The petition to PokerStars to raise the min buy-in

[CharlieDontSurf]

Stars should just add some deep tables.

They aint going to mess with the minimum buy-in
Hell they won't even show the cards on an all-in

[MyTurn2Raise]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Minimum Buyin: 40 BB

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

this is the happy medium IMO
it still allows for under-rolled 'shot-taking'
but, it eliminates the short-stack artists that hurt games

FWIW, Absolute has a min buyin of 40BBs
I'm surprised it isn't the industry standard.

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
"OH NO I CANT ADJUST WAT DO I DO"

Leave it at 20BB so the fish can play high stakes ty.


[/ QUOTE ]

You're missing the point.

Adjusting involves the whole table having to tighten up when several shortstackers are in the game.

The games suffer as a result.

[1p0kerboy]

The reason deep stack players don't like short-stack players is because they completely change the dynamics of the table.

I honestly don't mind the casual fish who wants to buy-in cheap and splash around a bit. The reason is not because I make money from these players, but moreso because I don't have to change my strategy because of them.

One aspect of deep-stack no-limit is start building a pot before the flop with hands that extract well after the flop, such as small pairs and suited connectors. But when there are several short-stackers at the table, we obviously can't do this anymore because this is the portion of the strategy they are exploting. The implied odds are gone, and the fact that a shortie is gonna push with a wider range of hands than they usually would causes the loose players to tighten up.

Do you see what is happening here? Essentially the short-stackers are ruining the games because they make a tight preflop strategy right and then we have a nit-fest.

I don't see what would be so terribly wrong with raising the min buy-in to 35-40BB or so. If someone wants to splash around with 20 bucks, let him do so at .25/.50.

No-limit is a game of implied odds. The increasing number of ratholers is hurting the game.

[I dunno]

[ QUOTE ]
The concept of defaulting buyin to 100bb's has very few if any advantages for the site itself.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is this exactly? Is it really just a matter of people going bust too quickly and nothing else?

[action44]

This is a terrible idea. I like to shortstack and bigstack poker. It should be an option totally up to the player. If you taylor the games exactlly the way one group wants it what do you think that does to the other groups? If Pokerstars does this they prolly wont lose my play but I would be greatly disappointed. You need to learn to adapt (hmm another funny idea)

[Mr_Donktastic]

I think HUDs and 12 tabling nits are hurting the game...lets ban them too!

(Oh noooo but then what would p0kerboy do for money?!?!?!?!)

When I'm playing deep I hate having more than a few good ss'ers at my table for the reasons you listed, which are absolutely correct. But imo you just have to suck it up and deal with it. Shortstacking is part of NLHE. There is no reason to think that NLHE is a game that should ONLY be played deep. Sure that is how most of us like to play, but there is no reason to infringe on other people's right to play short just so we can be happier and presumably make more money.

[MyTurn2Raise]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a terrible idea. I like to shortstack and bigstack poker. It should be an option totally up to the player. If you taylor the games exactlly the way one group wants it what do you think that does to the other groups? If Pokerstars does this they prolly wont lose my play but I would be greatly disappointed. You need to learn to adapt (hmm another funny idea)

[/ QUOTE ]

however, they would make a large amount of their player base happy.

Plus, i think the biggest thing for all sites is to entice the fish.

The fish do not like small pots and folding fests.

The fish like big pots and action baby.

[MicroBob]

I really don't even care if they raise the min buyin even though I am one of those who occasionally fools around with this short-stacking stuff.
Good luck in your quest though I suppose even though I think it's an over-reaction.

I would like them to make it so that the customer can choose his own default buyin though.
That way I don't have to always be typing over the $60 in the buyin box with my preferred buyin of $20!!

[action44]

I respect you and your opinion. I love reading some of your posts in the other forums, but I disagree. We as players look for large pot tables and what not. But a true fish makes a table a large pot table. I understand about shortstackers it kinda sucks but theres alot more and harder things to adjust too than this? I think it would just discourage the fish to play higher where they arent as skilled. Most people that play a shortstack play it wrong right?

This might be a question for another thread... but do you think if there were tables for max buy in only the avgpots or avg flop would be higher? I would think no but i have no hard evidence. What about you?