Spin N Goes on Stars?
Soo it killed the hyper action for HU today a bit, I decided to try them out..
Biggest prize I got was $180 I know a bunch of guys got the $300 though...
I honestly don't think it will be beatable in a couple days/weeks though way to many regs will jump into them..
Seems pretty easy, there was lots of higher stakes regs trying them out as well..
Biggest prize I got was $180 I know a bunch of guys got the $300 though...
I honestly don't think it will be beatable in a couple days/weeks though way to many regs will jump into them..
Seems pretty easy, there was lots of higher stakes regs trying them out as well..
Comments
Played 16 $7 ones, 12 had a prize pool of $14, 3 $28, and one $42......so I was down $39 in prize pool money before any cards came.....finished -$14
so i'm assuming that every time you only win double the buy-in, the rest of the money goes into the "pool" where it accumulates and then goes for the payouts of the larger spins. interesting idea.
10 games:
7-$2 prize pool
2-$4 prize pool
1-$10 prize pool
-$5 when I was done, so I probably won't play this that much.
pretty sure these are the same starting stack and blinds structure as the regular 6 max hypers so it does feel like there is a decent amount of play in them (relatively speaking) when you're starting with only 3 players.
it also seems like a lot of people are just treating them like a flip from the beginning with opponents shoving 20+ BBs preflop at any time. pretty easy to exploit it seems.
probably. but's that what most of us do with poker money anyway :P
basically, the vast majority of tables will give away double the buy-in. therefore, the money is coming from the third person's buy-in which is put into the "pool" and used for the random games where the payout is larger than 3 times the buy-in.
this was my concern as well because i couldn't find anywhere describing what they do with the money or how long it sits in the "pool".
so, it states that you are playing for more than your BI on average? is it just a promo thing then?
It's here to stay as far as I know..
You can find odds of hitting prizes here..
Spin & Go - Fast Real Money 3-Handed Sit & Go Poker Games
I've realized that you get more fish if u just register 1 at a time since a lot of the regs are registering all 4 at once..
anyways updated graph with only the $30s.. I haven't hit higher than $180 still but I'm happy winning the 120s and 180s
Also found a lot of the regs are playing way to tight or way to aggressive, saw a "reg" 3bet call 25bb shove with 97o tonight.. I guess i shouldn't really be calling him a reg, but had a bunch of them open...
no. it is a 3 max SNG. so, for example, at the $3 level * 3 players = $9 into the prize pool. however, the majority of tables that you play will have multipliers of only 2x the buy-in (i.e. $6) so the remaining $3 goes into the "pool". all those $3 buy-ins get collected and used for the less random larger multipliers.
EDIT: now if that money stays in a "pool" for just the $3 buy-in level, or if they are all combined into a larger "pool" for the entire spin n go promotion, idk. i'd also imagine that it would depend on how many people are playing as well. if no one is playing them, i'd think that the chances of hitting a big multiplier would have to drop. maybe i'm wrong though.
Spanish Players Protest PokerStars' "Spin & Go"
Pokerfuse has explained before that the “industry standard” of 7% rake for a hyperturbo is virtuablly unbeatable, which is what PokerStars' $1 Spin & Go charges. Just like with the horrible bad beat jackpot, flipaments, and other luck-based poker mutations, if it attracts enough bad gamboolers, some skilled players may join in hoping for more :fish:.
PokerStars has previously warned that a drop in other game formats can be expected: A 15% cannibalization of other formats has been observed when rolled out in dot-country markets. A noticeable drop-off in heads-up SNG and single-table tournament traffic may be expected. :-\
yeah, i can see that as being an issue. you could play thousands of these and never hit a big multiplier, whereas the next guy who sits down and plays one can hit the 1000x.
EDIT: plus, a lot of people suck at heads up in hypers.
