Poker Stars doomswitch (whining)

[Nina]

Some stats on stud hi FL 0.50/1$

Absolute Poker 2.2 BB/100 (> 5000 hands)
Microgaming 4.4 BB/100 (> 44 000 hands)
OnGame 9.36 BB/100 (< 3000 hands)

Poker Stars -11.7 BB/100 (< 500 hands)

I have never been "punished" this severely before. Wonder what it is all about as the VPIP-stats don't differ much either? [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Just wanted to whine a bit...

[Andy B]

Your sample sizes are all very small. I also suspect that Stars is a little tougher than other sites.

[The Worm]

I was a significant winner on the Ongame Network, and I am a significant loser on Pokerstars. Combine that with no RB and [censored] bonuses and thats a recipe for disaster.

[Nina]

Update:

300 more hands and "up" to +0.75 BB/100. Still nothing to compare with other site's stats.

And Andy, you are probably right that the competition is tougher. The only site where stealing the blinds (at this level)is possible is Stars.

[HOWMANY]

Yes, PokerStars has switched my Stud 8 doomswitch as well. Does anyone know the email address I need to use to ask to have the Stud 8 game unrigged against me? The Holdem side of Stars still seems to be functioning correctly.

[Nina]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, PokerStars has switched my Stud 8 doomswitch as well. Does anyone know the email address I need to use to ask to have the Stud 8 game unrigged against me? The Holdem side of Stars still seems to be functioning correctly.

[/ QUOTE ]

iwannawin@pokerstars.com [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Nina]

Variance update:

741 hands and BB/100 up to 2.07

[MrBlueNose]

I always found Stars to be very loose at 2/4 and below.

[PoorLawyer]

[ QUOTE ]
Variance update:

741 hands and BB/100 up to 2.07

[/ QUOTE ]

come back with at least 10x the sample size

[Nina]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Variance update:

741 hands and BB/100 up to 2.07

[/ QUOTE ]

come back with at least 10x the sample size

[/ QUOTE ]


I totally agree. I updated my post as I linked to it as a reply from another forum.