|
|
#21
07-23-2007, 03:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Stars T$/W$ System and Satellites
[ QUOTE ]
The obvious solution is to give out a token which can be used a 215$ or 530$ tourney or whatever the satellite was to. You dont have to play the next one, but you have to play. [/ QUOTE ] Yep...and somewhat what Full Tilt already does. If the tokens are sellable and such, that might be fine. If people want it to be different than now, make them sellable ONLY back to PStars for 75% of their value. So if you sell a 215 token, you can only get 170ish(fuzzy math) back for it. This promotes playing the actual event, but if all you have left in your account is a token you luckboxed months before...then you can cash it out. 
|
|
#22
07-23-2007, 04:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars T$/W$ System and Satellites
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The obvious solution is to give out a token which can be used a 215$ or 530$ tourney or whatever the satellite was to. You dont have to play the next one, but you have to play. [/ QUOTE ] Yep...and somewhat what Full Tilt already does. If the tokens are sellable and such, that might be fine. If people want it to be different than now, make them sellable ONLY back to PStars for 75% of their value. So if you sell a 215 token, you can only get 170ish(fuzzy math) back for it. This promotes playing the actual event, but if all you have left in your account is a token you luckboxed months before...then you can cash it out. [/ QUOTE ] As someone stated earlier, tokens hurt the fluidity of players funds. A case can be made for either side, but I don't see a reason for Stars to change their system when the one in place already provides plenty of satellite winners to the big tournament, etc.
|
|
#23
07-23-2007, 05:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars T$/W$ System and Satellites
[ QUOTE ]
As I said in my post, if you run into a scheduling conflict with the tourney, you lose a few hundred dollars. This would make me less inclined to play sats unless I KNEW I was able to make the day. If I was even unsure, I wouldn't take the risk. [/ QUOTE ] I have no problem if a few less people play when they are 'not sure' yet if they will be available on that day. I really think if you're playing in a sat you should be playing it so that you can play the tourney the sat is for. Also, with Stars support I'm sure if you emailed them the situation they would allow you to transfer your entry to another tourney as long as you weren't continually asking to have this done. [ QUOTE ] Sat grinders obviously don't want a "must play first seat" policy [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] -- and most importantly, because satellites are profitable for Stars, and the 'target' tournaments like the Sunday Mil are well-populated and seem to always meet their guarantees, there's no real impetus for Stars to change their system. [/ QUOTE ] Except to make it a better place for the casual player to play. While much of their business does come from grinders/sharks without having a site full of casual/fish type players they will lose the other players quickly. It's been argued many times that we would like to see better/longer structures and the counter argument has always been that they still need to cater to the casual players who can't commit so much time or have to be at work the next day and don't want to play in a tourney that last until early in the morning. Full Tilt obviously does fine getting players to play its sats and has no problem filling its tourneys so I can't see Stars forcing you to play your first seat hurting their business.
|
|
#24
07-23-2007, 05:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars T$/W$ System and Satellites
I would vote for leaving the satellite system as it is. I like being able to play sats once in a while, without worrying about whether I'll be able to play the particular tourney I'm qualifying for. I usually don't even care when I enter, since I'm just playing for T$. So I play more sats, and Stars gets more rake. If I had to play the Sunday Million, I would never play a $3R, since it wouldn't make sense with my bankroll.
On the other hand, I would like to make it easier to find sats I want to play. If I want to play Sats that are Turbo Rebuys between $2 and $5, I have to find them manually. There's no tab or combination of existing filters that makes this easy. Sorting by Buy-In helps, but then tourneys at around the same time are separated. And if I want to just play WCOOP sats, the tab for that has very limited filtering available, only cash vs FPP vs SNG. You can't even toggle to only show registering/upcoming on the Events tab.
|
|
#25
07-23-2007, 05:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars T$/W$ System and Satellites
[ QUOTE ]
I would vote for leaving the satellite system as it is. I like being able to play sats once in a while, without worrying about whether I'll be able to play the particular tourney I'm qualifying for. I usually don't even care when I enter, since I'm just playing for T$. [/ QUOTE ] This bold part pretty much makes my exact point. With T$ selling at 99.5% there are way too many people playing these just to sell the T$. Back when you could buy at 95% or so it was different. I really think Stars should create some way for players to trade and sell W$/T$ between themselves.
