No More Monthly Updates

Posted by icemonkey9 on Feb 1, 2010 in poker | 2 comments

By the title of this blog post suggests, I'm not going to give obligatory monthly updates anymore.  One thing I observed while mass multi-tabling full ring games was the highs and lows that each session can bring. It's still amazing to me to look at a session played where I lose.  Rarely did I misstep during those sessions, but would see things like me losing to two 2-outers (last session) or something like a W$SD (Won Money @ Showdown) percentage of 20% (which means opponents just kept showing up with huge hands or drawing out).

Anyways, it's not my point to make a thinly veiled brag, the point is that I see how even from session to session there's highs and lows and you can't even look at one session to the next and totally read into the results.  I say that comparing 1,200 hand sessions to my 500 sessions from the past.  Even small pockets of data like the weekly results and gameplay stats aren't quite enough of a barometer for me to look into. That's when I thought a monthly update comparing "Month X" to "Month Y" wasn't going to work for me anymore.

What I plan to do now is just do a running check starting from the year and moving forward. So when I look at my stats now, yes, I'm checking my month and how it's going.  But at the end of February I'll be checking for two months and so on for the rest of 2010. I have a feeling this will make the swings of playing a little broader instead of thinking "AHHHH crap I'm down $XXX already this month!!" I will just see that I'm looking at a small rough stretch of a very long haul.

It's just something I am experimenting with but I really like the concept after thinking about it.  So I will be giving updates on my game play at the tables, but I won't be saying things like "Well this week I have won X!" and "Wow this month has taken me for such a BE stretch..." etc etc.

Still No Word from PokerStars

PokerStars is the world's largest poker site and has more action than anyone else. I did predict about six months ago that they were prime for the plucking and that Full Tilt Poker could challenge them for the number one spot.  I was met for the most part with laughter and dismissal (Zachvac), but given that Full Tilt made huge strides in narrowing the gap between themselves and Stars it looks like I was on to something.

Fast forward now to present day and the entire industry is talking about Full Tilt Poker. It's the site that gives you rakeback. It's the site that just got rid of the ratholing shortstackers.  It's the site that innovated the game that the fish love, Rush Poker.  For someone who has been writing articles for two years now across what has been about a dozen websites, I've never written more stories about Full Tilt Poker in my life.  PokerStars is undoubtedly taking a back seat which is totally unfamiliar country for them.

Part of the problem is that the January promotions at PokerStars weren't all that impressive.  The Stellar Rewards is a good system and something that gives the micro and small stakes players something to shoot for as they make their way to SuperNova.  The problem is that the full ring players are making less VPPs per hand, so once again PokerStars gives you something while taking a little bit away.  Another huge issue is the absolute lack of response PokerStars has had toward changing the buy-in structure and Rush Poker.

I've personally emailed and PM'd four different PokerStars contacts that I know and even off the record haven't learned much of anything.  All I know is that they are talking internally and trying to come up with some solutions.  A huge issue for them with the shortstacking issue is that some of their "Team Online Pros" are the ratholing shortstackers, so a change to their buy-in structure would probably kill them off.  Clearly, everyone knows where I stand on the issue.  Playing No Limit Hold'em (the Cadillac of Poker) is not sitting at a table that has five people that buy-in for 20 big blinds who leave the table immediately if they win a pot.  I don't understand why people who want to play "regular" poker and sit down and enjoy the game have to navigate through to find special tables to do this.  I think those people that want to play this specialized form and theory of poker should find THEIR own tables.  Regular tables should be 40 big blinds to 100 (or even 200), and let the people that want to play short play at special short tables.

As it stands now, on February 1st, is that PokerStars has made no comment about what decisions it will be making or even when a decision will come (if any is coming at all).  In the meantime a flood of SuperNova+ players are moving their bankrolls to Full Tilt Poker to enjoy the 27% rakeback and from what I hear fantastic low and mid stakes games without the shortstackers.  We might point to this period in the history of online poker as the time that PokerStars "timed out and folded" when the chips went all in against the competition.