PokerStars Statement on Buy-in Amounts (My Thoughts and Analysis Included)
Tuesday, April 13, 2010 at 10:27AM So the changes have been made. I'm going to start with the link and summary given by PokerStars. I will then go on to add my thoughts at the bottom of the post.
Here is the link and summary:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28.../#post18141315
"Summary
Many players have requested that PokerStars alter the minimum and maximum buy-in amounts in many NL and PL cash games. After much consideration, the following changes have been made to ring games as a direct result of player input. These changes are planned for deployment on Tuesday or Wednesday of this week.
Many USD currency Hold’em and Omaha games with No-Limit or Pot-Limit betting will be offered with new and different minimum, maximum, and default buy-in amounts. Most stakes of NL Hold’em and PL Omaha will be offered as follows:
20-50 bb, with default buy-in of 40bb
40-100 bb, with default buy-in of 80bb
100-250 bb, with default buy-in of 200bb and ante equal to 20% of the Big Blind
All games in Euro currency will still offer a buy-in range of 35 to 100 bb, but the default buy-in will be lowered from 100 bb to 70 bb. Euro games are now available at some new stakes.
Most NL and PL tables will be labelled with their minimum and maximum buy-in as above, for example '20-50 bb'. This is an important change as in the past ‘20-100 bb’ tables were unlabeled, and thus practically a default. All exceptions to this labelling are in cases where only one buy-in range is offered for that game type and the buy-in range is unchanged.
All tables will have tooltips describing minimum and maximum buy-in amounts that appear when the mouse moves over the table name or description. These tooltips will include minimum and maximum buy-in information in terms of the currency of the game, such as USD or Euro, as well as in big blinds. As an example, for a $1/$2 NL hold’em game with buy-in range of ’20-50bb’, the tooltip will inform players that they may buy in for a minimum of $40 and a maximum of $100. The tooltips will be localized into each of the PokerStars supported languages. The tooltips will default to 'on' but can be turned on and off by players.
The amount of time a player must wait before returning to the same table with less money has been increased from 30 minutes to 60 minutes for all cash games of all types.
In order to inform players of changes, banners with information about these changes will be displayed above table listings in ring game lobbies for ten days. These banners will briefly describe the changes and will inform players how to turn off tooltips if they so desire. These banners will be localized into each of the PokerStars supported languages.
Some tables will still continue run with old buy-in ranges until there are no players seated.
The Decision Making Process
There has been much forum discussion over the past weeks, months, and years about the influx of players who prefer to buy in to NL and PL games with 20 Big Blinds. The drastic increase in the number of 20 bb stacks at 20-100bb tables has noticeably impacted the play of these games.
PokerStars was in fact a pioneer in offering games with a 50bb minimum buy-in back in March of 2008. That change, like so many others since, was initiated by feedback from players on 2+2. These player-suggested changes are very easy to make in cases where the vast majority of players agree. In this case, there is some significant disagreement amongst players so the evaluation was much more difficult. By no means was this decision easy.
Conversations with players here on 2+2 and in the 2+2 player panel have also been very important in determining the proper course of action in 2010. Every available player email and forum post was examined to create a valuable pool of varied perspectives and knowledge to draw from when making this decision. PokerStars has also conducted multiple surveys on this topic, especially of the recreational players both in Europe and in North America, and tapped the wealth of poker knowledge possessed by members of PokerStars Team Pro.
Yes, this decision took some time to make. Your patience is very much appreciated. Determining the minimum and maximum buy-in amounts is not a decision to be made lightly. It is important that PokerStars make the right decision rather than make a quick, less-informed change.
Reasons for Change
Constantly evolving strategies and trends are characteristics of well designed games of skill. Sometimes dominant new strategies evolve that were unanticipated by those who established the rules of the game. On occasion, the rules must be tweaked to account for new knowledge gained through the collective experience of the community. These adjustments aim to restore balance, depth, and healthy evolution to the game.
After much research, review, and discussion, PokerStars has decided that NL/PL Hold’em and Omaha cash games with 20-100bb buy-ins have evolved to the point where they can no longer be considered well balanced or well designed. As such, change is needed. The ratio of maximum to minimum buy-in at such tables will be lowered to an amount that will generate a more balanced game.
