New PokerStars Data Policy

[Ontario_Tory]

[ QUOTE ]

Any Service Operator found to be in violation of these rules risks having their access to PokerStars’ game client restricted and/or the service impeded, including but not limited to the warning of players who access the Service while the PokerStars client is open.

so how is pokerstars going to stop the people at sharkscope if they dont comply?

[/ QUOTE ]

By restricting their access to the client, or by warning players who access the service while the client is open. Very much like the warning you'd get if you were running 'illegal' software.

[pshady]

why protect the fish there are millions of fishes born everyday... the fish always has the choice to block the chat if he's getting berated, i doubt any decent player would do that maybe guys just breaking even

[BrandiFan]

[ QUOTE ]
why protect the fish there are millions of fishes born everyday... the fish always has the choice to block the chat if he's getting berated, i doubt any decent player would do that maybe guys just breaking even

[/ QUOTE ]Spoken like someone who hates money. Feel free to read the thread before posting, this has been addressed several times already.

[Deuce2High]

[censored] POKERSTARSFUCK POKERSTARSFUCK POKERSTARSFUCK POKERSTARSFUCK POKERSTARSFUCK POKERSTARSFUCK POKERSTARSFUCK POKERSTARSFUCK POKERSTARSFUCK POKERSTARSFUCK POKERSTARSFUCK POKERSTARSFUCK POKERSTARSFUCK POKERSTARSFUCK POKERSTARS

dear pokerstars,

your site is [censored] retarded go die thanks

[Albert Silver]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ah. On another note, why does Stars care about people's stats being displayed? I never hear players complaining about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I recall from a couple weeks ago lee jones wrote an article trying to explain why anonymity is good for online poker. He talked about having screennames change every session and completely cutting out online rankings systems so people quit berating the fish. If someone has a linky for those who care to read the article this is where you step in.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.biggerdeal.com/2007/06/26...-online-poker/

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the link. Boy, what a stupid article. I think he has no idea what he is talking about frankly.

The article basically states that the fish population is at stake, because the population of sharks has grown significantly proportionate to the fish, and also that this is largely because of these online SNG databases.

Since the proportion of actual fish at the higher stakes must logically be lower the higher the stakes, this must be about the lower stakes SNGs, which are also where the vast majority of the SNG players are. Namely the $3.40/$6.50/$16/$27 tables. Actually, only the $16/$27 tables when you think about it. I mean, how many 'sharks' do you think spend their time 'operating the three-forties'... No comment. How about the $6.50s? Tough to make money on them even with a will. I'm not talking about beating them, I mean making money that goes beyond recreational pocket cash. Players who beat them heavily usually quickly move up, and it is hard to imagine deriving any kind of significant benefit at these tables by consulting Sharkscope. Again, basic common sense shows how absurd that would be (no offense to Sharkscope or other DBs). ex: "Yeah, I am able to increase me profitability at the 6.50s by massively consulting Sharkscope and seeing who the fish are (99%)". If that sounded silly, it's because it is.

So this measure must be to protect the number of fish at the 16s and 27s who are shrinking at an alarming rate. Supposedly. And supposedly in great part due to the dastardly SNG-result online databases.

So, has access to these databases really made it easier to earn money by singling out the fish via consultation of their results? I think not. In fact, I must admit I find it really hard to believe that any of the winners add notes to every fish they meet. They might do it for the winners, to know who the fellow sharks are, but add notes for all the fish? At low-stakes SNGs? To what end? It is one thing to avoid a table with 3 known sharks already registered, but exactly how is my edge supposed to increase because I know that the guy next to me has a -5% ROI? Sure, I may have playing data on him/her thanks to PokerOffice, but how would my play change because of info I had on their ROI??

If there are indeed more sharks than before, I would think it was closely linked to the whole Online Gambling Law fiasco, which crippled numerous sites (Party being the foremost). The sharks obviously migrated, whereas a large number of fish did not as the difficulty of depositing has indeed become onerous.

It wouldn't occur to me to blame Sharkscope et al. for this though. I think this decision by PokerStars, if influenced by Lee Jones' article, is very poorly thought through.

Albert

[BrandiFan]

Most online poker players are not profitable. Therefore pokerstars customers are mostly not profitable. Pokerstars wants its customers to be happy and comfortable. They think the extra privacy will help accomplish this. Very simple and straightforward business decision.

[Albert Silver]

I missed the part where you explained how this was going to make them happy and comfortable.

[BrandiFan]

[ QUOTE ]
I missed the part where you explained how this was going to make them happy and comfortable.

[/ QUOTE ]A stars rep said it a few pages back, people have complained to stars support about the fact that people can find out how much money they have lost. Some people just want to gamble and don't even want to know how much they're down. I love these people and I want everything possible done to see that they keep playing poker on pokerstars.

[mbpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
I think this decision by PokerStars, if influenced by Lee Jones' article, is very poorly thought through.


[/ QUOTE ]

Stars rep posted here explaining the policy and it apparently had nothing to do with Lee's article.

[BadgerPro]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd love a world where I could e-mail PT and say "xxxxxxxxx is on PS/FT/Whatever and is telling everyone at the table their PFR% and how much they've lost in the last 30 days and here's the chat. Then 30 minutes later, boom, his PAHUD goes blank and his PT clears.

[/ QUOTE ]
This would be fun. Infact, if it was just "if you berate the fish, you lose your pahud serial", I'd love it. Sadly, I doubt it makes much business sense for the pahud guys...

[/ QUOTE ]

I got berated yesterday by a fish who was obviously running PT and made fun of me for being a "pro" and down a buyin over 200 hands. I cried myself to sleep later that night.