On Occupy PokerStars and Other Protests

Have been somewhat intrigued by all the hubbub surrounding PokerStars’ change to a weighted-contributed model of attributing rake instituted on January 1. The ones griping about the change have made the most noise, it seems. Meanwhile, those with less of an issue with it have been relatively less conspicuous, though perhaps more persuasive.

I’m one of those recreational players who despite playing a lot of online poker never really got heavily into taking advantage of things like rakeback or other promotions sites offer to reward high frequency players. While PokerStars didn’t offer rakeback, anyway, its “VIP Stellar Rewards” program was a way for even small-timers like me to earn a few bonuses along the way. So I became somewhat familiar with it until last April when I had to leave the site with the rest of the Americans.

I played a lot more on PokerStars than Full Tilt Poker over the years, preferring the site for a variety of reasons. So I ultimately earned a lot more extras on Stars than I did on Tilt, including numerous cash bonuses. I think the only extra I ever got from FTP was to purchase an international power converter with my FTP points once. Meanwhile, I never did figure out FTP’s “Black Card” program or “Iron Man” program or any of the rest.

All of which is to say, I’d never really given a ton of thought to how rake was attributed on the various sites. I knew that my Frequent Player Points (FPPs) on Stars were awarded based on how much rake was taken from pots, but it really wasn’t until last year -- after closing my account on Stars -- that I became aware of different ways to attribute rake and thus award FPPs or the equivalent.

Since I write some for Betfair Poker, I’ve gotten to know a little bit about its poker site (even though I cannot play on it) which joined the Ongame network back in 2010. There they have something called “Ongame Essence” which is some sort of algorithm that factors playing style and amounts won or lost when calculating the attribution of rake.

“Essence” is an appropriately mysterious-sounding name for it, I think, because it is hard for players to know how many points they are earning as they play. If I understand it correctly, the model boils down to keeping the less profitable players in the game, essentially (pun intended).

I’ve read forum threads where some have objected to the fairness of giving losing players extra benefits to retain them this way. I’ve also seen the whole program characterized as “poker socialism.” But others have noted how they’ve found a lot of poor players populating the tables on Ongame sites, suggesting the model might well be indirectly benefiting good players, too.

In any case, learning about Ongame Essence made me more aware of different ways to attribute rake and award loyalty points. It’s an issue fairly unique to the online game, really, something that can be experimented with much more easily there than in live poker where comps are generally given for the amount of time one plays (e.g., $1 or $2 per hour) rather than how much rake has been taken at the games.

By changing to a weighted-contributed model of rake attribution, Stars moved away from the so-called “dealt method” which awarded every player at the table similarly regardless of their involvement in a hand. In other words, whereas before all players at a table would get credited with the same amount of VPPs for hands into which they were dealt, now only those players who actually put money into the pot -- and thus contribute to the rake taken out -- can earn any VPPs.

In other words, you can’t really earn a lot of VPPs (which get translated into FPPs according to your status on Stars, e.g., Bronze, Silver, Gold on up to SuperNova and SuperNova Elite) if you fold the majority of your hands. Thus does the change appear to some to resemble the Essence program insofar as it gives the looser players (who tend to be less skilled) more VPPs while the tighter players (who tend to be better) receive less.

There are other objections being raised, including the fact that the change will likely mean PokerStars will be awarding less FPPs overall due to the fact that fewer players will be able to achieve higher statuses (where they get more FPPs for VPPs). A common cry, then, is that the change hurts regulars/good players a lot, helps recreational/poor players a little, with the site pocketing the difference.

The complaints reached a kind of fever pitch on the forums last week, making it seem like Stars’ decision fell into the same category as the Netflix-Qwikster debacle from September, Bank of America’s new debit card fee in October, and Verizon’s attempt last week to add a fee when customers paid their bills online.

All three of those changes were swiftly reconsidered in response to customer backlash. Back in August, PartyPoker saw similar complaints arise when they changed their rake structure and also decided to go with a weighted-contributed model for rake attribution. Players protested by staging a mass “sit-out” on the site -- logging in, sitting at tables, then not playing -- and Party backed off the rake hike although did keep on with the weighted-contribution model.

