lol, good one.

I cant see how anyone can see zoom as being good for poker longterm , its rake heaven for sites, which is a huge sign that its gonna be terrible for the game.

instead of 1 fish per 5 regs its gonna be like 10/1 , fish's money will go quicker , I think the amount of hands per hour outweighs the lower vpips , im sure it will be profitable for a few players, but it really isn't gonna be the future of poker.

Hi All,

Lots of great discussion here and I can't say I'm sold one way or the other on Zoom.

I think the idea that edges erode as a result of the recreational players naturally playing tighter is pretty important. If you change the balance of the game so that playing more hands is more profitable by removing 1-2 seats (i.e playing 4max or 5max) that problem could be solved. The cost of playing like a nit with the blinds coming around quicker would be so high that recreational players would go back to playing their 'natural' style. Importantly, this would be in everybody's interest (apart from weak-tight regs) including Stars:

1) STARS: More pots played, higher rake rate
2) RECREATIONALS: More 'action' game
3) STRONG REGS: Correct to play wider hand ranges

Change Zoom to 5max?

Quad

I have no clue what you guys can say against ZOOM. I've played 25000 hands of ZOOM now the last few weeks and I'm totally in love. You should all be pretty happy that it's finally starting to roll. Didn't you realize, yet, that - different to regular tables - there's seemingly NO variance at all on the zoom tables resulting in no headaches at all and pure joy all day long?

.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.




Uploaded with ImageShack.us


I'm gonna be a rich man soon.

can't even buy stuff with aiev-bucks :/

sure you can http://www.insuredplay.com

got my threads mixed up

thought you were referencing

2/5 zoom already seems a lot tougher than when it was first getting up, seems like recs prefer normal games

agreed, players/flop below 20%, prob 5/100 entries are legit fish

games have seemed super reggy recently

What do you expect? The fish can't win a fkn hand at these super nitty zoom tables. Do you think they enjoy getting stacked left and right with no chance of a decent run? Of course they'll move away.

Pokersites are slowly trying to take the skill out of poker and making it more of a gambling game where you can't beat the rake longterm. Zoom is just an extra tool in this strategy. Ratholing is logically very profitable for a pokersite as people don't play 800bb pots anymore but wager their rolls way slower thus generating more rake. Same goes for all the 'anti bumhunting' stuff, sites just want to minimize possible winrates and have absolutely no 'best interest om the game' reasoning. Sites aren't there to cater to your needs, sites are there to make obscene amounts of money.

I'm not calling you out specifically, but instead responding to this post in general terms.

Players bear a lot of responsibility too. Everything can't be put at the feet of the poker sites. The above posts talks about what sites are doing but no where in that post do I see anything about what players should be doing in response. And worse yet are the people who post that players can't accomplish anything.

As an example of player accomplishing something after a poker site action, I link to the 03/06/13 action by PS to change certain PLO HU tables to 20BB CAP. There was a uproar and in less than a month PS relented and removed the tables.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/15...games-1308448/

Players need to unify and solve the current problems. Not just post about problems or put all the blame/responsibility on the poker sites. The poker sites are making an obscene amount of money off...the poker players. Unified we have a lot of power and sway.

Since this is the Zoom thread, if Zoom is a rake-zapping nit fest, it either needs to be gone or tweaked from it current setup to something more favorable. I've suggested deep ante. I'm not seeing the player unity to get something done. I am however seeing plenty of complaint posts with no suggestions/solutions included.

what is killing cash game online is table broke 1second after fish quits. and table full 1second after fish sit in.

this is really really bad for the game. lots of fishs are gamblers, but they aren't adicted to online poker. they want gamble, but they won't gamble if they feel hunted or think theres a small chance other guys are playing as a team .

Then we need to start banning all the 40bb reg guys who run once they double up too. I highly doubt they enjoy seeming it either.

As someone who likes Zoom, I could easily look at your post and say it is a good reason for Zoom over regular (this is the zoom thread). But I'l go a bit further and also suggest a non-zoom option too because I'm all about looking for solutions instead of only talking about problems. Maybe some type of "third man walking" solution to sitting out after a fish sits out. No more that half the table is allowed to sit out. At a 6-max table the 4th person trying to sit out either has to play or give up their seat. But of course someone will write a script to be the fastest one sitting out after the fish sits out. D'oh.

^^^what is it good for that u can sit out at a single tbl???
sit out all or none......

Fairly small pool unfortunately, but late last night there were definitely more fish playing (in addition to me, ldo).

true, i hate it

hey, didnt read the whole thread, so sorry if ppl pointed this out allready.

I think pokerstars wouyld love to make all the high stakes action Zoom, because that would make the Regulars play 4-8 tables just because of 1 fish instead of 1 table.
On Zoom 5/10+ it doesnt show the entrys. Probably so that players dont realise that there is 8 Regs with 4 Entrys plaing with 1 Fish with 1 Entry (who is playing tighter than usual).

This will result in everybody having more Regs at the table and paying more Rake. Dont wanna start a bumhunting discussion, just wanted to point out what some may overlook.
Thats why I think we should keep up not playing Zoom High stakes.

Its a total disaster, everyone plays very tight and it takes all table selection away.

Zoom might be also the first step towards introducing so called "fair play technologies", where the better players are getting seated together.

Morgoth, I'm not sure how literally you mean "Zoom high stakes". On the FTP $400/800 NLH tables in the last few months there has been a player named MalACEsia that has dropped $2,750,000. Without a good seat script you can't even get a seat. I'm sure more than a few players that can't script into that game fast enough, would love a chance to play him in a Zoom/Rush pool, instead of being shut out.

Borys313, a remedy to the tight part has already been suggested. And if you think Zoom is akin to "Fair Play Technologies" then you need to work to ban or fix Zoom. I see a whole lot of complaints and even some whines. But what I don't see is an organized plan to ban or fix Zoom.

Moonship, just because people aren't coming up with solutions and getting organised doesn't mean they're a bunch of whiners sitting on their asses.

I, for one, have my doubts about Zoom wrt the health of the economy but am willing to see how things develop with the current system. If the winrates get low enough, I imagine most regs will forget Zoom. If people keep playing it, Stars have no incentive for change.

Also, I don't mind RB-grinders playing Zoom and occupying less seats at regular tables, I actually prefer that.

I've announced my support for change to deep ante and also suggested banning ratholing. Neither of these are yet to garner wide support. Perhaps people wanna wait and see.

And in my post I made a distinction between complaining and whining. I don't know, maybe complaining online is a version of therapy. People want to talk but not solve.

I have my doubts about the health of PLO in general. Not just Zoom. But it mostly falls around the lack of unity. For example, grizy is a smart guy, but it seems sometimes he goes in threads and takes in opposing view almost for no reason. His comments in some of the PLO rake threads are troll-ish. But back to Zoom, if urubu or others come in here and say they hate Zoom because it is killing regular game action, then I'm like, "okay bro let's come up with the closest thing to a win-win for pro-zoomer/anti-zoomers." But almost one one in thread beside me or you has lifted finger one to try and work on a solution.

$2/4 regular seems to be going strong. But at times anything higher can be slow to dead. So I'm looking for a win-win but mostly what I'm seeing is a lose-lose so far. But maybe that is just the new normal.

I think there is very wide spread support for this at least. Stars have mentioned in a few places their intent to stop incessant ratholing. Their plan is likely to be implemented in the not-too-distant future.