![]() |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] All this [censored] about stars losing tons of rake if shortstacking was eliminated is simply incorrect. Shortstackers PAY a lot of rake but they don't GENERATE a lot of rake. In general, shortstackers don't start games or keep them going, they join games that are already running and quit if they get short. Remove shortstacking and roughly the same number of games will run, IMO. [/ QUOTE ] shortstackers keep the games running longer. the fish lose their money slower. [/ QUOTE ] not much longer, though. how much would you say people tighten up with your presence? not much imo |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
not much longer, though. how much would you say people tighten up with your presence? not much imo [/ QUOTE ] they tighten up a lot, but that's not the only factor. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Shortstackers (and whoever),
I don't know about you but I don't see poker as just a business. I started playing poker because it was fun, not because I saw dollar signs ahead of me. Even now, the money is nice, but definitely not my main motivation for playing. I play for the feeling I get from competition and the fulfillment I get from improving my game and trying to become one of the best. Do you really want to turn poker into some regular 9-5 grind? With the direction it's going I'm very happy with my decision to keep going to college and get a degree. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Stinger:
I am rather surprised at this attitude. Not because it's wrong, but that I thought this attitude had been totally debunked around here. Shortstackers obviously get the least enjoyment out of the game - but they've already assumed that everyone else views the game as a horrible, methodical grind. FWIW, I think most of MSNL sees the game this way. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Shortstackers (and whoever), I don't know about you but I don't see poker as just a business. I started playing poker because it was fun, not because I saw dollar signs ahead of me. Even now, the money is nice, but definitely not my main motivation for playing. I play for the feeling I get from competition and the fulfillment I get from improving my game and trying to become one of the best. Do you really want to turn poker into some regular 9-5 grind? With the direction it's going I'm very happy with my decision to keep going to college and get a degree. [/ QUOTE ] poker's fun and all but if it weren't for the money (and the high level of competition that comes with it) it wouldn't be any more appealing than many many other games. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Shortstackers (and whoever), I don't know about you but I don't see poker as just a business. I started playing poker because it was fun, not because I saw dollar signs ahead of me. Even now, the money is nice, but definitely not my main motivation for playing. I play for the feeling I get from competition and the fulfillment I get from improving my game and trying to become one of the best. Do you really want to turn poker into some regular 9-5 grind? With the direction it's going I'm very happy with my decision to keep going to college and get a degree. [/ QUOTE ] i used to play for the same reasons, but i don't have time to play and study poker for fun anymore. the bills need to get paid though. tuition ain't cheap in america. the last thing i want to do is turn it into a 9-5 grind. that's why i'm in school. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Shortstackers (and whoever), I don't know about you but I don't see poker as just a business. I started playing poker because it was fun, not because I saw dollar signs ahead of me. Even now, the money is nice, but definitely not my main motivation for playing. I play for the feeling I get from competition and the fulfillment I get from improving my game and trying to become one of the best. Do you really want to turn poker into some regular 9-5 grind? With the direction it's going I'm very happy with my decision to keep going to college and get a degree. [/ QUOTE ] I think your attitude is the vast minority tbh. Not that it is bad, just that money warps things too much. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Stinkypete,
I think that your points are pretty valid up to about 2/4 or so on Pokerstars. Above that level, the majority of players who buy in for less than 50bbs are ratholers, and not fish. The traditional "fish" barely even exists at 10/20+ imo. So the raised min buyin at higher stakes would attract the best kind of people for the HSNL economy: the bad regulars who won't play vs/blame their losses on ratholers. The kinds of players who have outside sources of income, play a lot of poker, and play stakes that are over their heads are much more valuable than random fish who buy in for a few thousand and lose it once in a while. The positive effect of having ratholers in the game is very minimal. I actually think that the way ratholers tighten up games considerably (making action junkies unhappy) balances the short term variance they bring. Add the fact that taking ratholers out would encourage bad regulars to play, and I am pretty sure the poker economy would benefit from a 50bb minimum buyin at higher stakes. -Cowpig |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I shortstacked 3/6 the other day with my whole roll and it was fun for what its worth (i lost it all though)
|
#60
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If you take away their pf all in play they are done for. Even 25 bb would be a substantial improvement and 30 bb would be HUGE.
After all the emails and complaints nothing has changed so maybe the correct strategy may be to not ask for so much of a change. 50bb wont ever happen imo. I think pushing for 30bb is a better idea. And all you ratholers are POS for destroying the flow of the game. |
![]() |
|
|