Stars VIP Wild speculation

[Tenacious A]

One of my 2008 New Year’s Resolutions is going to be to pay a lot more rake to Stars. But, in order to do that I need to be able to play more than 12 cash game tables at a time. I’ve read posts stating that Full Tilt has given certain players the ability to play more than the normal max of 12. Would it be possible for Stars to give us the opportunity to play up to 20 tables? I am very interested in paying 75% more rake…come on Stars, it’ll be funny.

One software upgrade that would dramatically speed up multi-tabling and make it fairly easy to 20-table would be to fix the auto-rebuy feature to give players the option to update their stack after every hand to the max buy-in without having to click any buttons. Short stackers and guys who don’t care wouldn’t have to opt in, but it would speed things up considerably for those of us who want to have a full stack at all times. It’s so frustrating to have to click 4 buttons in order to top off my stack while I have pending action at several other tables. The same is true for when you first sit down at a cash table. I’d like to have the option of an auto max buy-in without having to click through a series of oks.

As a cash game player, I don’t really like committing a few hours every Saturday (okay, truthfully it’s more like a few minutes) playing in the Supernova freeroll. I would welcome the ability to do an extra $100 bonus each month as Scottyy suggested. The drawing/showdown tournament ideas also would be better from a time committment perspective. Or what if players had the option of working off a $100 bonus every month or getting a must play ticket to one $215 Sunday Million every other month?

If the VIP tournies remain I’d like to see the satellites taken away that allow Gold and Platinum the opportunity to satellite into the Supernova freeroll. The $200k per month that is earmarked for the Supernova freeroll is great, but it’s not as great a benefit to Supernovas if Golds and Platinums are eating up chunks of the prize pool every week. I’d prefer the freerolls to be bigger and be once a month, perhaps on the same day as the monthly $100k freeroll. If the current monthly $200k Supernova freeroll money was divided into a $100k monthly freeroll open to Supernovas only and the other $100k was somehow divided up via bonuses or other options more suitable for cash and SNG players I think that would be awesome.

If I make a run at Elite next year, I can see the run between 500k and 1M VPPs being pretty painful and I've seen several posts in this thread about this. It would be nice to see the milestone bonuses restructured so that bonuses are added for every 100k hands between 500k and 1M. I’d be fine with Stars increasing the playthrough for the bonuses slightly to help pay for added bonuses.

[TheProdigy]

Also;

I obviously wouldn't mind the 750k Level, but I think maybe for the sake of the regular player(I think there are more of these types of players than players hitting 750k), maybe the differences should be set in the middle of 100,000 and 1mill.

I mean the Supernova+ would be nice for me and 100 others, but would stars make more if they made something at 550k VPP's? As of now the new level would create a level at 100k, then 650k more for the next level, then only 250k more for Elite.

I think Stars would be more inclined to try and make players who would normally play for 100k go for 550k than making players who would normally go for 500k go for 750k.

I think the reasoning is obvious, but to respell it out for Stars itself:

Let's say 2x more players would be willing to get to 550k than 750k(I could be one of those based on work ethic, so this would also include a strong population of your .5/1,1/2, and 2/4 players):

So basically if you keep it the same or change it to 750k, maybe 100 players decide that they will go for 750k instead of the 500k goal, or if you change it to 550k for a whole new level, then maybe you get 200 or 300 of the mid-stakes players who spread their play out to play exclusively at stars to get the 550k(thus gaining 450k VPP's worth of rake from each one of these players who would only get 100k otherwise)


This is just an idea and may have holes in it, but I feel maybe the midstakes players who don't play much Stars would be more enticed by 550k than they would by 750k, as that is the difference of ~4months of work for them to get 200k extra VPP and many may not want to do that, but many would be willing to get 550k.

Also, I think if I play 100k hands a month when I played 1/2 I got like 60k VPP. This may be off in calcs but please correct me if I am wrong. That means all but a couple of your .5/1 and 1/2 players would not be able to make 750k VPP's even if they somehow maintained 100k hands per month. This may deter them from even bothering to put extra play in Stars when they know they can't get to the next level.


What does everyone think of this idea? It would be more lenient towards .5/1,1/2, and 2/4 grinders, which has to make up a large portion of Pokerstars rake and seems like that would appeal most to them(and be most profitable to Stars and those grinders as well).

[Mike Kelley]

[ QUOTE ]
I like the drawing idea in lue of the freerolls.

[/ QUOTE ]

[1p0kerboy]

Honestly Prodigy?

Reaching the 500k level is already rewarding. As shown in my tournament simulation, these players are getting more rewards %wise than anybody else except Elites; even those that are playing more than them.

I think the milestone bonuses are set up to motivate players to reach 500k. There is $11,000 at that point.

The problem is no carrots from 500k-1million other than the $6750 milestone at 750k.

