PokerStars VIP Changes 2016 and onwards

[tikay]

If they can win more money, more easily, they'd be bonkers to be put off by inferior software.  Poker players, by nature - perhaps many of us these days - are becoming more & more intolerant of trivial irritations, but if it means a 25% increase in profits, most with common sense would tolerate it.

It's remarkable how many good players ignore game selection in this way. Why do they insist at playing at the Venetian, when the softest game is at the Flamingo etc.

Shit software + reasonable traffic usually = soft games with players who don't know any better.

Super slick software optimised for 24-tabling, not so much.

Just as an aside, this was quite thought provoking, or it was to me. Are you familiar with the author? Writes well, imo.

http://www.parttimepoker.com/value-comes-from-interactions-not-individuals
 

[DaveShoelace]

If they can win more money, more easily, they'd be bonkers to be put off by inferior software.  Poker players, by nature - perhaps many of us these days - are becoming more & more intolerant of trivial irritations, but if it means a 25% increase in profits, most with common sense would tolerate it.

It's remarkable how many good players ignore game selection in this way. Why do they insist at playing at the Venetian, when the softest game is at the Flamingo etc.

Shit software + reasonable traffic usually = soft games with players who don't know any better.

Super slick software optimised for 24-tabling, not so much.

Just as an aside, this was quite thought provoking, or it was to me. Are you familiar with the author? Writes well, imo.

http://www.parttimepoker.com/value-comes-from-interactions-not-individuals
 

He only came onto my radar this last couple of months actually, what I have read of his has been very good.

[doubleup]

If they can win more money, more easily, they'd be bonkers to be put off by inferior software.  Poker players, by nature - perhaps many of us these days - are becoming more & more intolerant of trivial irritations, but if it means a 25% increase in profits, most with common sense would tolerate it.

It's remarkable how many good players ignore game selection in this way. Why do they insist at playing at the Venetian, when the softest game is at the Flamingo etc.

Shit software + reasonable traffic usually = soft games with players who don't know any better.

Super slick software optimised for 24-tabling, not so much.

Just as an aside, this was quite thought provoking, or it was to me. Are you familiar with the author? Writes well, imo.

http://www.parttimepoker.com/value-comes-from-interactions-not-individuals
 

He is slightly touching on the relevant point which is that the gambling industry in general (including poker pros) is too much interested in finding new whales to gut as quickly as possible and not enough about providing value for money entertainment.

Betfair introduced the premium charge on those with, in their opinion, super-normal profits.  The purpose of the charge, so it said, was to promote the exchange and continue to find new customers to bolster the super-normal profits.  So instead of looking at some of those making these profits and considering whether their practices (courtsiding, "trick" bets, laying fallers etc) were in the long term interests of their business, they decided to just take an extra cut and find more shark food. 

The peer to peer industry has to accept that it merely provides a facility for people to play poker or bet against each other.  Its long term sustainability is not about finding new victims to feed to sharks, but about doing its best to stop any practices that lead to excessive skill differences and about charging a reasonable amount for their services.  They should realise also that although their objective might be to reduce skill differentials this should be by education and protection not by structural changes.  For example, new player deposit bonuses are usually designed to get the new player to play as much as possible in a short period - how about bonuses that are dependent on watching some instructional videos and completing a questionnaire afterwards?

I think that the rake structure should be completely revised.  The present structure is based on the structure for live limit poker, which isn't surprising as online poker started as limit and at higher blind levels than the average nl/pl of today.  This has resulted in some games being over raked and almost unbeatable.  A far better structure would be a charge every time a hand is dealt.  Something like a 1/10 of a small blind.  This automatically adjusts the table rake for short-handed play and ensures that tight player pay as much as loose players.  The relationship with the small blind also stops over raking at smaller stakes.  No flop/no drop obviously no longer applies but I don't think that is an issue given the advantages of this change.  This charging method also emphasises that the poker site is being paid to deal cards and has no interest in the winners and losers of the pot.