Perhaps inspired by all of these other successful protests, there was an attempt by some regulars to stage their own “sit-out” on PokerStars on New Year’s Day. But the site quashed that quickly by clearing tables and locking the accounts of those trying to pull an “Occupy PokerStars.” Read more about that on PokerFuse.

“im guessing this sit out shizznit didnt go well?” asked one poster in the 2+2 thread devoted to the sit-out. “thats the general consensus,” was another’s response.

As I say, the cries of dissent have been loud, but some -- including Phil Galfond and a few other respected voices in the poker community -- are noting that the complaints aren’t necessarily warranted. Others -- including Kim of Infinite Edge -- have pointed out that Stars is in fact behind the curve a little when it comes to moving away from the dealt method of rake attribution, with only a few sites still operating that way. (Incidentally, Full Tilt had switched from the “dealt” method to the weighted-contributed model for rake attribution just prior to shutting down.)

If I were still playing on Stars, I probably would’ve have been affected a small amount by the change, likely earning FPPs at a slightly lower clip than before. But as I mentioned I doubt it would’ve mattered that much to me, given that I never put in enough volume for the loyalty bonuses to matter too greatly.

So I probably wouldn’t have been too bothered by it all were I still playing on the site. And while its hard to be certain from the rail like this, I’m less persuaded by the protestors than I am by those pointing out the change isn’t as worthy of criticism as some believe.

Going for the Gold

As I’d mentioned a couple of times over the last few weeks, I found myself playing on PokerStars enough during August that I discovered I might be able to reach “Gold Star” status, something I hadn’t tried for before. Ended up staying on pace and yesterday -- the last day of August -- made it to 3,000 VIP Player Points (VPPs) and got the Gold Star.

Kind of felt like I’d achieved something, I guess. Though to be honest seeing the little “Congratulations! You have achieved the GoldStar” pop-up was a tad anticlimactic. Still, having that goal in mind during the month did add a little extra interest to the playing. And I do think my game benefited somewhat from playing a little more (and on a regular schedule).

With only a few brief excursions elsewhere, I played almost entirely six-handed pot-limit Omaha during August. I stuck to the tables with $0.10/$0.25 blinds at which the min-max buy-ins were 20-50 BB (that is, $5.00 to $12.50). I’ve played higher before (up to PLO50), but decided if I was going to put in more volume I wanted to do what I could to manage the swings to fit more comfortably within my Stars bankroll.

I still have the old PokerTracker 2 for Omaha (never did update to PT3) into which I keep entering all of my hands played. During the month I was additionally keeping track of FPPs and VPPs earned on a separate spreadsheet, mainly just to give myself an idea how many hands it would end up taking to reach Gold Star.

Ended up discovering early on that it took me about 4.7 hands or so at my favored game to earn a single VPP, which meant in the end I had to get up to a little over 14,000 hands to get the 3,000 VPPs needed for the Gold Star. I haven’t looked back at previous months, but that’s definitely more than I usually will play in a given month. At least it is more than I’ve been playing lately, anyway.

That gave me an idea of how many hands I would need on average to play each day -- around 450 -- to get to Gold Star by month’s end. By multi-tabling I was able to do that without too much fuss, although I tend to feel more at ease (and do better) when playing shorter sessions (i.e., no more than 200 hands).

Probably would’ve abandoned the idea early on had I started out the month badly, but after a so-so first week I ran well and had a decent win rate -- 9.2 big blinds per 100 hands played -- going through the first three weeks of August. Endured a few sour days right about then, but recovered over the last week to end at around 6.5 big blinds/100 hands for the month. I also managed to score a couple of those VIP Stellar Rewards bonuses along the way, too (including a $50 one), so profit-wise it ended up one of the better months I’ve had in a while.

Perusing the PokerTracker info, my “Position Stats” unsurprisingly reveal hands played from the blinds to have been my least profitable during the month. Looks like I’m probably completing from the small blind more than I should (could I really have such a high “VP$IP” -- i.e., Voluntarily Put Money In Pot -- there?). I also managed to lose money from UTG+1, the only non-blind position from which I didn’t profit. Overall, my “VP$IP” was a little above 32%.