[Mike Kelley]

[ QUOTE ]

One software upgrade that would dramatically speed up multi-tabling and make it fairly easy to 20-table would be to fix the auto-rebuy feature to give players the option to update their stack after every hand to the max buy-in without having to click any buttons. Short stackers and guys who don’t care wouldn’t have to opt in, but it would speed things up considerably for those of us who want to have a full stack at all times. It’s so frustrating to have to click 4 buttons in order to top off my stack while I have pending action at several other tables. The same is true for when you first sit down at a cash table. I’d like to have the option of an auto max buy-in without having to click through a series of oks.



[/ QUOTE ]


There is an AHK script in the software forum that automatically rebuys to 100bb's for you. It works for me. I 9 table though.

[1p0kerboy]

Look at it from this perspective too:

TOTAL MILESTONE VALUE IN $

<font color="green">200,000 - 500,000 VPP: $11,000 </font>
<font color="red">500,000 - 999,999 VPP: $6,750 </font>

You tell me who's making out with this deal.

[TheProdigy]

Yea maybe you are right.

I'm just wondering how many 100nl/200nl players would put all their play on stars if they knew there was a FPP% bonus at 550k or so. I know a couple at least personally that I talk to on AIM that switch between sites because of them thinking that they can't get to any new levels.


The main thing is I am trying to think of 100nl players here. I mean it is nearly just impossible to get 750k vpp's at that level or 200nl. There are A LOT of players at these levels. If they knew they could get 400% or whatever for the whole next year, then I think they would be more inclined to get and keep this level for years and years. I know next year if I split things up when playing 2/4 and the only level is 750k I won't worry about getting it. I might get it, but if there are better games on other sites I would worry about that first because it would even be hard for a 2/4 player to achieve. I wouldn't even try it at 1/2 at all. But if I played 1/2 I would definitely dedicate all my play if I knew there was a level I could keep 400% FPP that was attainable.


Basically I am saying it would be worth so much more for your .5/1,1/2 grinders if they could get the 400% FPP at a stage that is actually attainable for all but 2 or 3 of them. In the mind of a grinder at 1/2 or lower that tries to play for a living, I most definitely would table select at other sites before trying to get 500k VPP just for a one-off 5,000 bonus. Throughout a whole year I am sure the table selection would make me more. If I got more fpp, on the other hand, for infinity(as long as I kept meeting the standards each month for the next years), then Stars would keep my play every year.


Does this make sense? I understand your idea may be quite a bit better, but I am just throwing this out because it is geared towards the 95% of 100nl and 200nl players that cannot get 750k and might just give up and split their play equally instead of trying to even get 500k.

[TheProdigy]

To the last post:

Yes I agree anyone getting to 500k is getting a good deal. But I am speaking on behalf of those grinders who split up their play. I mean Stars can do the calculations to see the benefits of each, but I was saying, in simple terms:

550k Level: Stars earns 200 more players who normally wouldn't want a one-off $5,000 bonus so they split their play, and with the new level they go for it instead. Stars gets 450k VPP's from each of these players.

750k Level: Stars earns xxx more players that normally stop at 500k VPP. They get 250k VPP per player they add to their normal amount that stop at 500k. They get almost 0 players that normally stop at 100k to try for 750k


I think I may regret introducing this idea if it turns out to be a good one because it probably actually adversely affects me, but I think it would be a really good idea for the normal .5/1-1/2 grinder.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Look at it from this perspective too:

TOTAL MILESTONE VALUE IN $

<font color="green">200,000 - 500,000 VPP: $11,000 </font>
<font color="red">500,000 - 999,999 VPP: $6,750 </font>

You tell me who's making out with this deal.

[/ QUOTE ]
Seems to me that's exactly how it should be. It just looks bad because it ignores the megavalue for hitting the million. If the rewards are made too linear then the incentive to push ourselves to play more than is comfortable is removed.

A couple of people have called Stars stingy. having played high volume at several sites I hate that. There may be bits we don't like but that's kinda inevitable and at least they try. The rewards are far from stingy, way way better than other sites and unlike most places they have to pay for support staff. Also the rewards are for everyone not just those who negotiate hard or have rakeback deals.

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look at it from this perspective too:

TOTAL MILESTONE VALUE IN $

<font color="green">200,000 - 500,000 VPP: $11,000 </font>
<font color="red">500,000 - 999,999 VPP: $6,750 </font>

You tell me who's making out with this deal.

[/ QUOTE ]
Seems to me that's exactly how it should be. It just looks bad because it ignores the megavalue for hitting the million. If the rewards are made too linear then the incentive to push ourselves to play more than is comfortable is removed.

A couple of people have called Stars stingy. having played high volume at several sites I hate that. There may be bits we don't like but that's kinda inevitable and at least they try. The rewards are far from stingy, way way better than other sites and unlike most places they have to pay for support staff. Also the rewards are for everyone not just those who negotiate hard or have rakeback deals.

[/ QUOTE ]

I certainly don't think Stars is stingy.

So Stars has a bunch of players looking for reasons to play past 500k. They don't have one, so they don't play.

And you're saying that's how it should be?

It doesn't have to necessarily be linear. A don't mind a nice jump at the end for the Elites. But why take a drop in the middle?