In my previous post I had talked about the various changes in the SNGs. The main changes are the changes in rake and the structure. After putting in some decent volume, I am able to give a more valid response to how it has effected the games.
Please note I am talking specifically more so about how these games effect the Pokerstars 180 man SNG tournaments.
Generally speaking I welcomed some changes, and others having more of a neutral view on it by just explaining what they were,but because I'm a MTT SNG grinder they simply don't effect me as much as they do to others. I am aware however, that these rake changes are higher for lower staked players, making them less beatable. But on the flipside I discussed how it would allow them to rake up those VPPs to get Supernova or even SNE a lot quicker.
Now there are a large percentage of players who are not happy with the changes. I understand and accept their positions. I'm not saying that they're amazing, fantastic changes, but the reasoning for saying that they were good... is because there *are* changes implemented. Not the fact that they got it right first time. What I mean is that I believe that PokerStars is showing the potential for changing something, and then modifying it til they get it right.
There have been many software improvements throughout the 2 years I've been playing on PokerStars, but a good example is the fact that they have changed the $3 rebuy 180 man non turbo to turbo, only 1 day after implementing it. I had complained about it on twitter, and they changed it soon after! Maybe it was a mistake? Maybe there was a lot of demand for it? But what's important to know is that if there is a demand for something, then they will change it for their customers! And I think that's good. Comparing to back when I was playing Full Tilt, it would absolutely take ages for anything to change or seem to get through to them!
I'm gonna go through all the categories again and give my 2 cents on each change now and talk about how successful each one is, now that I've put in some games to get a first hand feel of how they effect the games.
New Blind Levels - 3 minute turbos, 6 minute non turbos.
Cutting the turbos from 5 mins to 3 seemed to be something that was introduced to balance out the fact that they added more levels to flatten the structure. Whilst I agree with the flatter structure, I think taking off 2 mins from turbos is too much. Seeing that the old turbo was 5 mins, the new non turbo is 6 mins, which is close to the old turbo then the new one! What's funny is that I think there is a general satisfaction with having turbos at 5 mins, but probably the 10 mins for non turbos is too slow.
My choice - After playing a few, it became apparent to me that 3 mins is too fast. Of the 2 games which I won, 1 ended at blinds 7/14k blinds (which is the cap), and the other at 6/12k. With 300k chips in play, for that to happen almost every time you win it means that it is too fast. I would say, try putting turbos to 4 mins, or give us 2k starting stacks instead of 1500.
Non turbos can still be 6 mins, or 7-8 mins instead.
Change Rating = 2/5 Even no change would have been better.
New Additions - Super turbos, Turbo KO 9 mans.
I haven't played any Turbo 9 man KO STTs, but from my one game of hyper turbo that seems really fun. 500 chips, 2 min blinds... and level 1 has an ante! I used to start out on Full Tilt playing Super Turbos, and I can really see this hitting it off. At the moment there is only a $5 stake but I wouldn't be surprised to see more coming, and for this to become a permanent game. The KO turbo does seem like a good idea tho, and its new (meaning that Full Tilt doesn't have it). The KO's money would seem to be a good addition to their bankrolls.
Change Rating = 5/5 Add more stakes in hyper turbos! Full Tilt Super Turbos have shown that these games are popular and will be very profitable for them.
Standardized Structure - Flatter Structure, Ante is 10% of Big Blind
I have to say, in playing quite a few (about 100) of these since my last post I honestly didn't notice a big change in having a flatter structure. The speed of the blinds basically vetos the smoothness of the blinds going up. I worked out it took me on average 90-100 mins to win a 180 man tournament, compared to the old tournaments when it would take around 100-110 mins. 10 minutes is huge! It would take 23 levels to get to 6k/12k where as now it takes 30 levels. But its hard to tell if it makes a huge difference because of the change in speed of the blinds.