PokerStars Tournament #986051453, No Limit Hold'em
Buy-In: $2.85/$0.15 USD
3 players
Total Prize Pool: $720.00 USD
Tournament started 2014/10/02 21:07:57 ET
Dear pkrfce9,
You finished the tournament in 3rd place. A USD 60.00 award has been credited to your Real Money account.
I get all in qq vs ako and of course the fucker hits an ace on the river
Congratulations!
Thank you for participating.
tapatalk puts this here to annoy YOU
It's a gold rush I tell ya!
tapatalk puts this here to annoy YOU
Yup I won the 1st one I played,lol. Terrible opponents in these so far but as shown above I can't see them being beatable long term.
If we don't define the player types correctly the math won't show the true issues and the "customer" is then left without a voice. Sadly it seems every single "pro" player in the world, if they are studied at all in economics and game theory, subscribes to this old school thinking and are oblivious to Austrian/Nashian economics.
Spanish players seem smarter on the whole
Rake as a % is really smoke and mirrors, and its easy to see if we compare equal tournaments both with 7% on stars vs party. Which are you more likely to win at?
The real factors, are very well hidden, especially to the collective consciousness of the player pool. This is what is acceptable under old school thinking. Stars feeds it to the players no different than governments feeding inflation targeting to the peoples, under the guise of creating "stability". Where the truth is each the sites and governments are doing it purely for "profit", with no regard to the long term sustainability of the "game".
It might be true, but its tough to suggest that there is as much skill as the other games. And so what happens is the site profits more...and if sites are profiting more, it means the player pool has less money to spread around for the winning distributions.
Everyone wins less.
So I defined "rake" as a %, and "effective rake", where players should not be concerned very much at all with rake as a %, but rather the effective rake of the game. That is to say the actual raked monies sites take in over time. Once the general player pool wakes up to that, we'll have our game back.
Yes, so this shows up in "variance", high variance games take away skill edge and so the actual rake as a %, should be lower for such games.
For example imagine a game where the variance is so high you have to play 1 million games to get a TRUE roi established. If one cannot play anywhere near that many games in a lifetime, how can it be said to be a game of skill?
I want to be clear though, for someone like say Trigs, who is a teacher (last I remember), games like this make perfect sense. And that doesn't at all imply they are a "fish'. In fact I don't believe in the term "fish". For players that play primarily for entertainment, games like this make complete sense especially if they normally play similar games. If you aren't going to play a ton of games all year, might as well put some extra lottery in them. Even if Trigs is a skilled player that wants to win based on skill...it sill makes sense to play them.
However if we take a proper view on the overall economy of the game, its not just the liquid aspect of it that is bad (and it is really bad). Taking this route with poker messes with every aspect of the economy of the game, forums, coaching sites, promotion affiliates, regulations, public image, media, etc. My understanding from all this is Poker Stars has been liquidating the economy of the game in every way they can, in an accelerating fashion. These seemingly small changes actually have the most dramatic effect, far more than an increase in rake % would I think.
I can't understand how they can be so short sited at a time when they need the players support badly for their new "deal", especially when so many new options are opening up to the players. But I have to feel that Amaya has no interest in poker and is absolutely going to be concentrating on other "casino" style card game variants and sports style betting games.
It just makes me wonder if they weren't buying the image, or the player pool, what did they need to buy to enter the states? I wonder if Calvin Ayre or JonTm might have an idea to that.
Its just too hard for me to believe that Amaya bought such a well oiled machine and is intent on running it into the ground but they couldn't have handled things worse since announcing the deal. For any line they are taking and any reason they are taking it, all I can see them doing is wiping themselves out over the 12 months.
I fkn
I played a bunch of 7s. Hit 14 almost every time but got 42 twice.
These are a real bankroll builder for me. The combination of bad players and tons of action fit my skill set perfectly.
tapatalk puts this here to annoy YOU
tapatalk puts this here to annoy YOU
that is the thought that immediately came to mind when I saw this promo.
and no I haven't.
and no I haven't played any of them. And I will not.