AmayaStars

[dreenie]

If this is what's to come you have to ask yourself what's next. None of the last couple of months have given me any confidence that pokerstars are trying to look out for their players.

Spin and go's supernova's/elites l, these charges and casino games in the future.

Amaya have taken over and unfortunately have a totally different approach to how they want to make their money. They are ruthless and in business the very richest are the most ruthless.

It's all about their profit margin and they will do anything they have to do to make it as big as possible and sod anyone who has a problem with it cos there is just another 300 thousand other players that will play on stars.

The rational group cared about their players and they had a very good way of balancing out everything to keep the players and themselves happy. They also had the best reputation and that is why they were so successful.

Gordon Ramsay is probably the biggest chef in the UK in terms of audience wise and I don't see him charging the earth for a tuna tartare or a beef dish. His restaurants use the freshest of ingredients the best quality but he's not ripping off his customers to an extent where they are having to pay for the privilege of sitting in his restaurant because he is such a big name.

That is my example, I may not be making my point clearly but I think it's about time we all stopped with the whole 'dog eat dog' attitude and pull together if it's something that you feel passionate about.

[dreenie]

The sad thing is that most people really can't vote with their feet as there really isn't many viable other places to play at least for MTTs. I've dropped some stars tournies to be replaced by ipoker, but for example
the 888 client has been unusable this week due to crashes,
microgaming has very few tournaments of any size and also a shady past, ditto for ongame.
Party has awful software, also hidden fees, although the rake is often less.
ipoker has pretty bad glitchy software
Full Tilt is very reg heavy and also owned by Stars anyway
I like Winamax but this is our last week there
I like sky too but they don't let me play there when I am not in the UK, plus their tournies are generally not that big fields and also always 6 max and a lot of heavily raked bounty tournaments.
There are other tiny sites such as Unibet, but I don't really see any traffic at all.
PKR is pretty tough to multitable

That is literally all the choice now. Pokerstars have destroyed the market and most independent sites have joined ipoker.

Surely even the 'average Joe' knows you lose money by exchanging currencies. If they don't, maybe they should learn? Knowing everyday things like that have nothing to do with poker ability imo

This bit is very true and most surprisingly to a lot of people they will be the ones to destroy poker long term.

[The Camel]

The sad thing is that most people really can't vote with their feet as there really isn't many viable other places to play at least for MTTs. I've dropped some stars tournies to be replaced by ipoker, but for example
the 888 client has been unusable this week due to crashes,
microgaming has very few tournaments of any size and also a shady past, ditto for ongame.
Party has awful software, also hidden fees, although the rake is often less.
ipoker has pretty bad glitchy software
Full Tilt is very reg heavy and also owned by Stars anyway
I like Winamax but this is our last week there
I like sky too but they don't let me play there when I am not in the UK, plus their tournies are generally not that big fields and also always 6 max and a lot of heavily raked bounty tournaments.
There are other tiny sites such as Unibet, but I don't really see any traffic at all.
PKR is pretty tough to multitable

That is literally all the choice now. Pokerstars have destroyed the market and most independent sites have joined ipoker.

Surely even the 'average Joe' knows you lose money by exchanging currencies. If they don't, maybe they should learn? Knowing everyday things like that have nothing to do with poker ability imo

I was buying €2000 the other day towards my MCOP buyin.

I know buying from the bank is the worst possible choice, but as I had a little spare time I popped into Barclays and asked how much it would cost.

I was quoted £1730. Mid point that day was £1590.

I ended up paying £1620 in one of those Bureau De Change booths near Paddington station.

2% seems about fair for this service.

10% is legalised theft. But unfortunately most Average Joe's seem prepared to pay it.

[The Camel]

The sad thing is that most people really can't vote with their feet as there really isn't many viable other places to play at least for MTTs. I've dropped some stars tournies to be replaced by ipoker, but for example
the 888 client has been unusable this week due to crashes,
microgaming has very few tournaments of any size and also a shady past, ditto for ongame.
Party has awful software, also hidden fees, although the rake is often less.
ipoker has pretty bad glitchy software
Full Tilt is very reg heavy and also owned by Stars anyway
I like Winamax but this is our last week there
I like sky too but they don't let me play there when I am not in the UK, plus their tournies are generally not that big fields and also always 6 max and a lot of heavily raked bounty tournaments.
There are other tiny sites such as Unibet, but I don't really see any traffic at all.
PKR is pretty tough to multitable

That is literally all the choice now. Pokerstars have destroyed the market and most independent sites have joined ipoker.

Surely even the 'average Joe' knows you lose money by exchanging currencies. If they don't, maybe they should learn? Knowing everyday things like that have nothing to do with poker ability imo

This bit is very true and most surprisingly to a lot of people they will be the ones to destroy poker long term.

It's just proving that old adage.

Monopolies are bad for consumers.

[arbboy]

Where will online poker be in 2020?  Just stars operating as the only firm of any major size and the rest just slowly folding around them?

[dreenie]

And now is the best time for the other sites to close the gap on stars. I don't believe they just starter putting on all these high guarantee mtts in the beginning, they worked hard to build their player base together with their reputation.