I need further tutoring to gain from these stats, to honest, as I don’t really know what to look for. (Just one of many reasons why I’m still a recreational player, most comfortable at these low limits.) Truth be told, when I look at the stats I get distracted by various trivia. You know, like finding out how many times was I dealt A-A-x-x -- almost 2.8% of the time, it turns out. And even though aces occasionally can be very frustrating hands to play in PLO, overall they are winners. Indeed, I won 58% of those hands, earning a nifty 2.7 big blinds per hand. (Whee.)

Gold Star gets me a few things. For one, I will earn double FPPs for September (i.e., 2 FPPs for every 1 VPP). I’ll also have access to the “GoldStar VIP Store,” which theoretically means I can now purchase a few things with my FPPs that I couldn’t before, including some of the electronics (a Blu-Ray disc player, a Nintendo Wii, a Netbook, etc.). I say “theoretically” because unfortunately I am starting the month with only about 6,000 FPPs, not enough to buy any of those items yet. I could also now buy my way into a few of the bigger tourneys, had I the FPPs to do so, but again I’m a little short for that.

The Daily/Weekly VIP tourneys are open to everyone, anyway, so getting Gold Star matters little with those. However, I do get a free entry into a $100,000 tourney at the end of the month (as Silver Star, I would’ve had to win a FPP satellite first to play that one). There’s also a $1,000,000 quarterly VIP tourney which Gold Stars get to play, but unfortunately for me that doesn’t come up again until November, so I’d have to make Gold Star during October to play.

I suppose in practical terms all I’ll really do with my fancy new Gold Star is try to earn some extra FPPs this month, planning (probably) to cash them in at some point down the road.

And when it comes to playing, probably try to focus a little more on quality than quantity.

Hands & Happenings (In Search Of)

Yesterday I spent some time filling in some gaps in the Hard-Boiled Poker archives. Was mainly working on the section called “On the Street” and did manage to get that page entirely up-to-date with links to old posts. Two of the other archive sections -- “Shots in the Dark” (where go posts about strategy, theory, or other abstract ramblings) and “By the Book” (book talk, including reviews) -- are presently current as well.

I still have to go in and add a bunch of links to the other two sections, both of which are the largest ones here on the site. There’s “The Rumble” which collects posts that consider how poker gets discussed and presented in various media. Then there is “High Society,” under which heading go posts about the pro circuit, the WSOP, and so forth. Will probably try to get those all done this week.

I noticed something yesterday while adding some links to that “On the Street” page. That’s the section where I’ve stuck posts about my own play, or “hands & happenings at the tables.” Kind of where the whole idea for the blog began, as a place to write about my low limit adventures and maybe try to work out some ideas as a means to improve myself as an amateur player. If you think back to 2006 or thereabouts (when I began Hard-Boiled Poker), that’s really what a lot of poker blogs were doing then -- talking about hands, tourneys, what have you.

It only took a month or two for me to realize that it wasn’t terribly interesting to keep writing about hands all the time. It also occurred to me -- especially once I realized I had a few readers -- that it probably wasn’t all that interesting only to read about such stuff, either. So I started writing about other things, and soon came up with the five sections.

Anyhow, one item of interest I discovered yesterday was that the frequency of my “On the Street” posts has dropped off considerably of late. While I was averaging about five per month or so through the end of 2009, I’d only written 11 “On the Street” posts during 2010. That’s out of 178 total posts this year (through yesterday).

In fact, when I wrote an “On the Street” post last week -- “Dam Bluffers” -- it was the first time since May I’d written a post specifically about my own play. Noticing that drop off got me thinking about the reasons why I’m writing less about playing.

One obvious reason is that the more I write about poker -- which I’ve been doing a lot, both here and elsewhere -- the less I play.

My buddy Eric (a.k.a. “FerricRamsium”), a full-time tourney reporter for PokerNews who has been traveling the world over the last couple of years covering events all over, has a funny line on his Twitter bio that comes to mind here -- “I used to play poker before I got into poker.”

