In before people attack on me: I JUST WANT TO BE REALISTIC. I DO NOT GAIN ANYTHING FROM THIS CHANGE. IN FACT, I THINK NO PLAYERS GAIN FROM THIS SITUATION
Notifications
Clear all
PokerStars
103
Posts
43
Users
0
Reactions
20.8 K
Views
OK, just so you don't get me wrong:
I agree with changing to WC but there needs to be something to not cut SN pros earnings with up to 30%. That's just a ridiculous thing to do with 3 days notice when everyone had a 1 year or more plan made. It's not professional. Saying that Bronze Star VPP = SNE VPP is insane. Just take a look at the calcs quoted earlier.
Compare it to FTP imo. As much as the management were idiots by the looks of it, the promotions team were the complete opposite. After introducing Rush they also changed to WC but added so many extra bonuses for high grinders that all they did was change to what looks as the best system available at the moment and didn't hit the loyal high rakers. To me it looks like FTP was the only room to make a smooth transition to WC from Dealt. That's a big 
for who handled that.
AMaA: The Good Life
:diamond:Follow me on Twitter @emanuelc16
The Education of a Modern Poker Player by TwiceT, jbpatzer & EmanuelC16
Originally posted by EmanuelC16
OK, just so you don't get me wrong:I agree with changing to WC but there needs to be something to not cut SN pros earnings with up to 30%. That's just a ridiculous thing to do with 3 days notice when everyone had a 1 year or more plan made. It's not professional. Saying that Bronze Star VPP = SNE VPP is insane. Just take a look at the calcs quoted earlier.
Compare it to FTP imo. As much as the management were idiots by the looks of it, the promotions team were the complete opposite. After introducing Rush they also changed to WC but added so many extra bonuses for high grinders that all they did was change to what looks as the best system available at the moment and didn't hit the loyal high rakers. To me it looks like FTP was the only room to make a smooth transition to WC from Dealt. That's a big
Yeah, the timing is SUCK.
I hope FTP comeback soon. A market monopoly always bad for customer (us)
You are people funny,
I mean you are arguing about the monopoly of PS but forgot you made them so big when FT crushed. Most of you guys made the transitions to stars even you know that there is the hardest field to beat. Why did you guys not choose any other poker room. I mean I can here a lot of players arguing and complaing that there are no promotions from Pokerstrategy on PS. You were attracted by PS and made him so big but at that point you werent think. Now that you made him so big now you swearing on him. Take the concequences.
Originally posted by Sikac
You are people funny,
I mean you are arguing about the monopoly of PS but forgot you made them so big when FT crushed. Most of you guys made the transitions to stars even you know that there is the hardest field to beat. Why did you guys not choose any other poker room. I mean I can here a lot of players arguing and complaing that there are no promotions from Pokerstrategy on PS. You were attracted by PS and made him so big but at that point you werent think. Now that you made him so big now you swearing on him. Take the concequences.
The only funny I see here is that you think we should have joined other small, insecure, high-rake, bot-infested and god knows what else rooms with virtually 0 population and crappy software.
So Stars is actually going to copy as much as they can from FTP now?!
http://www.pokerstars.com/poker/promotions/vip-club-blast-off/
Ring game happy hours... haha!
AMaA: The Good Life
:diamond:Follow me on Twitter @emanuelc16
The Education of a Modern Poker Player by TwiceT, jbpatzer & EmanuelC16
Originally posted by EmanuelC16
So Stars is actually going to copy as much as they can from FTP now?!http://www.pokerstars.com/poker/promotions/vip-club-blast-off/
Ring game happy hours... haha!
Last minute desperation to try and stop sit-out? And for only a month?
It's funny how they think 31 hours of 50% more VPPs in a month can make up for 1 year of 30% less.
Make January Happy Month (not just a few happy hours) and everyone will be pleased to wait for future permanent changes imo.
AMaA: The Good Life
:diamond:Follow me on Twitter @emanuelc16
The Education of a Modern Poker Player by TwiceT, jbpatzer & EmanuelC16
This may be dumb, but it seems like logic to me, (maybe I'm dumb), but would lowering requirements for status levels be a good idea?
Originally posted by bazerk
This may be dumb, but it seems like logic to me, (maybe I'm dumb), but would lowering requirements for status levels be a good idea?
SNG and MTT players are not affected by these rake changes.
They can't mess with requirements.
They can change rake and VPP multipliers/table like some people already suggsested.
AMaA: The Good Life
:diamond:Follow me on Twitter @emanuelc16
The Education of a Modern Poker Player by TwiceT, jbpatzer & EmanuelC16
Oh yea, didn't think of that.
You mean like from 5x - 6x or something.
(I've only really started grinding points for 2 months, so NOOB)
Yes! There's currently a number of VPPs/$ for FR and SH tables... this could be increased...