Other sites need to be doing the same. I've played ipoker recently and it's got a lot better. Not as many glitches with software and slowly building there guarantees. The multi entry is a very good thing imo. Sky is great for the fact it does not allow u to have any hem or other tools to help u make decisions and this would be the first place I would go for cash games sit n gos and maybe 5 mtts throughout the week. I would be happy to pay a little higher rake but know it was all fair game tbh. Only thing I would say is the time bank needs to come into play as I wouldn't feel comfortable having someone go all in for a thousand pounds and me have 30 seconds to make a decision...

I feel micro gaming could come back as they had good tournies when at Ladbrokes so again if Unibet/Stan James puts in some hard work they can only get better.

Apparently 888 is real soft for all variants of poker and yes they had some issues this week but I wouldn't be too worried, I'm sure it was just a few technical glitches which can easily happen.

If some of these networks got the right people in the know and did their market research then I believe you would see a much bigger change in who's at the top.

[bergeroo]

All these sites and networks had their dream chance when Full Tilt went down and none of them took it. I don't see any of them stepping up the game now when they couldn't then. If you are hamstrung with dodgy software then there is only so far you can go. Sad fact is that Stars also has the best of software (although I like winamax better).

[SuuPRlim]

Like it or lump it but changes like this that really challenge pro players livlihoods are really the only way it was ever gonna go, and I believe it had to go like this, the weaker or less determined pro players have to drop off the radar, only way.

We all had it far too good for far too long I don't really think you can blame amaya.

[Whollyflush]

Like it or lump it but changes like this that really challenge pro players livlihoods are really the only way it was ever gonna go, and I believe it had to go like this, the weaker or less determined pro players have to drop off the radar, only way.

We all had it far too good for far too long I don't really think you can blame amaya.

This charge tho effects deposits more than withdrawals (depending on your currency i geuss), therefore recs get stung initially and then the regs secondly as less rec money is in play. Its just a simple money grab from the whole demographic of players.

[SuuPRlim]

Like it or lump it but changes like this that really challenge pro players livlihoods are really the only way it was ever gonna go, and I believe it had to go like this, the weaker or less determined pro players have to drop off the radar, only way.

We all had it far too good for far too long I don't really think you can blame amaya.

This charge tho effects deposits more than withdrawals (depending on your currency i geuss), therefore recs get stung initially and then the regs secondly as less rec money is in play. Its just a simple money grab from the whole demographic of players.

true true, but still the net result is going to be pro's lose out/quit in the end, there will always be people losing money at poker it's just about where the money goes.

A common misconception I believe though;

Poker ecology NEEDS professional players, groups of ametuers playing each other sounds like a nice idea in theory but wouldn't work...

The big 55 with no pro's would prolly lose 1/3 -1/2 of it's field on a weekday and therefore be massively reduced top prize and less appealing to play, if you're an ametaur player who fancies gambling at a bit of 100/200 PLO are you going to find 5 other recs who wanna play with you, prolly not - you need pro's.

I'm not saying that stars or sites have a duty of care towards to pro players I'm just saying that they are not the enemy. It's a natural cycle the easier poker is then the more people who will be attracted to it as a full time occupation, thus making it harder, in turn meaning eventually less pro's, making it easier and therefore attracting more people to poker full time. Anything the sites do or don't do is merely speeding up or slowing down an inevitable cycle. Doesn't really matter too much where they take the money from, every $ more stars earns will ultimately come at the expense of the pro community.

[tikay]

Like it or lump it but changes like this that really challenge pro players livlihoods are really the only way it was ever gonna go, and I believe it had to go like this, the weaker or less determined pro players have to drop off the radar, only way.

We all had it far too good for far too long I don't really think you can blame amaya.

This charge tho effects deposits more than withdrawals (depending on your currency i geuss), therefore recs get stung initially and then the regs secondly as less rec money is in play. Its just a simple money grab from the whole demographic of players.

true true, but still the net result is going to be pro's lose out/quit in the end, there will always be people losing money at poker it's just about where the money goes.

A common misconception I believe though;

Poker ecology NEEDS professional players, groups of ametuers playing each other sounds like a nice idea in theory but wouldn't work...

The big 55 with no pro's would prolly lose 1/3 -1/2 of it's field on a weekday and therefore be massively reduced top prize and less appealing to play, if you're an ametaur player who fancies gambling at a bit of 100/200 PLO are you going to find 5 other recs who wanna play with you, prolly not - you need pro's.

I'm not saying that stars or sites have a duty of care towards to pro players I'm just saying that they are not the enemy. It's a natural cycle the easier poker is then the more people who will be attracted to it as a full time occupation, thus making it harder, in turn meaning eventually less pro's, making it easier and therefore attracting more people to poker full time. Anything the sites do or don't do is merely speeding up or slowing down an inevitable cycle. Doesn't really matter too much where they take the money from, every $ more stars earns will ultimately come at the expense of the pro community.

It needs recreationals, too, Dave........that's where it all starts.

[Simon Galloway]

Online sparsely  for a few days, but I don't think we need to get too bent out of shape on this!