The goal of this change is not to stop players from buying in for 20 big blinds. Players who like to buy-in and play with 20 to 40bb (and 40 to 50bb) stacks are welcome to continue to do so on PokerStars at 20-50bb tables. Many customers, including recreational players as well as long-time customers, both groups being highly valued, prefer to buy in for these amounts. PokerStars expects that these tables will meet the needs of these players.
Players who buy in for stack sizes above 50 big blinds will now see their stacks in play on all streets much more often. The full complement of actions will be available for play on all streets in most pots.
It is important to emphasize that these changes are being implemented to serve the wants and needs of players. Any decision on this topic, including a decision not to change, would displease some number of players. PokerStars believes that these new buy-in amounts are the best possible choices to provide enjoyable games to all players.
Going Forward
PokerStars does believe that these buy-in structures are the best possible given the current state of the games. Games do evolve, however, and very shortly actual game data and experience will supplant theory in discussions of how 20-50bb games will play. PokerStars will be watching and listening. Future tweaks may be necessary from time to time.
Going forward, minimum and maximum buy-ins will be reviewed regularly at the end of each year. Any alterations deemed necessary will be deployed early in the year so that players can make informed choices when planning their attempts for Supernova Elite VIP or other high milestones of the PokerStars VIP Club. No promises can be made that every such change will be made in January or February, but that will be the goal."
These are some pretty drastic changes. Here is my quick summary of some disadvantages and advantages the new changes will bring to current players:
Short-Stacker Disadvantages
1. Player’s can no longer buy in over 50BB on the short-stack tables.
This equates to less rake for the short-stacker. However, I wouldn’t say the rake will decrease by 50% for the average short-stacker, I’d say a 20% decrease sounds more accurate. Very rarely on the old tables would you have 2 full stack players go to war with each-other creating a massive pot where the short-stackers benefit. It happened occasionally, but a LOT less often than most people would think.
I don’t like the fact that a player is not allowed to buy in for over 50BB and sit with short-stacks. People should have this choice in my opinion. I know some people would prefer buying in with a bigger stack, but not risking it against 7 other 100BB buy-in full ring pros. This type of player would generally buy in 40BB-80BB, so he will have an interesting choice to make.
2. Rat-hole timer is increased (“The amount of time a player must wait before returning to the same table with less money has been increased from 30 minutes to 60 minutes for all cash game types.”)
Funny story, I’ve been multi-table short-stacking for over 2 months and didn’t even realize there was a “rat-hole timer”. I actually didn’t realize you were allowed to rejoin tables with a reduced stack (lol?). So yeah uh 60 minutes seems fair to me. I’ve never once ran into a situation where not being allowed to join a table I once left drastically affected me. There were always a good amount of tables. I just logically went after tables based on $ pot average, players per flop %, and individual players at the table.
This could come into play more, but I think it’s the least of concerns for me. I’d be short-stacking 12 tables at once going forward. I think this more will hurt the pro 24-tabling short-stacker who needs to constantly fill new tables to hit his rake-back quota. I think the rat-hole timer will personally help me. It makes it easier for a fish to take a seat, rather than a 24-tabling short-stacking pro.
3. Short-stackers will lose a percentage of their fish?
This is really what it comes down to. Regarding the casual fish player, how many will chose to buy in 20-50BB as opposed to 40-100BB? Only time can really tell. I think the 40-100BB will become a hybrid of the old 50BB+ tables. It will certainly be better than the old 50BB tables because a casual player who wants to buy-in over 50BB is FORCED to play with no short-stackers, for whatever stupid reason. So they have to choose whether they would rather fight the pro full-buy in regular or short-stacker.
4. Short-stackers can’t chase the fish if they all choose to play 40-100BB.
If this is what 80% of the casual players choose, then short-stacking is pretty much over. Short-stackers are left to rot on the 20-50BB tables. But if the casual players do decide on the 20-50BB tables, the regular full-stacker can always go down and play with 50BB full buy in. So the regular full buy in player is not really affected in anyway, they absolutely won here.
