to poker. As a gambler you get that gambolling rush every time you enter one, and of you hit the double buy in the instant natural reaction is to enter another straight away to hit a higher prize pool.

This in itself is very dangerous for gamblers and demonstrates the difference in approach that Amaya have compared to the Isai Scheinberg ownership who I expect would not have come up with an idea like this.

As a format for the pro poker player the variance is huge, but even if you only get double buyin prize pools on 3 handed games the player pool is so weak that they should still be profitable for an experienced player. I see no reason to ban them but may as well accept them for what they are and either embrace the gambol or leave them alone and focus on other core games.. GL getting them banned!

Pokerstars reaction:

it reduces gameselecting to zero (cant even see total pool like zoom)

ridic HIGH rake higher than 6max as high as 9max (unreal)

and turns up the variance so high that its essentially a gambling game because it will take years upon years to get a sample in 100x+ spins


Just when the general public is starting to see poker more as a skill game

so you saying the end is the end? but when do you start?

gl @ ipoker

oh and no deals possible

last 12 1000xs i railed was two or 3 randoms screaming how the **** to chop it up

this is all wrong you don't want public to c poker as a skill game.

if so why don't you play cash games? or chess?

Because he doesn't know how to play with a 10+ bb stack

Yeah if you don't think us SNG regs can learn cash you are kidding yourself.

I don't like Spins for the fact it's nothing but going to kill the site. Unless stars is pumping money to the economy of these countries, why would they allow you suck $$$ out of their country for mediocre bribes?

I prefer them to actually get some dudes in their who are good at advertising/promotions.

The .com/.eu site is a joke in comparison already in terms of promotions if you just look at .es/.fr. Those are already kicking in the teeth of .eu/.com every single promo. It's a ****** joke.

gotta agree, that is pretty brutal. maybe stars will find a way to make it up or offer a few extra benefits.

if by learning you mean spending money on coaching and countless hours learning the game then sure, easy game!

The .com site has always sucked for promos. That's nothing new.

Stars does not owe you a living. If/when your game of choice is no longer popular then you switch to something new. It's called adapting.

Yeah, so long as you know the fee % you're paying (or have the distribution of possible "random prize pool amounts" which which to calculate it), you can use your finish distribution like so:

EV = (1-f) * [P(1st)*0.8 + P(2nd)*0.1 + P(3rd)*0.1]

where f is the fraction of the buy-in that goes to fees.

Your finish distribution should converge at roughly the same rate regardless of the structure.

It could still take a painfully long time to actually realize your expected EV though...

Juk