Tbh, "average Joe" is actually  sharper on fx than the typical poker player.  Long before this change, I've spoken to a lot of poker players who don't have the first clue what they are doing when it comes to fx.  They will study for hours to find 0.0001% on their game and then blindly give 5% to Thomas Cook.  I would expect a poker player to be careful (but they aren't) I'd expect a poker player to be a rate tart, and even then, ask the fx bureau for an improved rate (but they don't)  At the other end, I've seen poker players expect me to drive 4 hours and wait for an undetermined length of time in a car park somewhere to save them what would amount to about $20 in fx rates just because they read on a forum that trading at spot was the way to do it. While not every member of the public "gets it" too, this isn't specialised poker knowledge ~ this is general knowledge and poker players generally are worse at it than average, not better.

Next up, I don't see where you lose 2.5% on a deposit.  You will if you deposit in another currency to what Stars offer in their cashier, but if you are depositing in GBP, you won't lose anything.  Yes, some players will lose money.  Yes, that is stars choosing to pass on banking costs to the users.  Yes, that's what monopolies can do, where there isn't a regulatory body with teeth that can push back effectively anytime stars overdoes it.  Yes, I think the war was a bad thing.  No, I'm not going to stop playing on Stars, at least not until someone offers me a credible alternative.

[arbboy]

Online sparsely  for a few days, but I don't think we need to get too bent out of shape on this!

Tbh, "average Joe" is actually  sharper on fx than the typical poker player.  Long before this change, I've spoken to a lot of poker players who don't have the first clue what they are doing when it comes to fx.  They will study for hours to find 0.0001% on their game and then blindly give 5% to Thomas Cook.  I would expect a poker player to be careful (but they aren't) I'd expect a poker player to be a rate tart, and even then, ask the fx bureau for an improved rate (but they don't)  At the other end, I've seen poker players expect me to drive 4 hours and wait for an undetermined length of time in a car park somewhere to save them what would amount to about $20 in fx rates just because they read on a forum that trading at spot was the way to do it. While not every member of the public "gets it" too, this isn't specialised poker knowledge ~ this is general knowledge and poker players generally are worse at it than average, not better.

Next up, I don't see where you lose 2.5% on a deposit.  You will if you deposit in another currency to what Stars offer in their cashier, but if you are depositing in GBP, you won't lose anything.  Yes, some players will lose money.  Yes, that is stars choosing to pass on banking costs to the users.  Yes, that's what monopolies can do, where there isn't a regulatory body with teeth that can push back effectively anytime stars overdoes it.  Yes, I think the war was a bad thing.  No, I'm not going to stop playing on Stars, at least not until someone offers me a credible alternative.

Average joe comments are spot on.  Suppose this is why so many 'pros' go skint because they don't take care of the business side of the job.

[SuuPRlim]

Like it or lump it but changes like this that really challenge pro players livlihoods are really the only way it was ever gonna go, and I believe it had to go like this, the weaker or less determined pro players have to drop off the radar, only way.

We all had it far too good for far too long I don't really think you can blame amaya.

This charge tho effects deposits more than withdrawals (depending on your currency i geuss), therefore recs get stung initially and then the regs secondly as less rec money is in play. Its just a simple money grab from the whole demographic of players.

true true, but still the net result is going to be pro's lose out/quit in the end, there will always be people losing money at poker it's just about where the money goes.

A common misconception I believe though;

Poker ecology NEEDS professional players, groups of ametuers playing each other sounds like a nice idea in theory but wouldn't work...

The big 55 with no pro's would prolly lose 1/3 -1/2 of it's field on a weekday and therefore be massively reduced top prize and less appealing to play, if you're an ametaur player who fancies gambling at a bit of 100/200 PLO are you going to find 5 other recs who wanna play with you, prolly not - you need pro's.

I'm not saying that stars or sites have a duty of care towards to pro players I'm just saying that they are not the enemy. It's a natural cycle the easier poker is then the more people who will be attracted to it as a full time occupation, thus making it harder, in turn meaning eventually less pro's, making it easier and therefore attracting more people to poker full time. Anything the sites do or don't do is merely speeding up or slowing down an inevitable cycle. Doesn't really matter too much where they take the money from, every $ more stars earns will ultimately come at the expense of the pro community.

It needs recreationals, too, Dave........that's where it all starts.

Ofc, and it has both, pros and recs right now! It's all good yeah?! The pool of recs will either fill up or dry out, and that's fine, it's the pro pool that has t oadapt, and that's a fine system too IMO.

[buffyslayer1]

Just my 0.2 cents

But I don't think all the changes at Stars are down to Amaya most of the things they have implemented will have been in the pipeline for a long time already. Cutting off affiliates, introducing spin and go's, now the currency charge.

Stars has always planned things out long in advance and most of these (specifically spin and go's) would have been a long time in development. The site has been moving away from the stars of old steadily since BF and this accelerated when they bought FTP and essentially killed off  the site (which I think everyone thought had a chance of becoming firm #2 again)

Amaya might have moved up the timescales on some of these things certainly but, Stars was alredy going down this route