3/11/2010 (Regrouping and SSing Coalition Idea)
Thursday, March 11, 2010 at 10:50AM I started drawing up a “damage control” plan as soon as Stars decided to put the doom-switch on my account about a week ago. I refer to doom-switch as a type of code a poker-site puts on a certain account. The code makes it so the player loses more than 80% of his races, gets coolered to hell at a 5 to 1 ratio every session, and takes consecutive unthinkable suck-outs over a 20 hour+ span (mostly on the river). During this time an opponent all in with 2 outs seems to be 80% like to hit against the doom-switched player (in this case Baglife). That being said, some of what I have gone through has been my own fault. I’m willing to step back and take a share of responsibility despite running terribly. Doing some research it seems a major problem was bankroll management (embarrassing). Apparently I was severely under-rolled to be playing 8-12 tables at once at 200NL (even short-stacking). When I started about a month ago I read a bullshit article or two that claimed having a “40 short-stack buy-in bankroll is sufficient to short-stack no matter the limit. REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY TABLES YOU PLAY”. This couldn’t be more bull-shit and incorrect.
Asking around it seems a 100 buy-in bankroll is more feasible, maybe even more. So my down fall was pretty much inevitable, unless I somehow defied all odds and ran like a God to build my short-stack bankroll from 40 to 100 buy-ins. I ignored the red flags (which I’m great at doing). Just like a horrible girl the red flags were all over the place, but I blatantly ignored them. The weekend before “doom-switch” I had a $+300 session, a -$300 session, and a +$400 session. This should have TIPPED ME OFF. Something like “wait I’m swinging a shit-load of money here based on my bankroll”. What if I ran bad and lost two out of those 3 sessions for $-400? (My life would suck). And what if the unthinkable doom-switch was turned on and I lost all three of them? (My life would really suck). And that’s exactly what happened the next weekend when it all came crashing down, my life REALLY sucked.
Going forward the first adjustment was deciding to immediately drop to 100NL. Last night I played my first 4 hour session 8-12 tabling. I played good, but the doom-switch is still on my account. Down another unthinkable 10 buy-ins. If I stayed on 200NL and ran like that it would have ruined me. I won’t go into the session much, just read my last two posts. It’s the same thing. All in with dominating hands, but can’t dodge 2-6 outs to save my life. That being said I enjoy 100NL and think I can do well there. Though it’s tougher at first because I don’t have the stats built up on many of the regulars, but general tendencies can be seen very quickly. Table selection is never a problem which is awesome. There are many more tables running. I can easily fill up 8-12 tables. You never really have to be pressured to stay on a bad table (like some of the peak times on 200 NL). The second 8 nit-bags fold around on a pot you can get up and leave with no pressure.
No adjustments can really save me if I continue to run like I have. Trust me they wouldn’t save the best player in the world. He probably would have quit by now. He would have quit before the success he would have eventually obtained. It would have made him think: “You know this isn’t really working out. MAYBE SOME PEOPLE AREN’T LUCKY ENOUGH TO PLAY POKER. If I can’t avoid 2-outs one out of four times WHAT THE FUCK can I really do?” I’m being sarcastic (sort-of), but crazy down-swings like can spawn illogical thoughts. This is the worst swing I’ve ever experienced, I feel like I’m driving through a tornado. It’s actually worse, with the tornado at least it would rip me out of the car and slam me somewhere where I’m unconscious (temporarily ending the misery). But this misery has no end, I can only SIT AND ENDURE. It is maddening. If I can get through it I can probably get through anything.
That being said I have still made adjustments. One of the big ones was to my HUD display, and I’m happy with the stats I have up. Another was completely dropping limits. Going forward I now have around 70-75 buy-ins online for this limit. If I drop to 60 buy-ins (which should take about 2 more sessions at this rate), I will deposit $600 more online and boast my roll to 90 buy-ins. Another adjustment has been about 10-15 more hours of study Monday-Wednesday to confirm I’m on the right track here.
Another piece of horrible news. Stars is considering completely eliminating short-stacking from the cash games, and upping the buy-in. This would pretty much make two months of my poker life wasted. I can’t even believe they are considering such bull-shit. The ONLY reason this debate is going on is because the regulars are losing profit to short-stackers. And they want the fish all to themselves. Most of the fish prefer buying in short and playing with people that have a less buy-in. They feel less threatened. The regular pros know this so they are forced to drop to 20BB buy-in tables and battle the short-stackers (with a profitable counter-balance strategy) to catch their fish. Here’s the thing: the greedy asshole regulars already have their 50BB tables. So if it was only an issue of “refusing to play against short-stackers” then they would be happy staying on their shitty 50BB tables. I really don’t even see the issue here. When I search for tables the 50BB+ tables often seem to be more profitable and loose. But they want it all and it’s never enough.
So my advice is to sit on your fucking bullshit 50BB tables, shut the fuck up, and fold around to each-other with the 7 other nit’s on your table only playing AK+ (except when the occasionally 2 fish per hour swim through, then adjust your range slightly). You already have your 50BB+ tables! I don’t understand; are you honestly going to force fish to buy-in to 40BB+? I have a feeling changes this illogical and stupid will end up going through with PokerStars. Of course PokerStars would bend over backwards for their super-users. I’m not even so sure the games are fair to be honest. If I’m in a pot with a super-user, it’s actually getting to a point where I should play a hand differently because of their status. They just seem to catch all of the breaks. Which makes sense; they are generating the rake for Pokerstars.