[arbboy]

Just to clarify betfair introduced the premium charge for customer who made profits 'too fast' and were not paying what betfair considered a suitable % of their profits in commission.  A lot of people are misled by the bf PC.  You can be a huge winner on betfair in cash terms and not pay the premium charge if your 'churn' is such that you still pay a relatively high % of your profits (i think it is 30%) in commission to betfair.  Conversely you can be a relatively small profit maker in cash terms and still pay the premium charge.

If you win £1m a year on betfair but in the course of doing so pay £500k in commission on your bets then you will not suffer any PC.  If you win £20k a year and only pay betfair £2k a year in commission your profits will be subject to an additional PC on top of your £2k commission payments.

The PC is designed to stop people who are not position takers usually and literally just suck money out of the bf ecosystem in various methods (usually using bots) without paying bf a sufficient fee in their mind to cover the cost betfair incurs to attract the 'losers' to the site to replaced this liquidity.  I actually agree with the premium charge on principle.  I also think a premium charge model could easily be adapted to pokerstars (more so for cash games than MTT's) who are just bum hunters and win at rates which are too high and not good for the ecosystem for example rather than giving action generally and winning at a slower rate.

Sorry for the derail.  Back to the poker.

[rfgqqabc]

Most sites have bot problems so it's not just shit software. It certainly has affected my decision to play I poker because the level of tilt I have to endure affects the other games I play.

[The Camel]

Just to clarify betfair introduced the premium charge for customer who made profits 'too fast' and were not paying what betfair considered a suitable % of their profits in commission.  A lot of people are misled by the bf PC.  You can be a huge winner on betfair in cash terms and not pay the premium charge if your 'churn' is such that you still pay a relatively high % of your profits (i think it is 30%) in commission to betfair.  Conversely you can be a relatively small profit maker in cash terms and still pay the premium charge.

If you win £1m a year on betfair but in the course of doing so pay £500k in commission on your bets then you will not suffer any PC.  If you win £20k a year and only pay betfair £2k a year in commission your profits will be subject to an additional PC on top of your £2k commission payments.

The PC is designed to stop people who are not position takers usually and literally just suck money out of the bf ecosystem in various methods (usually using bots) without paying bf a sufficient fee in their mind to cover the cost betfair incurs to attract the 'losers' to the site to replaced this liquidity.  I actually agree with the premium charge on principle.  I also think a premium charge model could easily be adapted to pokerstars (more so for cash games than MTT's) who are just bum hunters and win at rates which are too high and not good for the ecosystem for example rather than giving action generally and winning at a slower rate.

Sorry for the derail.  Back to the poker.

A new account opens and has £10k on the favourite for the Gold Cup at 3/1.

It wins and he doesn't have another bet, will they charge him PC?

[doubleup]

no has to be 250 markets I think also there is a rule about excluding one big win that I can't precisely remember.

[tikay]

An interesting take on how those strikes went, & at the same time, a snapshot of online poker liquidity.

http://www.onlinepokerreport.com/19247/impact-pokerstars-boycotts-online-poker-liquidity/

[Doobs]

I don't know if everybody has signed up, but the new vip steps challenge looks like it could be ok, and not the usual $500 freeroll with 20k entries.

I signed up and got 10,000 stars coins ($100) on reaching the first target.

I am Platinum at the mo, and am on supernova target this year if these things affect the bonus.

[teddybloat]

Yeah tis a worthwhile promo for all.

Encourages volume, has clear goals and actually has a decent $ev

[Simon Galloway]

Just completed it.  100 starcoins.  FFS!

[teddybloat]

Got 10000, thought it equated to $10 for some reason.

Nice surprise when checking the cashier.

[Doobs]

Just completed it.  100 starcoins.  FFS!

Just done the 100 levels for 500 coins.   Original optimism clearly misplaced

[DaveShoelace]

New rewards scheme announced

https://www.pokerstrategy.com/news/world-of-poker/100447/

Cliffs:

*No more traditional rakeback
*StarsCoins across poker, sports and casino
*More focus on in-session rewards rather than monthly
*Launches in Denmark in May, rest of world in summer
*Players being emailed with how its likely to affect them
*As much as 85% less rewards for some players, but most will not notice difference, according to OPR http://www.onlinepokerreport.com/24732/pokerstars-vip-rewards-changes/

[Marky147]

When is Daniel's video out?