Short-Stacker Advantages
1. Short-stacking was not completely eliminated.
A sick hybrid form of short-stacking still exists. If Pokerstars changed the buy in to 35BB+ on all tables it would have been GAME OVER. Furthermore, if Stars made the buy-in amounts 20-40 BB, and 40+ BB it would have been GAME OVER. The 10BB over-lap gives short-stackers hope.
2. There is a chance the casual player will prefer the 20-50BB buy-in tables.
If this is the case the 24-tabling, HUD/PTR bot regulars will have nothing left to bitch about. The casual player will have shown his preference and that is it. Now the regular full buy-in players could either drop and buy in 50BB on the 20-50BB table, or drop and play short-stack. I would like to say there is a small chance that the 40-100BB tables become the same as the old 50BB+ tables, but I see this scenario as almost impossible. PokerStars has created a massive divide by not allowing people the free choice to buy in over 50BB UNLESS it’s on a 40-100BB table.
3. There is a chance that psychological factors will cause the fish to choose the 20-50BB buy-in tables.
Imagine a player has $40-$50 and is looking to sit down and have some “fun” playing poker on a 100NL table. This player might prefer a 20-50BB 100NL table because they will actually feel like they have an advantage with a big stack here. But on a 40-100BB 100NL buy-in table they may feel over-whelmed.
Now imagine a player has $60-$70 he is looking to piss away on a 100NL table and have fun with for the night. He may try to place the money on the 20-50BB table, but realize he is FORCED to buy-in for a maximum of $50 here. He will then check the other option, which is the 40-100BB table. He might see 7 regulars with $100 stacks and think “ok well screw that I might as well play on the short table for $50, at least I don’t feel at a disadvantage. I don’t want one of these 100BB players to stack me in one play”.
Summary:
This will probably be a huge blow to most short-stackers. However, only time will tell how this truly plays out. This is a turbulent and interesting time. That being said I’m glad I’m not relying on online poker as my source of income at this moment. I did predict something along these lines a month or so ago, I remember saying: “I have a feeling a sick hybrid form of short-stacking will still exist.”
It seems the full-stacking regular has won this battle because players are not allowed to buy in with 20BB short-stackers with more than $50 (on a 100NL table for example). If they want to buy-in for more than $50 the player is forced to sit on a 40-100BB table. The only way the full buy in player will lose here is if 80%+ of the casual player’s decide they prefer sitting at the 20-50BB tables. This would be ironic because it would mean the full buy in players actually screwed themselves over. They actually deserve this fate for all the bitching over the past year, but I don’t see this scenario happening.
As for me personally I’m just hoping the 20-50BB tables are profitable enough for me to achieve Platinum Star status by short-stacking the beginning of each month for profit. I have been preparing for this change for over a month. When it’s said and done I will be going wherever the fish go. I’m confident in my ability to short-stack and play full buy in profitably going forward.
It's adapt or die time for everyone.
Reader Comments (6)
Hey, spot-on and insightful analysis. I think that your #3 point about the fish buying in relatively short for psycological factors is what will make the 20-50BB tables the game of choice on stars.
Anyway, regarding the worst run of luck that I've had--
I am 8k below ev after about 1.6 million hands (1.3 of which were shortstacking). I know it's gross, but I accept the fact that it's entirely within the realm of normal variance. I have run many variance simulators with my winrate of .5BB/100 (in EV) over a similar sample, and some graphs were up 15k, others were down 15k. However, due to the FPPs I've made over 1.5M hands, mostly at 50NL, I am still making a living at poker today. I wouldn't worry about the ev. I believe a 50k sample is a good place to gauge your winrate by looking at the EV. I'm not saying that you will actually run *at*, EV, but what I mean is-if the EV is generally up-you've got a winning strategy.
Best of luck and keep in touch!
