|
|
#212
03-07-2007, 01:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Stars 25-50 Shortstackers
[ QUOTE ]
From a player's perspective (I am a NL player), players who buy in for the minimum are my favorite. They don't have enough money to defend a good hand, and often get all the money in on the flop, meaning that I can call on a draw knowing that the turn card will be free. My strategy has always been to play at tables where I can buy in for the maximum so I am not victimized by the big stacks. Regards, Dan PokerStars Customer Support [/ QUOTE ] What is the opposite of QFT? 
|
|
#214
03-07-2007, 01:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars 25-50 Shortstackers
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] From a player's perspective (I am a NL player), players who buy in for the minimum are my favorite. They don't have enough money to defend a good hand, and often get all the money in on the flop, meaning that I can call on a draw knowing that the turn card will be free. My strategy has always been to play at tables where I can buy in for the maximum so I am not victimized by the big stacks. Regards, Dan PokerStars Customer Support [/ QUOTE ] What is the opposite of QFT? [/ QUOTE ] I hope Dan doesn't quit his day job. I imagine I shouldn't assume someone who works for a poker site has a grasp on fundamental poker theory, but this really surprises me.
|
|
#215
03-07-2007, 04:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars 25-50 Shortstackers
[ QUOTE ]
I believe that, at lower stakes, fish who buy in for the minimum are major donators. The increased variance that truly terrible players experience by playing this way allows them to believe they are strong players for much longer than they would if the min buyin was higher. At the stakes I play, the only remaining true beginners (with rare exceptions) are shortstackers. Even the worst players who buy in for 60+ bbs typically have at least a very basic understanding of the game. These fish who donate hugely to the smaller stakes in effect add money to the higher stakes games as money made trickles up. Therefore, I think raising the min buyin for all stakes may be a bad decision long-term. This is all just speculation, though, and I certainly don't have any data to support what I'm saying. [/ QUOTE ] extremely interesting point that i hadnt thought of yet. this very well may be true [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
|
|
#216
03-07-2007, 11:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars 25-50 Shortstackers
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Something stars(and other sites) should certainly do is to increase the time you have to wait before sitting in with smaller stack then you left with. I doubt this has big impact on their rake(increasing min. buyin might have and thats why they dont do it) income. However it would improve the situation if players would have to wait at least 90mins before comming back. [/ QUOTE ] This is a great point. [/ QUOTE ] I vote 6 hours.
|
|
#217
03-07-2007, 12:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars 25-50 Shortstackers
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I believe that, at lower stakes, fish who buy in for the minimum are major donators. The increased variance that truly terrible players experience by playing this way allows them to believe they are strong players for much longer than they would if the min buyin was higher. At the stakes I play, the only remaining true beginners (with rare exceptions) are shortstackers. Even the worst players who buy in for 60+ bbs typically have at least a very basic understanding of the game. These fish who donate hugely to the smaller stakes in effect add money to the higher stakes games as money made trickles up. Therefore, I think raising the min buyin for all stakes may be a bad decision long-term. This is all just speculation, though, and I certainly don't have any data to support what I'm saying. [/ QUOTE ] extremely interesting point that i hadnt thought of yet. this very well may be true [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I think this a very very good point and argument, lucid and something, like Daut, I had never thought of.
|
|
#218
03-08-2007, 12:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars 25-50 Shortstackers
[ QUOTE ]
All, I shortstacked 25-50 last night against strassa, brad booth, nath, and Layne Flack. It ruled. [/ QUOTE ] lol you sat with layne flack and didn't cover him why not just burn money?
|
|
#219
03-10-2007, 05:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars 25-50 Shortstackers
Stars just needs to add some deep stacked tables. If they spread better than the 20bb tables then they will prosper and the 20bb tables will probably die off slowly. This accomplishes the goal of making the big winning regulars happy and is the only realistic change that can be made at this point considering stars has heard complaints about shortstacking for a long time and has done nothing about it. I think stars wants to keep losing players around for awhile and allowing the 20bb buyin for all stakes probably accomplishes this goal.
My solution: Lower high limit sng rake by 50% and let shortstackers go back to one table donkaments.
|
|
#220
03-10-2007, 06:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars 25-50 Shortstackers
One thing I dont get is situation which often occurs.
3 or 4 2p2'ers are playing along with one unknown (to me) and one or two shortstackers. Why not just all sit out and starts berating shortstackers on the chat. Some cheating accusations would be great too as other ppl may be afraid to play them. Something along the lines : "XXXXX is another shortstacker ABUSING a bug in Stars software thus ROBBING us from money I wont play unless this HACKER using BOTS leaves". If 4-5 ppl at every table do that for a week or two I guess Stars would do somethign about it.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