Logically what should happen if they make changes and bend down for their super-users (which they will) would be to add different table buy in types. This way the fish can choose their type. This will still absolutely screw short-stacking because most of the fish will probably choose 35BB+ buy-in tables. So short-stacking will die right there. The 50BB tables will remain 8 stupid nit pros per table, and the 20BB bilnd+ will be 8 short-stackers who can’t adapt from their strategy. So the new most profitable tables wil be the 35BB+ tables. And to all of you super-user SN elite assholes out there you won’t be fighting those 35BB+ tables for the fish alone. I will be switching to a full stack strategy and going after them with you, many others will do the same. Your strategy is not hard to play, it is very ABC. The push equilibriums really good short-stackers use to 4-bet pre are as advanced as any strategy you use daily. Many competent short-stacking players will adapt and do the same. Hopefully fish will still choose the 20+BB tables, then the super-users will have nothing left to bitch about. But only time will tell. Another option for some skilled short-stackers is to stay on the 20BB tables, but go up to 35BB+ when necessary to chase fish (Just like super-users drop from 50BB to 20BB to chase fish). It’s annoying, but possible to adapt. I still think there is a niche-market out their for a hybrid-shortstacker type. Which is what I sort of want to work towards. And by the way this path would be a lot harder then just putting a full buy-in on every table. I'd like to see these regulards play a short-stacking strategy on different tables at the same time.
So if these changes go through for the worse I will probably have to either:
A) Drop limits and go to a full-stack strategy. This would screw me on FPPs, but I would be able to bum-hunt for profit so much easier.
B) Use a hybrid strategy where I keep playing 20BB+ tables, but also move up to 35BB+ tables to bum-hunt the previous fish.
C) Consider switching sites to continue short-stacking.
Hopefully Stars will lose a flood of short-stackers and business if they go through with this move. I read on some forums that short-stackers "don’t have anywhere else to go", but there is always somewhere else to go. And if it comes down to switching to a full-stack, hopefully most of the short-stackers will switch sites out of spite.
PokerStars will play the "looking out for the casual player" card when debating these changes. But in actuality they are only looking out for their whiney super-users that suck at adapting. If you really wanted to improve the experience for the casual user you would BAN multi-tabling over 12 tables. While you send out your little surveys try asking the "casual user" if he would rather:
A) Have table buy-ins adjusted to 35BB to avoid playing short-stackers.
or
B) Limit super-users to 12 tables (so you have to play with them less) and BAN the use of an HUD.
I guarantee the causal player would 100% choose option B ANY FUCKING DAY.
If you want to help the casual player you limit the super-user's range (aka hunting grounds) and BAN the HUD. The super-users and the software will eventually ruin online poker, NOT short-stackers.
I have some strong thoughts on these issues, so I should probably post on 2+2, I've never posted before but I do keep up on some of the threads (dominated by the same assholes I'm talking about in the paragraphs above). If someone follows this issue or 2+2 and wants to link this post as an argument please do. I could also put up a seperate post that just covers THIS argument (without the personal progress above). I think I need to get some short-stackers together and really fight here before it's to late. The full-stack regulars are in control of the debate and have all of the influence right now. Seriously, I'm going to post on 2+2 and have my thoughts known. I'm also going to put a link to my site and encourage SSers to contact me for a coalition effort. I'm sick of this super-user bull-shit seriously. I should do everything I can to set things right here. This effort will be more important then grinding up a few hundred, or losing a few hundred more by way of doom-switch. Time to make a difference. I would glady create a seperate web-site for the cause. I wish I thought of this earlier.
Reader Comments (3)
I'm with you 100% and I want to fight this thing. I'm sure if enough BIG NAME shortstackers (at 100nl+) got together and made their voices heart, stars will think twice about completely ruining their games to please these assholes. Let me throw out some names of notable, successful, extremely high volume (many of which are SNE) shortstackers who will not stand for this crap:
1bunn
IMSAKIDD
yugor
sodom
call honey
dymarko
I think we should all get our heads together and fight this.
SS,
My first step is putting together a separate post with only the short-stacking issue (no personal b.s). The next step will be putting that post on 2+2 on the debate forums and linking it to my site. Players can contact me through my site. I then have to go out and get reputable short-stackers that will support the cause. I spoke to Yugor before playing with him on 200NL. I short-stacked on 200NL for over a month, so I could log onto Stars and simply talk to a lot of the regulars while they are playing. IF any of these guys have blogs or website's let me know, or let them know about me.
We also need to put together a plan of action if PokerStars does go through with these changes (example leaving if necessary). I can also put together and pay for a separate website devoted to the cause. Even if PokerStars goes through with the changes, I can leave the website to bash them for their stupid decision. It will stand as a monument as to why to avoid Stars. In the long run the negative promotion will cause them to lose a lot of customers. Imagine the site "What Pokerstars really cares about" popping up when people Google "Should I play on PokerStars?".
-bag
I'm going to try to get a post together tonight and post it on my site here. I still have to think of a would-be created website name that I will begin making in case PokerStars decides the unthinkable. Any ideas please let me know. I'd like to have the name before I submit this post to 2+2 because I am dead serious. Even an example site name would be good, doesn't matter if we settle on another name later.
EX:
StarsPlayerMovement.com
OnlinePokerJustice.com
-bag