1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested

[billxo1b]

[ QUOTE ]

oh btw, ...
and implement the bet pot button plz!

[/ QUOTE ]

no betpot plzzz!

[KCW12]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

oh btw, ...
and implement the bet pot button plz!

[/ QUOTE ]

no betpot plzzz!

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not? I find that the 'bet pot' button on UB causes fish to make terrible bet sizing errors, particularly early game.

[donkeykong2]

remove the early blind levels 10/20 or 15/30 to start at 25/50 right away, make blind levels times longer from then on.

[darinvg]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
BTW one more thing about rake if you were to make these threads in SSNL/MSNL/HSNL/MTT they would not ask to lower rake, they would ask for structure changes, stuff like synchronizing breaks in MTTs, adding more high stakes 6max games, etc. The fact STTF is asking for lower rake means that it is a serious problem effecting the long term profitability of a games and not just an easy way to save $1 a sng.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand Stars position on the high rake as it's a competetive marketplace and that is the norm rake among the best sites. That being said, the best idea (IMO) is to keep the rake the same so that the fish keep paying it (since they really don't notice the difference anyways), but make the VPPs/FPPs/rakeback MUCH higher (obv just for SNGs). Now the regs have their lower rake and Stars hasn't sacrificed the cream-puff rakes on the fish.

-BK

[/ QUOTE ]

Very true. This could be where the leaderboard comes in. The hardcore grinders will get more "rakeback."

[suzzer99]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
as far as I can tell, playing 10 handed STTs wouldn't increase the length of time needed to play each STT by too much and good players would make slightly more profit per game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, they really don't seem to take much longer (if at all). There are really no downsides to making these 10 handed, and there are definitely upsides.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just bubbled in one after the grindiest 6-5-4 handed ever. Very frustrating. As the king of the $225 bubbles, I'm not real nuts about having to survive one more player.

[JackStrap]

change the 25+2 to 30+2 obv.
15+1 is fine

[fluorescenthippo]

[ QUOTE ]
10-mans are better because the extra seat would most often just put one more fish in the game. If you now have four regs playing the 114s you get those 4 players in every game together with 5 randoms. 10-mans would mean you get 4 regs and 6 randoms.


[/ QUOTE ]

just think if they made 18 man sngs!!!!!

[fluorescenthippo]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm here... reading and digesting. You folks are more than carrying the conversation at this point, so I thought I'd let it go on without interfering.

I'm definitely reading, though... fairly sure I'm not the only one.

As for the antes, based on this thread, the consensus seems clear and I thank all of you for sharing your thoughts on the feedback we'd received to remove them. As for the other feedback, I can't make any promises, however I have noted every bit of it, and passed it along as well.

One thing I can tell you is that the 150/300-25 level is likely to be added soon.

Further question, if you don't mind: what do you prefer, 9-handed or 10-handed... and why?


All the best,

Bryan S.
Tournaments Administrator
PokerStars Poker Room Management Team

[/ QUOTE ]

10 handed with antes increases ROI for good players. at 100/200/25 the pot will be even bigger but most wont adjust. so this in mind with the countless other reasons probably already post are why 10 mans are good.

[suzzer99]

One think I wasn't thinking about. In a 9-man, doubling up early is usually a free ticket to ITM. In the 10-mans maybe not so much. Does this mean that the 10-mans, like the 18-mans, reward a little more risk-taking early? If so, then maybe they would be better for me after all.

[The4thFilm]

I prefer 10 man because 3rd place is more than a buyin. But it really means nothing compared to less rake.