1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
 

Hello there, STTS...

We've gotten some feedback recently regarding the structure of our 1-table sit'n'go tournaments, in particular requesting that we do away with antes in the blind structure of these tournaments.

I'd like to read your thoughts on our 1-table sit'n'go structures in general, with particular attention paid to the question regarding antes.

Thank you for taking the time. The floor is yours...

All the best,

Bryan S.
Tournaments Administrator
PokerStars Poker Room Management Team

Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
 

Well it makes the later stages less interesting as there is less money in the pot when you shove so therefore less calculations and less marginal decisions.

We also have enough players stacking up chips and then sitting out early on when multi-tabling. Taking something away from the game.

Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
 

I'm in favor of keeping the antes in the game.

Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
 

I like antes because I think they are favorable to good players. Bad players don't really care about blind structure and antes so you won't win or lose any bad players if you change the structure. Some good players might switch to FTP when you have no more antes.

In general I like Stars structure. I think the problem of PartyPoker's structure is the big step between 100/200 and 200/400. You tried to make this transition easier by adding another round of 100/200 blinds with antes. I like that, but my preference would be a 150/300 level instead of another 100/200. If the antes kick in at 150/300 or at 200/400 should be discussed, but that would help the games run a bit smoother. I notice that many people are getting short when the 200/400 level starts and the game becomes a gamble during that period because even the bad players realize that they have to do something to survive. This leads to a "gambling stage" in my opinion. Which shouldn't be the interest of Pokerstars.

Greets

Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
 

I think antes are a really good thing because they increase the edge of good players in games that are otherwise very tough to beat. Bad players just don't understand how they have to change their play when antes are in. Since the games are already tough and very few people have over 5-10% ROI even at lower levels, getting rid of antes could make alot of winning players just breakeven and they would stop playing. I'm curious what the arguments are in favor of getting rid of antes, because I can't imagine any winning player would support that. If poker as a whole is trying to establish itself as a game of skill and not just luck, then it seems that keeping elements that help distinguish good players from bad players -- such as antes -- would help the cause.

Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
 

Antes are a big reason I play on stars instead of tilt, If you take out antes high probability I lower my stars play considerably, Im not a sng whale or anything but I pay somewhat significant rake atm and 99% of my play is at stars.

Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
 

I would prefer 100/200/25 be changed to 150/300/25 and keep the antes.

Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
 

[ QUOTE ]
I would prefer 100/200/25 be changed to 150/300/25 and keep the antes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I would be fine with some structure changes, Im thinking of alot of different things that COULD be changed depending on what you were going for, but antes are gonna be a huge issue I think with most regs.

beserious people would still be winning just like they do on FTP with no antes, the game just plays different and you have to adjust, personally I just much prefer how the game plays with antes.

Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
 

old party structure

Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
 

[ QUOTE ]
old party structure

[/ QUOTE ]

and fix the rake in the turbos so the percentage decreases as stakes increase. Ideally the rake for SNGs should be capped at like $5 but I don't think you'll go for that.