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showpost.php?p=18195064&postcount=1322
p.s. here is my lifetime EV. 65% 50nl, 20% 25nl, 15% other (10nl to 200nl)
SS,
Thanks for the input. I will check your 2+2 graph later (2+2 is banned at work LOL). You have a massive amount of life-time hands played which I respect, quite a grinder. I had a nice 50k hand stretch on 100NL where I short-stacked and lost 1-1.5 BB/100. I analyzed all of my big losing hands after each session and didn’t feel I was playing badly. Most of the time I thought a normal person would have profited. Though during the first 20-30k hands of that nightmare stretch there were a few leaks, which I think I have plugged now. I have strived to become much better at keeping up aggression around the blinds and making optimal pushes pre-flop based on specific opponent ranges. My range assigning and pushing skills have drastically improved from when I started.
I also know at times I was pressuring myself to play to many tables at once, and lost EV because of it. I’ve played 16-24 tables in many of my sessions just trying to rush FPP earnings and hopefully balance out horrific luck. Now going forward I’m going to stick to 12 tables. I can very comfortably play 12 tables while constantly table selecting, while mixing profitable fast tables into the mix. If someone put a gun to my head I could play 24 tables and hold my own I feel, but I know I’m losing EV by taking this course of action (especially if some crazy mother fucker is actually holding a gun to my head).
You made a good point about the EV. I agree if your EV is going up and positive in the long-run you should be generally profiting. I think this is more important than looking at the EV of individual sessions. For individual sessions, I think it’s more important to go back and analyze each big pot you lost or won. Though beating the EV during individual sessions is feasible, even if you still lose net. That being said I discussed before that EV isn’t the entire story. If you have a session where you get all in with pre-flop with AK+ 10 times, and get hammered 9 of those times the EV might not pick this bad luck up. Perhaps the opponent was dealt AA or KK 9 out of those 10 times, it happens sometimes. The only way you can reduce shit-luck like this is if you have enough data on a player to make a ridiculous read pre-flop and chuck perhaps a few of these hands away.
For example, a TAG nit regular who 3-bets your early open all in from middle position pre with a 3-bet pre-flop raise percentage of 3% has a MONSTER HAND THAT WILL RUIN YOUR LIFE. With me I know I have to realize that and know when to make this lay down sometimes and save $20-30. Against certain players a hand like JJ in this situation becomes a coin-flip at the very very very very very best. Even QQ needs to be considered weak at this point, especially if your stack is around 33BB or something. When I started short-stacking AK, JJ and QQ were basically automatic calls here (incorrect).
Anyways I’ll keep chugging forward and adapting to whatever format I settle on. Last month I lost the most in my life, but feel I also IMPROVED the most. Poker isn’t easy and I did sort of jump into higher stakes with a lot of money, but I don’t have time to build a bankroll from micro. I’m keeping faith that consistent profit online is still attainable for me if I keep up the hard work.
Hey Bag,
Just got a chance to respond to your analysis.
I think that if you feel most comfortable playing 12 tables, by all means-that's the best way to go! I have played about 10k hands since the change on Stars, and the games are softer than ever. I also am making the same VPPs as before! The sample is still small, but I thought I was making less because I must have been playing on some nitty tables.
Your example of the TAGnit 3-betting your EP raise made me lol, because it's so true. They literally never call/raise with less than JJ. However, I see a lot less of those nits, if any, on the new 20-50BB tables!!
Don't worry about EV, just keep grinding those VPPs...honestly only worry about ev if you see a general negative trend after 20k+ hands. As you said, you can't control it during individual sessions. What about all the times you push/3-bet AQ and AK and some donk stacks off with 22? Your EV will go down, despite the fact that they made a moronic call. Little things like that can't be helped.
I'm feeling very optimistic about the future, I should clear a $1500 bonus by next week, and be on my way to 100nl within 3 weeks. What are your immediate goals as far as limits/vpps/profit goes?
Best of luck and keep grinding.
cheers for the analysis/update about the changes- always a good read on here.
Ss,
Good to hear things are going well; the super-nova bonus’s are awesome. As for my goals; I want to get myself in a position making online close to what I make at my day job. Then I won’t feel pressured to quit. I don’t have an exact format that I’m going to live and die by. Whatever format gets me to my goal of quitting. Whether it ends up being short-stacking or full ring I’m not sure.