However, I am not a non turbo player. I can totally see this structure benefit non turbo tournaments. But for turbos, I don't think it makes such a big difference because the blinds go up so quickly. The fact that it takes less time to complete a 180m makes it more of a "crapshoot" (I would argue that there is still skill involved) according to some players. Maybe a different structure is needed to turbos, instead of making them the same as non turbos.
New Structure, 180 Man Turbos.
Ante Introduced at Level 10, 30 mins
30 Levels to get to 6k/12k, 90 mins
Old Structure, 180 Man Turbos
Ante Introduced at Level 7, 35 mins
23 Levels to get to 6k/12k, 115 mins
I am a big fan of making ante 10% tho, totally standardizing that makes sense.
Change Rating = 3/5 For turbos the blinds seem to go up too quick for it to seem to make a difference. Maybe we need even more levels, or introducing antes later on would improve it. Either way, the structure must make it so that the new turbos take the same time to complete as the old ones for us to see any notable change effected by the new structure.
Multi Registrating MTTs - This seemed to have been taken off.
Change Rating = n/a Would love this, but I guess it does make the lobby messy. Maybe a mistake accidently put up?
Time Additions - More time per 5 levels, and 60 seconds more on Final Tables.
I really welcome this addition, although there are a lot of people who are saying that time hoggers will use this to prolong the bubble as long as possible. This is a valid argument, but so far in all my games I have yet to see it happening.
However on the flip side, it will allow you to play more tables and not worry about timing out. If I had to choose between not having bubble hoggers and more tables for me, I'd say more tables is way better then worrying about those bubble hoggers.
Change Rating 4/5 - Maybe some kinda protection vs bubble hoggers can be introduced... like they cant use their timebank 3 times in a row on the bubble, or have admins control it a bit.
Standardized Buy Ins - It is a much better system now that they standardize all the buy ins. All the buy ins are going to be 1,3,5,10,20 etc going up in a logical manner. However, I do agree with Epitomized that making the lobby add up the raked numbers does make for some very strange numbers on the lobby. A $3.38 or $5.43 buy in might seem a rather odd arbitrary number to a random fish who simply wants to play a $3 or $5 game! Its a very good point. Maybe making them add up to nice numbers of ten is better then adding rake on the whole numbers.
Change Rating 4/5 - Funny numbers, but a much smaller jump between stakes allows for easier and less risky bankroll building.
Rake - The rake has been standardized throughout the stakes. It isn't just a bunch of random numbers anymore. The most important thing is that the higher stake games rake has been reduced, allowing them to be slightly more beatable then before. However, whether fish will see the difference is debatable?
Unfortunately, the lower stakes has been hit hard. The $16s, now being the $10s+0.85 is now even less beatable then before, despite its regged filled games. However, on the flip side it is arguable that it is easier to get Supernova or SNE by risking less money.
One has to wonder what PokerStars are thinking as well. With their traffic being cut from Black Friday, do they make things cheaper for everyone, or do they try and make more money to balance out the loss of the Americans? It seems they've gone the for latter. Was this wise? Only time will tell...
Change Rating 3/5 - I personally think they should have lowered everything to adjust to Black Friday. Get more new players in by offering better value. It is good that they have introduced a lower, more standardized rake especially in the mid to higher level stakes, but I would have thought that incentifying new players at the lower stakes is a better strategy for the long run. Making the rake higher in low stake STTs for example, is quite a risky proposition considering that there are so many breakeven regulars anyway that make those game very hard to beat.
Change Rating 3/5 - Good that its standardized, but bad that the lower stakes have to pay for the reduction in the higher stakes.
Overal, it is a good change. I said that in the last post. But no better then a lukewarm "good". Others might disagree. There are a lot of holes in it, but I think people don't understand that its almost impossible to get it right first time. The fact that they're willing to change it up, and show that they will is a good thing. If the majority of their customers cry out about something, then they will change it. It will be interesting to see if the traffic slows down on STTs. But as far as the changes to my 180 mans, again, its not really that hugely different so I'm not complaining.
No comments:
Post a Comment