Wowwow... new stud structure on Stars. - Page 2

Micturition Man · #11 10-20-2007, 08:50 PM

Why on earth do you think you need 10:1 to peel 4th?

Andy B · #12 10-21-2007, 04:40 AM

Changing the structure of a game isn't anything like cheating.

AffleckKGB · #13 10-21-2007, 05:28 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Changing the structure of a game isn't anything like cheating.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that I know that Raymer was responsible for this, but it's an unfair advantage for one player to have the power to radically change the structure of a game to his advantage, and it's very bothersome if he is able to do this behind the scenes so that the other players don't even know why the structure has changed.

Of course, I'm pissed off about this. The 100/200 stud HL on PokerStars started in the middle of April and in the last few weeks has been very popular so that i can 3table it occasionally. It was always $15 ante and $30 bringin including Friday morning 10/19. Than all of a sudden on Friday afternoon I sit down again and I thought I was in some strange game where the ante was $25. PokerStars always gives an annoying popup warning when you join a fast table, but somehow they didnt feel obliged to warn that the structure had just changed from 30 minutes earlier.

If it had been like this all along, fine. Now, any conclusions that experienced players have arrived at about correct play on any street is thrown out the window. If some PokerStars favored high stakes player decides on a whim for another change, all experience at the new structure will be useless, so I don't feel it is worth my time to learn a brand new game.

I have no idea how the other regulars feel. Most of the amateurs probably dont care, but I find it hard to believe there was a general excitement for this new structure. I assume the typical 30/60 player who gives 1/2 an occasional shot will have second thoughts, since it will now play like 200/400 on early streets.

Red_Diamond · #14 10-21-2007, 11:25 AM

I've been triple tabling stud a few times myself. Glad to know I'm not the only one, as I was fearing maybe this isn't optimal 99.9%.

Someday, I may even step up to 4 stud tables at once, but this would only be for HI games of course.

PoorLawyer · #15 10-21-2007, 12:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I've been triple tabling stud a few times myself. Glad to know I'm not the only one, as I was fearing maybe this isn't optimal 99.9%.

Someday, I may even step up to 4 stud tables at once, but this would only be for HI games of course.

[/ QUOTE ]

3 tabling 1/2 is a little different than 100/200 I would think.

Andy B · #16 10-21-2007, 01:53 PM

It is highly unlikely that Raymer or any other individual player is responsible for the change. And anyway, so what? The game changes, you adapt. That's what poker players do. Those that can't or won't adapt give up and go away. This has been going on for decades. A lot of the old guard in California couldn't adapt when the action changed from draw games to hold'em and stud. When they went from one blind to two in LHE, that hurt a lot of tight players. Poker has been evolving for about 200 years and will continue to do so. You can adapt, or you can find honest work.

And I think a lot of folks make too much of different ante structures. Especially for stud/8, the mix of hands that you played with the $15 ante shouldn't change all that much with the $25 ante. It's not like you're suddenly going to play T98 or K44. How you play you hands might change a bit, but I don't think it should be too dramatic. The bottom line as always is that you're probably going to have to show down the best hand in order to win. If you were beating the old game for, say, 1 BB/100, I would guess that you could beat the new game for a small amount with no adjustment. If this game was worthwhile for you before, I don't see how it can't be now.

djk123 · #17 10-21-2007, 02:59 PM

hah my pestering paid off

Hello Daniel,

I want to let you know that the decision has been made to reduce the ante
to $20 and the force bet to $35. The change has actually already been
made in the system; for obvious reasons the game that's going on right now
won't change until it breaks down and re-starts; we can't change a game
that's in progress. The "fast" version of the $100/$200 is already
deployed at the new structure.

I hope everyone will be happy with this middle ground.

barryg1 · #18 10-21-2007, 03:05 PM

Greg had nothing to do with it.

I have been trying to get someone to sit with me in the 500-1000 and 1000-2000 HORSE, so I can see what the ante and bring-in are. I assumed the ante is too low, based on the straight stud and stud hi/lo structures.

When you play with better players (presumably for higher stakes), it's standard to make the ante 20% or 25% of the small bet. In most casinos, the highest stake game with less than a 20% ante is the 30-60 game, which has a $5 ante and a $10 bring-in. The reason the ante ratio is higher in bigger games is to reward poker skill more than starting hand selection.

I e-mailed the top people and said that the structure was too tight in the 100-200 game and I assumed it was too tight in the bigger HORSE games also. They told me Daniel said the same thing when he played.

They said they would change it in the next build, which was wierd because I often have to argue my point to get changes made. I think the combination of me and Daniel was enough for them to make a quick change.

Unfortunately, they didn't tell us what the change would be. They showed me written complaints and I saw this thread and I said I agree that a bring-in in of 50% is too high. I told them to try a $20 ante with a $30 bring-in. I think this is right for the skill level of the $100-$200.

I guess if there are some absurdly loose players who play in the game, the sharks would want the ante ratio to be less. I hope this new change will be OK. The $15 ante seemed absurdly low and stops some action players from sitting down.

Barry

Jackal69 · #19 10-21-2007, 05:43 PM

i always thought $15 was kinda low and the FTP game has a $25 ante... $20 seems a reasonable compromise though.

Barry, can you push for some more mid limit mix game tables, like 100/200 HORSE and TD (and 200/400 etc). Some of us would like to play 5/1k with you one day but its a bit of a leap from 30/60 ;-)

barryg1 · #20 10-21-2007, 07:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]
i always thought $15 was kinda low and the FTP game has a $25 ante... $20 seems a reasonable compromise though.

Barry, can you push for some more mid limit mix game tables, like 100/200 HORSE and TD (and 200/400 etc). Some of us would like to play 5/1k with you one day but its a bit of a leap from 30/60 ;-)

[/ QUOTE ]

I have asked for 100-200, but they are afraid of busting the 10-20 to 30-60 players who move up when they are losing.

This will probably have to wait until the UIEGA is repealed, so that there is more money and players on the site who would want to play at these levels regularly.

Barry