Stars VIP Wild speculation

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
Most of the discussion thus far has centered around what people personally would benefit the most from. Everyone wants to declare themselves and others with similar playing habits as more "valuable" to Stars than any other type of player.

Since Stars already gives the best rewards of any site to its high-volume players, I don't see why more people can't just swallow their pride and allow Stars to reward some lower-volume fish. Tailoring the VIP program even more towards high-volume players isn't going to help the fish count at Stars very much, which should be a major concern to all of us

[/ QUOTE ]

Well said.

I will gladly continue to give Poker Stars my 500,000 VPP under the current setup and it would be great if they bring more recreational players in. Then with the rest of my play I can take advantage of some of the other promotions that are being offered by other rooms such as rakeback, Full Tilt's Iron Man promo along with their Aussie Millions promo, Cake Poker's Gold Card promo, amongst all the others. And I'll get the best table selection at multiple sites.

I'm cool with being capped at 500k value-wise.

[Henry17]

I would play in the off peak hours if I got something extra. I'm a limit player and there is a 4 hour period with hardly any tables going.

I'm all for the <200k getting some benefits. Just no communal benefits.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Since Stars already gives the best rewards of any site to its high-volume players, I don't see why more people can't just swallow their pride and allow Stars to reward some lower-volume fish. Tailoring the VIP program even more towards high-volume players isn't going to help the fish count at Stars very much, which should be a major concern to all of us


[/ QUOTE ]
That's my view as well but a lot of the ideas don't violate that principle and most are looking for win-win.

Stuff like extra points for non-peak times might be good for everyone. How many new non-usa players consider Stars see few games running and go somewhere else. I've no idea but that's the reason why extra points sounds like a good idea. I know I sometimes dont play because there's so few games going.

Also rejigging the high volume bonuses whilst paying out the same amount shouldn't matter to the low volume players at all.

but its why I'm not sure the freerolls should be abolished even though they have little value to me. They should be kept if they attract/encourage new players - don't know if they do.

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't read many posts

[/ QUOTE ]

That's pretty obvious because

[ QUOTE ]
People who get to 500k vpp are likely not going to quit playing at stars because their $/fpp decreases.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wrong. In fact, many players have already come on here and said that they are "timing" their play on Stars to hit the 500k mark and not much more than that.

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
okay, now i'm curious which of those 3 you don't think is very good. I don't look forward to any of those 3 players at my table.

[/ QUOTE ]
maybe its 2 of us 3 he doesn't think is any good.

BTW love the extra points for playng at of-peak times idea.

[/ QUOTE ]


sethy says he's been running badly the last 75k hands or so and you tend to play a bit tighter I think.
I'm doubting he finds much of marchinvest's play to be very exploitable so I'm kind of curious if he was referring to you or sethy.
I don't think he meant that onlinepro should consider his own presence when sitting down at a table with only two good players. It seemed to me that it was definitely a jab at one of you. But I'm just not sure WHICH one.

As I said, I don't think I share his views as I pretty much don't look forward to any of you guys at my table. And if all 3 of you are at the same table then there's no way I'm sitting down unless the one open-seat happened to have position on my favorite 85/40 fish or something ridiculous like that.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
okay, now i'm curious which of those 3 you don't think is very good. I don't look forward to any of those 3 players at my table.

[/ QUOTE ]
maybe its 2 of us 3 he doesn't think is any good.

BTW love the extra points for playng at of-peak times idea.

[/ QUOTE ]


sethy says he's been running badly the last 75k hands or so and you tend to play a bit tighter I think.
I'm doubting he finds much of marchinvest's play to be very exploitable so I'm kind of curious if he was referring to you or sethy.
I don't think he meant that onlinepro should consider his own presence when sitting down at a table with only two good players. It seemed to me that it was definitely a jab at one of you. But I'm just not sure WHICH one.

As I said, I don't think I share his views as I pretty much don't look forward to any of you guys at my table. And if all 3 of you are at the same table then there's no way I'm sitting down unless the one open-seat happened to have position on my favorite 85/40 fish or something ridiculous like that.

[/ QUOTE ]
Interesting. I'd put sethy least likely and probably vote for myself as worst.

until Alobar sits down [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[OnlinePro]

You guys all misread my post. I said at any time those 3 are at the table and I sit down that makes it 4 pros. I took a jab at myself saying that they all look forward to playing against me.

In my mind they are all mediocre players, I dont think anyone is that great in the 5-10 to 10-20 level. ALthough collectively those are the tougest games to beat because so many regulars play those games. There are seriously so few fish at those games.

I dont find playing against any of the regulars to be profitable. I dont like searching for 1% edge in a tight ass game at stars where I can find much larger edges at many other sites.


I want stars to implement some huge bonuses for the much higher levels like

2 million 3 million and 5 million. And not this BS 10k bonuses, there should be another multiplier and something huge. I want to lose over 100k on stars next year but they have to make it worth my while

[boc4life]

[ QUOTE ]
That's my view as well but a lot of the ideas don't violate that principle and most are looking for win-win.

Also rejigging the high volume bonuses whilst paying out the same amount shouldn't matter to the low volume players at all.

but its why I'm not sure the freerolls should be abolished even though they have little value to me. They should be kept if they attract/encourage new players - don't know if they do.

[/ QUOTE ]

The freerolls were basically the basis for my comment. I don't play them regularly, and I don't really care to. However, if they're keeping lower-volume, and presumably lower-skilled, when viewing the group as a whole, VIPs happy, then I am all for them.

For the same reasons, I would be fine with something like the proposed lottery (Fish love lottos), or something similar to that (The showdown tournament idea was pretty intriguing)

Fixing up the incentives to keep people playing between 500k and 1m VPPs seems like a no-brainer as well. It's probably wise for Stars to make the last bonus somewhere in the range of 750k-800k VPP range though, for reasons previously stated in this thread.

The VIP program doesn't need an overhaul, it just needs some fine-tuning

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
The VIP program doesn't need an overhaul, it just needs some fine-tuning

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] the VIP program.

[MicroBob]

op - nobody misread your post. We understood your meaning.

Did you not see alobar's post. That's what we're responding to.
alobar quoted you and then said, "sitting at a table with only two players. sounds like a good table."
So we assume that out of the 3 that you named Alobar specifically doesn't have a lot of respect for the skill of one of those players.

It's really not as good if you have to explain the whole thing.
Actually, it wasn't that great regardless...but whatever.