Are you really whining about the 40bb shortstacks ? Everyone was whining when it was 20bb and praised stars when they increased the minimum buy-in. Now everything is bad again ? So if stars would increase it so 60bb everything will be good for 6month and then everyone starts whining again ? Oo

Everyone said stars made a step in the right direction but the problem was not solved.

Yes people complain about ss ratholers who tighten up the game.

Also fwiw the difference between 40 and 50 bbs is huge imo.

You can complain about shortstakers arguing that you don't like to play vs them. Is reasonable, if someone buys in for 100bb he likes to play deep, more flops, etc. But, the people who like to play w less blinds because likes to play more pre,etc, don't have the same right to enjoy the game as you? The solution would be to split the tables between 20/30/40-70 and 70-100+.

The people that here wants to have all tables 70-100+ is just being selfish and trying to increase its winnings, obligating the fish to buy deeper and to other regs to play the stack they are confortable with.

And should be pointed out that when the games were 20-50 and 40-100 there was way more fishes in the 20-50 tables than in the 40-100 ones. That from Stars perspective is extremely important because the costumer they care the most is the one who deposits :=)

i really like the idea of making ratholing universal. i mean, its kind of stupid that they have had it at a per table basis all this time when there are like 100 games running, and theyre all basically the same ****.

so let people buy in for 20, 35, 40, 50 bb min, and then don't let them rathole a particular table for 2 hours, and don't let them rathole the limit for 12hours.

that would be awesome

lol i'll bite. stars has a 100bb max buy-in. its probably best for them if they keep it that way
its not something people need to understand. someone writes support and the response would be we upped then min bi and it may happen again in the future.
stars has made changes in regards to ss'ing and have indicated they are continuing down that path. if you dont get why, how, etc thats your problem
they have cap etc and the ss'ers prefer the reg tables for a reason

the last statement is false. stars cares most about rake. rake is about having a large and healthy player pool. its the same as a simple food chain where people ate meat and plants, meat ate insects and plants, and insects ate plants. if we eat all the meat we will have to eat the plants but theres nothing eating the insects so that population grows and eats all the plants too and now theres no food. lol that was long and weird. the point is regs pay by far the most rake and stars profits the most from them but the site needs to feed them fish or they will leave. if either regs or fish leave the site will be decimated

eat drink man wood meat fish dish bacon

Poor Joey :

PokerStars Hand #86534193387: Omaha Pot Limit ($50/$100 USD) - 2012/09/21 21:05:28 ET
Table 'Virgo III' 6-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 2: Fake Love888 ($9350 in chips)
Seat 3: patpatman ($34421.55 in chips)
Seat 4: 1Il|1Il|1il| ($39022 in chips)
Seat 5: Lateski ($16022 in chips)
Seat 6: JoeIngram1 ($69328.60 in chips)
1Il|1Il|1il|: posts small blind $50
Lateski: posts big blind $100
Fake Love888: posts the ante $20
patpatman: posts the ante $20
1Il|1Il|1il|: posts the ante $20
Lateski: posts the ante $20
JoeIngram1: posts the ante $20
*** HOLE CARDS ***
JoeIngram1: raises $300 to $400
Fake Love888: calls $400
patpatman: raises $1450 to $1850
1Il|1Il|1il|: folds
Lateski: folds
JoeIngram1: calls $1450
Fake Love888: raises $5800 to $7650
patpatman: raises $17400 to $25050
JoeIngram1: raises $44258.60 to $69308.60 and is all-in
Fake Love888: calls $1680 and is all-in
patpatman: calls $9351.55 and is all-in
Uncalled bet ($34907.05) returned to JoeIngram1
*** FLOP *** [4s 6s 6d]
*** TURN *** [4s 6s 6d] [Qd]
*** RIVER *** [4s 6s 6d Qd] [7s]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
JoeIngram1: shows [2c 8h Ac Ad] (two pair, Aces and Sixes)
patpatman: shows [5d Js Td Qs] (a flush, Queen high)
patpatman collected $50143.10 from side pot
Fake Love888: mucks hand
patpatman collected $28235 from main pot

^patpatman was rumored to be Tom Dwan.

i really don't mind the 40BB minbuy in they have atm. it's perfect for fish who dont have too much money but want to play small/midstakes. all they have to do is somehow getting rid of teh russian armada. they just have to make a cap on how many tables you can buy in for 40 and that's it. I personally see no reason to increase the minbuyin.
especially full ring tables tonight had sometimes up to 6 40BB stacks and that's just disgusting...

+1

that idea has been passed around for a while and i really think it's a great one.
i do see ment's point, though, in regard to the capped wait-lists, about scripts that auto wait-lists new tables.

one thing is certain though, these problems should be addressed by stars before 2013. (and hopefully discussed before Dec. 30th)

i love when discussing sser's, the guys with 100 posts start popping up.
yes, people are complaining about 7+ ssers per table.

+1

it's problem, comrade.

sser's gain their edge by playing larger stacks(.) but when there are only ssers on a table, no one has that super cool awesome-tastic secret edge. they're only jerkin off and pissin' off regs and fish alike. all the while payin' $3 in rake to their stupid $20 shove every other hand at 50nl. i don't care that people want to play that .00001wr game, i prefer to make my .00001wr in other ways. i don't log on to stars to play one st. poker and pay absurd rake compared to the pots. if you want to play short, that's why stars created CAP. it's 'selfish' that these guys are ruining our games by exploiting our stack size and telling us we're the complainers.

limiting the # of ssers per table would benefit all, but is most likely unrealistic. melea's and xela's ideas seem great and plausible and i hope they are put in place for the benefit of all.

and that last paragraph is false. they might have had more traffic, but the data is skewed because of all the scumbag rat-holing. when the ssers all rat-hole they all have to start new tables. and like someone mentioned above, rec. players just want to hop on and play... those 20-50bb games had far more games starting, and thus the appearance of being more 'favored'.

Nothing is going to happen whine on bitches!

wrong thread douche.

SSers were saying the exact same thing before the arrival of 40bb-100bb tables... Enjoy your last 3 months of professionnal ratholer.

Thats because i play cash, whine on bitches!

judging from your posts, i'm sure you do great!

keep up the great work and good luck with your new interest in micro/free-6m-hyper-turbo-games that have 10bbs!
that's where all the cash regs are running to nowadays.
sounds pretty tricky!

wp.

Hey! can't i try new games? you guys seem uptight

win a 78k pot one day, lose one the next

omg.

i think what timstone suggested sounds great either on it's own or coupled with some of the other suggestions. the 40bb minbuyin can def stay if you cap the # of tables you can sit at ( cap at like 6 so as to not fk with the rec players at all) and make ratholing universal (even for 6 hrs would be perfect).

that would all but eliminate the ss infestation and they'd have to all move to cap if stars don't eliminate that as well :evil:

redacesfulll sighting at the plo tables, say it aint so

I still see him fairly often at fr 100nl