During the two months I was in Vegas this summer helping cover the WSOP, I did manage to play here and there -- probably 6-8 sessions or so, including some fun mixed games with my fellow PN colleagues over at the Hard Rock. But really most of my energies during that period were devoted to writing about others’ play, and I while I did have some interesting hands and potential anecdotes to share from my own sessions, I wasn’t too inspired to break them down here.

There are probably other reasons, too, for my posting less frequently about my own play. As one plays more and more, the novelty obviously wears off, and hands or situations that seemed especially interesting (and seemingly worth writing about) become less so with repetition.

I think the instinct to talk about one’s own strategy and thinking might also necessarily lessen the more one plays, too. Indeed, in that “Dam Bluffers” post last week I noted that those who offer a lot of commentary about others’ play in the chat box often turn out to be less than solid players themselves, often revealing themselves to be relatively inexperienced. Or just experienced enough to start to have some ideas about strategy and an irresistible urge to share those ideas.

One last reason for less frequent posting about my own play is that I haven’t been winning at the same rate this year as I have in past years. Not that I ever won a heckuva lot, playing at the micro/low limits as I do. But still, the fact that I’ve been essentially running in place for all of 2010 has probably lessened the urge to write about “hands & happenings from the tables.”

We all like to tell others about our successes. And most of us are less enthused about sharing our failures. Even if such preferences can be defended as “natural” or “human,” in poker they represent a pretty obvious flaw. Or at least a limitation. One has to be willing to examine closely one’s lack of success -- to write about it, for instance, if that’s the way one generally performs such examinations -- if one hopes to improve.

I’ve been playing a lot more (all online, natch) since returning from Vegas. I still entertain thoughts of gunning for that Gold Star over on PokerStars this month, and am in fact on pace to do so, although I’m considering Stephen’s suggestion (in a comment last week) about perhaps waiting until October to gun for that so as to land that free seat in the Quarterly VIP Tourney in November.

I do like writing about hands. Not so much because of my desire to (pretend to) demonstrate any special strategic knowledge, but because of the way poker hands can often produce interesting, compelling narratives -- little stories with plots, characters, and themes.

Will try to keep an eye out, then, over the next few weeks while “on the street.” Plenty going on out there. To paraphrase that old film noir, there are eight million stories at the tables. I’ll try to find one of them.

And Bingo Was My Name-O

Was playing some pot-limit Omaha yesterday. Am going for my Silver Star cash bonuses on PokerStars. Can’t exactly trade the FPPs directly for cash -- you still have to put in some hands to get the moneys. But clearing the bonus isn’t too arduous.

By the way, to revisit that question I posed earlier in the week -- I am not displaying my status at the tables. When I see others’ displaying that they are Silver Stars or Gold Stars or Platinum Stars or Supernovas or whatever, I suppose I tend to believe they at least have some clue what they are doing. In other words, in a game of PLO, say, I tend to expect such players to understand a little something about starting hands or how the hand values aren’t like in hold’em and so forth.

Thus do I choose not to let my opponents know of my Silvery superpowers. Now that I think about it, not displaying my status might’ve encouraged the following bit of hilarity from yesterday’s session.

I’d been playing for awhile, two-tabling at $50 max, and was starting to think about leaving. At the full-table I was up quite a bit, while at the 6-handed table I had been down for a while, but had managed to chip back up to about $55. At the latter table a short-stacked player had taken the spot to my left about 20-30 hands back. He’d bought in for just $10 and had been raising or reraising pot preflop about once per orbit.

Had a hand come up where I picked up in the small blind. A nice Omaha-8 hand, but not really the cat’s pajamas here in PLO high only. Anyhow, the table folded around to the button who raised pot to $1.75. He’d been open-raising from the button with just about anything, so I went ahead and called with my double-suited hand. That’s when Mr. Shorty (in the big blind) decided to pump it up to $7, leaving himself just $7.35 behind.

The player on the button thought a moment, then folded, leaving just me and Mr. Shorty. Feeling as though his range was pretty wide here -- looked like a definite squeeze, frankly -- I decided to gamble and so reraised enough to put him all in. He called, of course.