|
|
#26
07-23-2007, 05:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars T$/W$ System and Satellites
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I would vote for leaving the satellite system as it is. I like being able to play sats once in a while, without worrying about whether I'll be able to play the particular tourney I'm qualifying for. I usually don't even care when I enter, since I'm just playing for T$. [/ QUOTE ] This bold part pretty much makes my exact point. With T$ selling at 99.5% there are way too many people playing these just to sell the T$. Back when you could buy at 95% or so it was different. I really think Stars should create some way for players to trade and sell W$/T$ between themselves. [/ QUOTE ] How long ago were T$ selling for 95%? I play for T$ so that I can play SNGs as well as Tourneys. This flexibility makes them attractive to me. I'm not grinding satellites by any stretch of the imagination. I'm a recreational player. I'm also a net buyer of T$, because of the slight discount. The only time I remember selling any was when someone offered 100%. And Stars obviously has a way to trade and sell W$/T$, that's what makes the existing market. The actual market is handled by the internet (2+2, etc.), but the execution happens on stars. That's also what makes folks feel safe about buying T$/W$, Stars handles the transaction. What I think you meant was for Stars to provide a way for buyer and seller to get together. But frankly, I don't think that's a big business for them. In fact, they collect money when people play the sats with real $. When people win T$/W$, Stars is better off if it sits in their account, since it's an IOU against Stars, and they don't pay any interest on it. The more W$ and T$ that sit unused, the better off they are, I suspect. Of course, the same is true for real $ in the account, except that I can't cash out W$/T$ without selling it for $ or playing a tourney and winning.
|
|
#27
07-23-2007, 05:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars T$/W$ System and Satellites
[ QUOTE ]
With T$ selling at 99.5% there are way too many people playing these just to sell the T$. Back when you could buy at 95% or so it was different. [/ QUOTE ] Why is this a bad thing? People sold WSOP lammers at 100%. Forcing people to play, may make the sats a little softer, but not the bigger tourneys IMO.
|
|
#28
07-23-2007, 05:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars T$/W$ System and Satellites
Personally, I currently play the Sunday Mil sats for the t$ to play tournaments and occsionally take a shot at a higher buy-in tourney that is slightly above my roll.
If there were satellites that awarded $20-$55 tournament seats, I would definitely think about playing the actual tournament as opposed to simply unregistering. Although, I don't think me deciding what to do with my t$ has any effect on Stars' bottom line.
|
|
#29
07-23-2007, 05:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars T$/W$ System and Satellites
[ QUOTE ]
How long ago were T$ selling for 95%? [/ QUOTE ] I think a year ago you could buy $215 for $200 - $205. [ QUOTE ] What I think you meant was for Stars to provide a way for buyer and seller to get together. But frankly, I don't think that's a big business for them. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, that's what I mean. [ QUOTE ] Stars is better off if it sits in their account, [/ QUOTE ] This is untrue though. It actually hurts Stars as there are a few T$/W$ selling and buying places on the net who do very very well off of this system. These places obviously take money out of the poker economy that Stars would probably see recycled through its site a few times otherwise. Also, if someone is looking to sell it they are going to do so anyways regardless of whether or not Stars provides them with a place to.
|
|
#30
07-23-2007, 07:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars T$/W$ System and Satellites
[ QUOTE ]
Full Tilt obviously does fine getting players to play its sats and has no problem filling its tourneys so I can't see Stars forcing you to play your first seat hurting their business. [/ QUOTE ] Hey Badger have to disagree with you somewhat here. I find Full Tilt's sats to be very low populated on too many occasions. I rarely find one with a nice sized field at the hours I play. Usually I'm just looking for a sat as a screen filler during a session. For example the $24 + $2's (1 in 9) to the FTOPS are more like a 2-3 table sit n go with only 2-3 seats awarded during much of the non-prime time hours. These are of no interest to me when I can play a $36 + $3 or an $11R on Stars with a significantly larger sized field. Because of this Full Tilt doesn't get as much of my Satellite play as Stars does.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
