I think these games are beatable but with less ROI than FTP.One more level between 25/50 and 50/100 would make a huge difference.

I agree with the both of you.  We'll see what we can do in the upcoming weeks to try to add another level.  Until then, at least they are profitable, especially with the 35% rakeback and other rewards.

I think these games were profitable even when there wasn't a 25/50 level added.  Even though I have a small sample size I still managed to maintain a 9% ROI in the $4.20 Super Turbos on Carbon after 226 games and I'm sure my ROI would still be climbing had I decided not to move up in stakes in the super turbos due to them going so well for me.

I think these games were profitable even when there wasn't a 25/50 level added.  Even though I have a small sample size I still managed to maintain a 9% ROI in the $4.20 Super Turbos on Carbon after 226 games and I'm sure my ROI would still be climbing had I decided not to move up in stakes in the super turbos due to them going so well for me.

Look Rypac and Mersennery please just leave the super turbo games on Merge alone, these games were very profitable then before any changes were made to them and the changes that are being made to them makes the super turbo games seem pretty much just like a regular turbo speed game.  These are super turbos, where the action is meant to be fast and the variance is meant to be much higher.  If you have grievances about the structure then don't play super turbos, because the super turbos on Merge are how super turbos are supposed to be.  The super turbos on full tilt used to be great when you started with 300 chips in HUSNGs, but now they have been watered down with increased structure and made less exciting like what all the big wigs are trying to do to the super turbos at Merge.  Once again, leave them alone please...

I guess most the people here care for profit and not so much for gamble.

I disagree with you about the profitability of these prior to the changes.If 20 people played the $4 + .20 level, it's likely some would profit over 200 games in these, but long term you're just giving it back to the house with 5% rake on them at 15bb.  In reality, many more than 20 played, so it wouldn't surprise me if one or two made their way here or on 2p2 and reported good results over small samples.The old FTP super turbos were certainly not profitable.  There just isn't that much edge 0-10bb and that's something the best minds in the game have agreed on for awhile after studying that area (Spamzor, Mersenneary, Skates, HeyBude have all mentioned this at one time or another).  The rake is just a huge factor as well, 5% rake combined with short play, getting into a low edge area like 10bb or less so often so quickly.If you think a 5-8% ROI in the old structure was possible, you should be happy with the changes, as you should see 10-20% ROIs now.  I think the true numbers are more like 0% ROI and now 2-4% ROI, maybe a bit higher at low stakes for some of the wider spreads (really good player that hasn't moved up yet versus the field).In any case, we're not ruining anything by asking for a new blind level between 25-50 and 50-100, it's simply giving players more play in the 15-20bb area of the match, which has much more potential for edge than the 0-10bb area (this can certainly be proven with ST player's stats over long samples).

Marzipannase,I certainly prefer structures that allow players that put in the time and effort to build skills to profit long term.We put up with a ton of variance in the short term, even in some of the more friendly structures, so we don't need to add the burden of wondering if anyone (much less ourselves) can beat a structure.It isn't just "more edge, more edge" though.  As you see with heads up cash, that was not a sustainable form of poker, much like only offering deep, slow structure husngs on a poker room, without a seemingly endless supply of fish, players just go broke so fast.I think that's what happened in heads up cash.  Low rake, low variance, no need to have to play anybody with a hint of skill (allowing players to sit out for hours, unpunished, no requirement on hands played against people that sit you, etc.) all of this just made the edge for literally any players jumping into the game from other games too large.  You'd see marginal heads up players from MTTs, from full ring games, from limit! just coming in to hu cash and bum hunting the fish.I'm not sure why the sites put up with it (and still seem to).  It's not like heads up cash 2-4+ is a massive rake earner, I doubt any sole heads up cash players hit levels like SNE.  I understand the nosebleeds are a popular marketing tool, having Ivey or Durr or DN playing at 200-400 is good for business, but what's that have to do with 2-4 hu cash or even 10-20?  Lack of oversight/incompetence has been my best guess thus far, but from my vantage point they truly did a terrible thing by not fixing the heads up cash ecosystem sooner (or at all, as far as I know they made some half assed changes in recent months/years).  It truly seems like an instance where it could've helped the poker rooms create a healthier ecosystem, while still making more money from it.

Was not my intention to completly diss superturbos, just bad structured and raked superturbos (like kamikazeman wants them).

KM1,It's possible to achieve a high ROI in roulette, too. I understand your desire to play really quick games, just like I understand people's desire to play roulette. It can be fun and exciting. I'm not dissing that, I just want a form of STs where people can win at long term. I think that's a reasonable middle ground.You mention the 300 chip STs on FTP nostalgically, but the truth of the matter is that nobody was able to beat those for any kind of significant sample, and a lot of the best players lost a lot of money trying.

Look guys I know that 226 games is not a big sample size at all to prove any point to you whatsoever, but I'm telling you that I felt that I was beginning to crush the Merge super turbos even before the 25/50 level came into play(which accounts for all 226 games in the sample).  It wasn't a hot streak or just plain good fortune, but I think proper Nash applications and a general feel for my opponent was what gave me the success I was getting.  I think adding the extra 25/50 level is not too bad of a change, but the whole matter of it is is that I was taking full advantage of my opponent's numerous end game mistakes and making them pay for it.  I used to be against playing super turbos until I found the ones at Merge, now it's all I play.  I truly believe that I had an edge over many of my opponents(especially those who rematched me) even before we had a 25/50 level added.  And I also am in full agreement with the 5% rake issue, which can add up pretty fast, even with the 35% rakeback deal which I have, but I think just lowering the rake levels would have been a good change and leaving the structure alone.  I wish I had a chance to prove to you guys that I was beginning to make bank in the old Merge super turbo structure and that I could keep it up long term.

Must be a level. Nobody can really think beating the $4 games over a 226 games gets you an idea about the profitability of these.