As we were on PokerStars, the cards didn’t get turned over until the very end. So when the flop came , I was pretty sure I’d lost the hand. The turn was the , giving me a ray of hope. And the river was the . My hand was revealed, showing I’d backdoored a flush. Mr. Shorty then chose to show his hand -- . Ouch. He was now sitting out as the $28.95 pot slid my way.

Mr. Shorty: why call with that ****... u fat bingo player

I instantly smiled. I typed back.

Short-Stacked Shamus: fat?
Mr. Shorty: u stupid fat idiot

I rarely get called fat. If I were a boxer, I’d literally be a lightweight (almost a featherweight). I think at the WSOP last summer the wiry F-Train might have been the only guy in the entire Amazon Room over whom I had any weight advantage, although to be honest I think he could probably take me. I base that assumption on the fact that F-Train is, after all, the the 33rd best razz player in the world. And razz players tend to have an ornery streak, even if it is hidden most of the time. Much more so than us bingo players, anyhow.

My opponent continued.

Mr. Shorty: yes and your fat mother 2

Hahahahaha. He left soon afterwards, and so didn’t get to see my response:

Short-Stacked Shamus: :)
Short-Stacked Shamus: that made my night
Short-Stacked Shamus: think i'll go exercise

Trick or Treat

Got home late in the afternoon on Friday (October 31). Ripped open the bags of Laffy Taffy, Hershey bars, and Smarties we’d gotten earlier in the week and filled a big wooden bowl, readying myself for the march of zombies, princesses, witches, and ghosts that was sure to commence sometime before sunset.

Having a little bit of time to kill before the trick-or-treaters would be arriving, I opened PokerStars and checked out my “VIP Status” for the month. I was sitting at 1,230 points, meaning if I wanted to reach “Silver Star” I was going to have to make a crazy push here at the end to do so. I’d gotten the Silver Star once before earlier this year. I wrote about it here, including as an illustration an embarrassing photo of a young Shamus dressed as a cowboy. Gawd, I hope that was Halloween. (I cannot recall.)

I never really took advantage of any of the (modest) benefits of the Silver Star back in April when I had it, only playing a couple of the tourneys and never cashing my FPPs for anything. Something made me want to try again, though, and perhaps this time around do something with the status. I did a few quick calculations and decided I’d have to put in something like 500-600 hands at the $50 buy-in pot-limit Omaha tables to get the needed points. And the kiddies were coming. I’d have to move quickly....

So I did something very uncharacteristic. I four-tabled at PLO50 for the next two hours, actually putting in over 700 hands. Two of the tables were six-handed, so the action was pretty relentless. I ended up coming away a bit down, though not nearly as much as it could have been. Had some crazy, head-spinning swings (for me, anyway) in both directions throughout the session. Lost what was probably the biggest pot I’ve ever played online (over $160, I think), but won a couple of $100-plus pots as well. I’d offer details, but the whole thing was so manic I can barely remember what happened.

Now I have the Silver Star and over 10,000 FPPs to spend, and I’m thinking this time I might just take the cash. One can get $50 for every 5,000 FPPs, and while I know there are better deals (including using FPPs for buy-ins to certain tourneys), I don’t think I play enough tourneys really to make that work for me.

Another decision I get to make is whether or not to display my status at the tables. What do you guys think? Any advantage (or disadvantage) to letting the world know I’m a Silver Star?

In any event, it looks like my “treat” for having made that final push will be an extra hundy in my account. Can’t help thinking, though, that for us small-timers who find ourselves occasionally pushing to make that Silver Star it’s mostly a “trick.”

Oh, but I did get another treat out of it. Night had fallen by the time I finished up play, and when I took a peek out front I realized I’d forgotten to turn on the porchlight when I got home. Meaning the kiddies passed us by.

Sweet! More Laffy Taffy for me. Delicious!

And hilarious. Jokes On Every Wrapper! Mmm-umm-mmm... what does this one say? “Why did the chicken cross the playground?” Let’s see... “To get to the other slide.”

Terrific! Have a whole bowl of this stuff now!

