I even won a $5.50 ticket
Then I went to the lobby and I filtered out all the Hold'em, leaving only the Stud, Draw and Mixed games, with the Omaha Hi/Lo games.
Here is what's left — sixteen tournaments:
Leaving 184 Hold'em and Omaha hi-only tournaments.
Makes ya wanna gag.
I will of course play some of the hold'em tournaments. If I can cash in one in three 888 freerolls, I should be able to at least cash in some low-stakes ones.
Originally posted by taavi1337
what is disappointing about this search? the low number of results?
No — the extremely low number of non-mainstream games.
I play almost exclusively games that aren't Hold'em or Omaha (except for Omaha hi/lo split)
The events series were once a good source of tournaments with decent stakes
Originally posted by taavi1337
i couldn't have known the history of tournaments on pokerstars ♦
well, MicroMillions starts tomorrow.
I'll play what I can, and include some Hold'em as well
Originally posted by VorpalF2F
Originally posted by taavi1337
i couldn't have known the history of tournaments on pokerstars ♦well, MicroMillions starts tomorrow.
I'll play what I can, and include some Hold'em as well
16 weird games not enough? you want to play more? actually 15, because 1 is hold'em/plo even ...
You avoid hold'em and instead you choose to play these weird games where you have to avoid making anything ... that sounds easy 
I would be better at a game like that probably
I said it before, the main strength of Pokerstars compared to other rooms is the large amount of non-Hold'em/Omaha games as well as their good traffic. The combination of these two things is especially important, as most other rooms who are brave enough to offer these games tend to have close to non-existent traffic, making these tables pointless.
What surprises me about this selection of MM events is that it only includes one PLO8 tournament, which I thought would have been a somewhat "mainstream" format. No Courchevel at all either, but instead 6-Card PLO? I assume you made sure that your filters are set up correctly.
Sometimes I still dream of the day when Pokerstars would add Badeucy, Drawmaha, OFC and maybe Crazy Pineapple, but that's a long shot to say the least. Drawmaha at least, maybe? Please? 
Originally posted by Stackoffski
16 weird games not enough? you want to play more? actually 15, because 1 is hold'em/plo even ...You avoid hold'em and instead you choose to play these weird games where you have to avoid making anything ... that sounds easy
Those "weird games" include Five Card Draw, which is arguably the original version of poker itself, as well as Stud, which was for a long time considered the most popular version, before Hold'em was even conceived of, let alone before it became widespread.
As for expecting to be better in games where you aren't supposed to hit anything, which I get was meant as a joke... you wouldn't believe how easy it suddenly is to hit a straight draw in 2-7 lowball games where they count against you. Vorpal used to run a "gutshots hits" counter when he was streaming his lowball games.
Originally posted by VorpalF2F
I will of course play some of the hold'em tournaments.
Awww, getting that desperate already? 
Originally posted by Harrier88
As for expecting to be better in games where you aren't supposed to hit anything, which I get was meant as a joke... you wouldn't believe how easy it suddenly is to hit a straight draw in 2-7 lowball games where they count against you.
The odds are 11:1 against hitting gutshots in draw poker. I did far, far better than that when I didn't want to hit.
I wish I had kept track long-term.
Originally posted by Harrier88
Originally posted by VorpalF2F
I will of course play some of the hold'em tournaments.Awww, getting that desperate already?
No — the idea is that if I can cash so often in 888 freerolls, perhaps I can hold my own in low-stakes hold'em tournaments
Originally posted by VorpalF2F
Originally posted by taavi1337
i couldn't have known the history of tournaments on pokerstars ♦well, MicroMillions starts tomorrow.
I'll play what I can, and include some Hold'em as well
Yes and please come back and describe the players to me with great accuracy.
Originally posted by Harrier88
What surprises me about this selection of MM events is that it only includes one PLO8 tournament, which I thought would have been a somewhat "mainstream" format. No Courchevel at all either, but instead 6-Card PLO? I assume you made sure that your filters are set up correctly.
6-card PLO is the top 4 most played game on the site. It is more popular than any of the other games in the list Vorpal posted. Don't you think it would be weird to skip it instead of Courchevel?
Originally posted by ColorFlusher
6-card PLO is the top 4 most played game on the site. It is more popular than any of the other games in the list Vorpal posted. Don't you think it would be weird to skip it instead of Courchevel?
