I've had a lot of success with different poker rooms over the years and a lot of success with the different support departments of those rooms. I truly believe that the way you approach a topic is nearly as important (if not more important) than the topic itself.One of the main issues I see with the way we go after improvements, is asking for too many at once. Even if every single topic we are asking for are easy solutions, and they are all obviously topics that should be handled, it still comes across poorly when we Email a site and ask for 10-15 changes. Regardless of how much else we tell them we love their site, or how great their support department is, or how much we appeciate their past improvements, 10-15 changes implies we aren't happy with the site."Honey, you really are great, and I'm so lucky to have you. Before we go on vacation next month though, can you dye your hair, whiten your teeth, lose 15 lbs, buy all new clothes, find some new friends to bring along, and work on your sense of humor?"I'm not saying we shouldn't go after all 10-15 topics. We should. But, the best approach would be to dedicate a large push into one topic at a time. Once we get the change we want, (or as close as we can get), we can then move on to another.And, we'll have more success working with a site that realizes we are happy, we are loyal, and we just want to make the grinding experience better for us, the recrational players, and the site itself. For those of you who don't feel that way, at least pretend; it will help get you what you want, I promise. ;-)
I see it quite the other way around. By addressing several issues at once you give the pokerroom the chance to 'pick' some of them and fullfil them. They will never agree to all 15 changes, no matter in how many requests you split them up. They might agree to some (adjusted) versions of a very few of those requested changes. In order to convince a big room, you need to mobilize the masses and this has to be coordinated. What will happen if you hand in the first 7 changeing requests with 1 month between each other and none of them is made reality? Lots of the masses will surrender the support of your requests and not invest the 5 minutes it needs to send a 'standard' email to any pokersite anymore and you will only have the (semi-) regulars and some people who have not been involved on your side and this will cost you a lot of numbers to convince the pokersites if they notice (which will they) that the support is fadeing and the players are still playing even tough nothing has been changed - yet. /edit: but of course it has to be coordinated. Pokerrooms will not reduce the rake AND add the husng to promotions AND makeing extra promotions AND ..... AND.....Here our 'marketing' comes into play: the familar requests has to be bundled. As far as the above request goes, one could bundle them like 'possibilites to reduce the effective rake for HUSNG and makeing them more interesting for potential new customer (f.e. HU CASH players).
Hi.
I understand your thoughts, but if you look at past experiences with the poker sites, they hasn't seemed to be the case. The changes we have gotten over in the long-run have been when we really pushed for one topic at a time.A few thoughts:- "They will never agree to all 15 changes, no matter in how many requests you split them up". I agree 100%, but, most of the time that is due to poor choices in the first place. By the time we make a request, we should have a fair idea of whether or not it is something that they will have reason to turn down or not. And, how the letter is written is very important. Stars willingness to refund after disconnects, send back for players who don't chop as agreed, or punish time bankers, have all proven to be greatly influenced by the letter written requesting action.- "What will happen if you hand in the first 7 changeing requests with 1 month between each other and none of them is made reality?" That argument is the same as if we bundle 7 together and we get no results. Unless rake is lower, promotions are given, leaderboards are designed so no one but HU SNG's guys have a chance, and Strippers are sent to our door to cook for us, most players will give up helping quickly. Shockingly, (as we sit in a chair "working" and watching tv for our "job") Poker players are not a highly motivated group. ;-) Unfortunately, as a rule, many poker players will spend a far greater time complaining about a problem than they will working to fix that problem. Take "Black Friday" for instance. The number of people that ignore TheEngineers daily ideas to help is sad.- 'marketing'. Again, this is key. I truly believe that the push on 2+2 for topics has 100% been the largest factor behind those changes: Hypers, better Hyper structure, card dealt speed, and not waiting so long for a tournament to start. All topics push hard on 2+2, usually with Ryan's guidance. Btw, we can double check, but I'm pretty sure all of those above mentioned topics were ones that were requested 1-at-a-time.Anyway, nothing wrong with an agree-to-disagree. :-)
"Hypers, better Hyper structure, card dealt speed, and not waiting so long for a tournament to start"All those points eventually gain pokerstars money, didn't they? Of course those were welcomed changes. With everything that directly or indirectly reduces their income it is a different story.
Hi.
With that argument, then why can't we get a chop feature?You need to explain to them how the feature you are requesting will eventually make them money, that's the point.
This is really not a HU SNG related question, is it? AFAIK stars does not know a chop feature in any kind of game. How did you explain the need of this feature to Stars? "Neither my opponent nor I do have an edge against each other so we wish to chop but i do not trust that guy" is not the problem of stars.
Hi.
At the moment there is none. Not a one. Would HU MTTS bring more players into the realm of the HU sng? I guess that's the question. But recreational players like to play MTTS, they like the idea of a decent score with a realtively small outlay. So Mtts are good for the recreational players enjoyment. Recreational players like to play a lot of hands. HU MTTS are splendid for this. Maybe if there were some Hu Mtts at various buy in levels this might engender a trickle through into the HU Sngs.I was thinking maybe a 5.50$ or a 11$; a 22$ or 33$ and a 55$ or a $110 - if satellite were run for all HU Mtts this might be okay too. So if it was a 22$ hu mtt you could play a HU sng for 11$ to sattie in, that way the recreational player is getting some HU SNG action on his or her way to the HU MTT. Satties could maybe even take the 4 man HU sng format so you could get into a 22$ mtt for $5.50$ and so on. If the satellite were in the HU sng lobby. Ipoker does run satellite that take the HU SNG format but are for MTTS regular and are to be found in the HU SNG Lobby...so clearly someone thinks HU satellite are not the worst thing in the world...so to actually have three Hu MTTS per day with sats at three price points - one per day - might not be the hardest thing to implement. I think I poker could do 3 HU mtts a day one at each price point though not sure what the highest buy in should be...but i think/hope it's worth discussing. A simplified way of looking at the idea of Improving the games: You either make it cheaper to play...reduced rake.Or you try and encourage recreational players to play more HU sngs - and yea you can do it by making it cheaper to play...reducing rake or dangle a differnt sort of carrot...the lure of the MTT, the value of the satellite, the joys of the HU SNG lobby.Can i assume that the plan is to take a single proposal to each of the Networks/Pokerooms...if so this is my contribution to what I'd like to see as part of a proposal to be taken to Ipoker. I don't think it's too big of an ask. and if it doesn't work out they can scrap it and no damage done. But the variety of MTTS on Ipoker is piss poor and a lot of recreational players will jump in any mtt that's starting when they are playing...Ipoker has way too many rebuy mtts, not enough Six max mtts and zero HU Mtts. Surely there's a gap in the market.
Stars has a chop feature in development.Stars actually does a pretty good job, their only real fault is speed of changes (2ish years after FTP has STs they add Hypers, 2ish years after FTP has rematch button they add that, they're just starting to likely include HUSNGs in promos like battle of planets, we hope, etc.).The chop feature is simple: Players go all in preflop the same time, and even though Stars says they don't enforce these agreements in the chat, they still do at times (bc they used to), and even if they didn't, they would still get people complaining, upset, etc. about it. So it costs manpower.Plus, if you're a poker room and two players in a $100 + 5 want to chop, wouldn't you rather have them be able to do it instantly and move on to the next game? You want to collect your rake as fast as possible. These aren't rake free chops obviously.
I was thinking about hypers/supers that were a best 2 out of 3, or the best 3 out of 5 etc. Are they going to offer 4 man or 8 man hypers?I dunno as rec player I wouldn't mind paying a buyin and having a best 2 out 3 against a pro.