A New Sheriff in Town

Decided yesterday to go ahead and make that last push toward getting the Silver Star on PokerStars. I was close when the day began, having to pick up nearly 100 more FPPs/VPPs to get there. Besides, I did get over to the gym on Saturday (finally), so that made me feel relatively less guilty about wasting away a few more hours in front of the laptop.

Ended up putting in several hundred hands of pot limit Omaha ($25 buy-in), limit Hold ’em ($1/$2), and Stud Eight-or-Better ($0.50/$1). Took a while, but I finally crossed the 1500 FPP/VPP mark around nine last night, after having taken a break to watch Davidson nearly pull the huge upset. (Didja notice how on CBS they abbreviated Davidson as “David” on the score line? They shoulda just gone ahead and listed Kansas as “Goliath.”) Logged off a winner for the day (about twenty-five clams up), though was a bit miffed at having made a dumb PLO play near the end that essentially cut my profit in half.

All in all, though, I think I did well not to push too hard (i.e., multitabling, playing too high) in order to rack up the points. As I mentioned over on the PokerSift blog yesterday, I know folks frequently end up getting into trouble chasing bonuses, oftentimes losing at the table more than they stand to gain from the bonus. I know that has happened to me a time or two. During these last few bonus chases, though, I’ve realized I’ve actually been able to play with extra patience, perhaps knowing that even when I’m folding a hand I’m still “earning” something just by sitting at the table.

Now, of course, I am curious to learn what exactly being a Silver Star means. When you reach Silver Star, PokerStars sends you a little email with a link leading you to the VIP Club page where you can read more about just what your little shiny star gets ya.

There are daily VIP tourneys for Silver Star peoples. Just 10 FPPs to enter, and they have $500 prize pools. Will likely have to try a few of those.

There are weekly VIP tourneys every Saturday afternoon, too. Those cost 100 FPPs, and have $20,000 prize pools. Might have to try a couple of those as well, if I can. Saturday afternoon is an excellent time for me, although I might end up having to multi-table it so as to play in Saturdays with Pauly (which I’ve missed the last few weeks).

Then there’s a big VIP tourney at the end of the month with a huge $100,000 prize pool. Looks like I’d have to satellite into that sucker.

A couple of other perks. One is that for April I’ll be earning FPPs at 1.5 times the usual rate, although one still earns VPPs at the same clip. (Meaning I probably can’t hope ever to rise above Silver Star status, practically speaking.)

Then there is the VIP Store where those with Silver Stars are allowed to purchase certain items others cannot. Hunted around there a little while, but didn’t really see a whole lot that I couldn’t also have gotten as a measly Bronze Star. I don’t care about clothing or coffee mugs or that folderol. The books are all the same (and at the same prices). There are a few electronics items that look interesting, such as the iPod 8 GB Nano, but I’d have to accumulate a whopping amount of FPPs this month to get there. Other stuff (tourney entries, gift certificates, etc.) would also be well above my FPP budget.

The only other item of interest here would be to trade 5,000 FPPs for $50 cash, an offer only Silver Stars are invited to take. If you look around on the forums, most judge that trade to be a relatively poor investment compared to playing certain SNGs and MTTs. There’s a lot of debate on the topic, but I’m seeing a lot of people calculating 62 or 63 FPPs to be equivalent to one dollar (a figure usually arrived at by comparing FPP price tags for various items and/or tourney entries). Trading 5,000 for fifty bucks would make each FPP worth only a penny (100 FPP = $1) -- on the surface, not such a good use of the FPPs, although since I rarely play tourneys it might be an option worth considering.

Stuff to ponder. Any of you Silver Stars out there have any ideas on the matter?

Meanwhile, if you were wondering, I pulled an Iggy with that photo above. You might recall how about three weeks ago the Blogfather published a first-ever photo of himself on Guinness and Poker. Actually this is not the first photo of me that has appeared on Hard-Boiled, but in the other I wasn’t facing the camera.

That’s a two-year-old Shamus up there. Check out those striped pants. Strikes fear in yr hearts, don’t it?

While we’re on the topic of public embarrassement, keep a watch on this space for the debut of The Hard-Boiled Poker Radio Show, due tomorrow. (Publishing the first episode on April Fool’s Day means I can always claim it was a joke later.)