Even more popular than 5-card PLO, and PLO8? I'm surprised to hear that, but I don't have the data, so I can only take your word for it. I thought that Courchevel at least had a few more MTTs running each day compared to 6-card PLO. Courchevel Hi-Lo even had somewhat acceptable SNG traffic, while I'm not aware of any 6-card PLO SNGs even existing. I have no idea about cash games, of course.
Yep you could argue that hi/lo games are more popular than 6-card plo based on MTT's but the cash games for them are completely dead. On MTT's people tend to play what is offered whereas on cash people play the game they want to. They never added any 6-card MTT's over $5 to the mix so it's though to make a fair comparison. But yeah I agree with you it's weird there isn't more plo8 micromillions.
Originally posted by ColorFlusher
Yep you could argue that hi/lo games are more popular than 6-card plo based on MTT's but the cash games for them are completely dead.
For a good reason, too. Rake can be a real problem in split-pot cash games. Maybe some people have figured out a way to use exactly those kinds of dynamics to their advantage in cash games, but for me, those were always pure tournament games. I feel the same about non-hi/lo split pot games like Badeucy and Drawmaha, which I both mentioned. They all seem much more enjoyable in a tournament form, but good luck getting any tourneys going anywhere if the game is not on Stars.
Mixed games like HORSE and 8-Game are even more of a pure tournament game, as far as I'm concerned. I'm aware that there are cash games out there, but the very idea of it just seems wrong. The whole point of cash games is that you can enter and leave whenever you want, and I feel that this simply clashes with the concept of forced game rotations.
Regarding Courchevel vs 6-card PLO MTTs, it should also be pointed out that Courchevel is offered in more formats on Pokerstars than 6-card Omaha, which seems to be strictly PL in the line-up. Courchevel, meanwhile, has NL hi-only, NL hi/lo and PL hi/lo, so there is simply more stuff adding up.
Originally posted by Harrier88
For a good reason, too. Rake can be a real problem in split-pot cash games. Maybe some people have figured out a way to use exactly those kinds of dynamics to their advantage in cash games, but for me, those were always pure tournament games. I feel the same about non-hi/lo split pot games like Badeucy and Drawmaha, which I both mentioned. They all seem much more enjoyable in a tournament form, but good luck getting any tourneys going anywhere if the game is not on Stars.
Good point about the rake. I even used to play hi/lo cash few years ago and I came to the same conclusion. In a typical poker game there is a lot of winners and obciously even more losers. But that was not the case on hi/lo games. Out of 42 villains with 5k+ hand sample I played the most against guess how many had a positive winrate?
3
And I only had an okayish winrate of 6bb/100 myself so it wasn't me crushing the field -- the rake was. That was also the reason I decided to play something else. There just wasn't any way to improve further after certain limit. As a tournament I still sometimes play hi/lo 
Originally posted by Harrier88
For a good reason, too. Rake can be a real problem in split-pot cash games. Maybe some people have figured out a way to use exactly those kinds of dynamics to their advantage in cash games, but for me, those were always pure tournament games. I feel the same about non-hi/lo split pot games like Badeucy and Drawmaha, which I both mentioned. They all seem much more enjoyable in a tournament form, but good luck getting any tourneys going anywhere if the game is not on Stars..
A very good point, and that is exactly why I play the split pot cash games.
Let's assume that you're playing pots that have nut potential for both the high and low sides. Let's further assume that you don't chase weak draws postflop[1] . If that is the case, you can very easily hit the rake targets for promotions.
For example, PokerStars currently has a pirate promotion. you get a chest for your first $3.00 in rake. In split-pot games your risk is far less, since 60% of hands have a low side.
Here is the graph from yesterday — 38 hands of PLO8 25 the very small ups and downs are split pots, yet they pay off handsomely in accumulated rake points. The big jumps are scoops where a player (in this case me :f_biggrin:) wins both high and low sides.
I want to create a stat "dollars won per dollar rake"
I haven't figured out how yet, but I am guessing it will be much higher for split pot games.
In the above session, it would have been 15.6
[1] Even assuming you are playing good hands wisely, things can still go horribly wrong. It may be my perception, but it seems to happen far less often in split pot games.