Here's a link with a lot more info:
AMaA: The Good Life
:diamond:Follow me on Twitter @emanuelc16
The Education of a Modern Poker Player by TwiceT, jbpatzer & EmanuelC16
Thanks dude, I understand alot more now.
I'm 13 hours ahead of EST, so I get a little more 'grind time' in the new year before the changes and sit-out.
It's funny that some of you just don't get it. How can't you? You don't see rake numbers in your HM? They make millions with rake.. We have to pay a lot of money already, just for clicking buttons. And now they want more. It's just not ok. I don't play on Stars but since this Sitout thing got serious.. I'm in.
Originally posted by edismah
It's funny that some of you just don't get it. How can't you? You don't see rake numbers in your HM? They make millions with rake.. We have to pay a lot of money already, just for clicking buttons. And now they want more. It's just not ok. I don't play on Stars but since this Sitout thing got serious.. I'm in.
Is this referring to me?
If it is, I have never worried about how much rake I pay, as my country doesn't have gambling taxes, so for me rake is just tax. Yes it would be good if it was lower, but I feel I have to pay some sort of expense for the service I'm provided with. And I'm at a win rate where I beat rake anyway 
Anyway they're not raising rake anymore, AFAIK, just making it harder to get VPPs.
If your post wasn't aimed at me, please just ignore me dude
Originally posted by Tarhonya
The only funny I see here is that you think we should have joined other small, insecure, high-rake, bot-infested and god knows what else rooms with virtually 0 population and crappy software.
Dear Tarhonya,
I think in some kinda of way you just said that all partner rooms from this forum where you writing(Pokerstrategy) have the above mentioned characteristics and in some sort of way you are accusing that this site offers you sites were you can only be screwed in any sense of the word. Since you only count PokerStars as the one an only site to play after FullTilt which is quite pathetic.
But lets start from the begging. Now ask your self why are playing on Pokerstars. Most of your answers will be he has it has the best software, a lot players, always big promotions, good reward program and so on. But the most important thing is that they have in any criteria simply the highest quality and standards. Why are you arguing if they have capitalism behind that and we all always want to be there were is the best. It is like any other product in this world. I personally play on Pokerstars as well every day almost (monthly around 60 h) but I don t care at all. You know way because I know to appreciate who good they. They are simply the best and we are used to this quality so all other rooms seem a little bit short in some way.
But again what are you saying on Partypoker? Or 888? PKR?Ladbrokes? Everest?PokerHeaven?iPokerNetwork? Are all of this sites are good not so bad as you represent them. This site are all Pokerstrategy sites. They are the "small, insecure, high-rake, bot-infested and god knows what else rooms with virtually 0 population and crappy software". So think about and then write again some better commentary. Think before you act.
Originally posted by Tarhonya
Originally posted by Sikac
You are people funny,
I mean you are arguing about the monopoly of PS but forgot you made them so big when FT crushed. Most of you guys made the transitions to stars even you know that there is the hardest field to beat. Why did you guys not choose any other poker room. I mean I can here a lot of players arguing and complaing that there are no promotions from Pokerstrategy on PS. You were attracted by PS and made him so big but at that point you werent think. Now that you made him so big now you swearing on him. Take the concequences.The only funny I see here is that you think we should have joined other small, insecure, high-rake, bot-infested and god knows what else rooms with virtually 0 population and crappy software.
That's exaggerated.
small:
yeah, other rooms smaller than Stars. but except you are playing >6 table or uncommon game, you can get better choice than Stars (softer competition, ps.com point, ps.com promotion, rakeback, etc)
insecure:
I dont think Stars among 5 most secure sites
high-rake:
Stars rake is low but IMO it doesn't compensate though competition there
bot-infested:
exaggerate
0 population:
LOL.
crappy software:
everyone has own definition about it. For ones who play <6 table, I dont see it as a problem. You'll used to it after 3 days even on Everest (so far the worst software in my experience)
I'm not saying that all rooms have all the negativ preferences I described, but each of them have at least one. And don't twist my words, I didn't bashed on PokerStrategy.
Originally posted by patszerdonk
That's exaggerated.small:
yeah, other rooms smaller than Stars. but except you are playing >6 table or uncommon game, you can get better choice than Stars (softer competition, ps.com point, ps.com promotion, rakeback, etc)
That is one approach, but try playing at night...insecure:
I dont think Stars among 5 most secure sites
mhm, UB data leak, Bodog (not so)anonymus tables, etc?high-rake:
Stars rake is low but IMO it doesn't compensate though competition there
That's debatable, but that's not the point because they do have the lowest rake.
bot-infested:
exaggerate
No, it's not an exageration, look at iPoker.
virtually 0 population:
LOL.crappy software:
everyone has own definition about it. For ones who play <6 table, I dont see it as a problem. You'll used to it after 3 days even on Everest (so far the worst software in my experience)
That's kinda controversial
Sad days for stars multitabling ABC nits (ha ha ha). Well all poker sites now wants to get rid off them as much as possible and will do the best in the future. So got used to it guys