Can't Win at Pokerstars

[Jeffage]

This is kinda a pointless post I guess, but does anyone else have this problem?? I have shown a profit everywhere I've played except this site and it is getting very irritating. I've dropped like a grand chasing the July 4 Bonus there and I'm done. Consider it officially and permanently uninstalled. They can keep their $100.

Thanks for listening,
Jeff

[Robk]

Have you tried playing NL? It's hard to lose and you can clear the bonus quickly.

[J_V]

Well if you're after the the $100 dollar bonus, playing head up 30-60 with 300 bucks aint a great idea.

[Jeffage]

"Well if you're after the the $100 dollar bonus, playing head up 30-60 with 300 bucks aint a great idea."

Well, I actually started with more than that and planned to buy in more if I lost (I have ample funds in Neteller). But I'm just fed up with the site and decided to bag it. Was kinda joking/steaming with the post, but will admit I shouldn't have sat 30 without putting more on the table but we all make mistakes...frustration led me to a bad decision but in any event...I'm done with the site. I'm up 500 at Party 15 since I made the first post so that is some consolation /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Jeff

[RollaJ]

Most people cant win on stars its rigged. I know Im a kook, but there are many people on this site whos play I respect who have had the same experience, win everywhere EXCEPT stars. I wont even go there to get the bonus, its not worth losing $500

[Zing Zing]

I think the "rigging" part of stars works both ways. However most people tend to forget about the beats they lay down on other people, its as simple as that. If a bad beat puts you in a bad mood, then that is why you are losing. I have never complained about stars, and probably never will, bad beats happen, just accept it already.

[Zwiggelte]

Welcome, join the club..However with the last bonus of 4th July i manage to get a profit of 20$.. I played now the 05/1$ and 1/2$ games instead of the 2/4$ and 3/6$ games..
after 600 hands..

[dux]

That's funny, I really thought you were joking when you last aired your PokerStars deal gripe. Have the recent news from PokerStars that their shuffling algorithm has been submitted to agencys of some sort alleviated your fears?

[Hung]

[ QUOTE ]
Have you tried playing NL? It's hard to lose and you can clear the bonus quickly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with this. I've played NL. And you lose faster playing NL. The pots are not always bigger. I have lost $500 too chasing the 20% bonus. I wont say it's rigged like Rollaj did. But I just stay away. I'll just go there when we're playing the next zoo tournament. If it's not in the middle of the night of course.

[David]

Ahhhhh, Pokerstars....... I too, have won at every single site I have played with the 1 lone exception. That's right, Pokerstars. It was the second site I played at after Paradise and I could never figure out what I was doing wrong. I blamed it on the shuffle, I blamed it on collusion, I blamed it on my dog, etc etc etc.....

Well, some time back I decided I was going to make 1 more deposit at Stars and try a different approach. Since that last small deposit I have been winning at a higher rate than any site I play. Why? I am taking a very different approach to the games there. I will not go into details, but suffice it to say I believe I have found the enemy and he was........ME. After I have played a few thousand more hands I will let you know if my ?luck? is still holding up. By the way, I still believe that overall the players on Pokerstars are the toughest to be found anywhere-internet or B&M. Seems someone else on here (maybe jek) posted he had figured out how to consistently beat the games at Stars so if I am right there is a way and you can figure it out too and if I am wrong I'll be posting shortly about the rigged deal at Stars! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Hung]

Hey David,
Are you saying that you're stronger then the players that have lost at stars?
/images/graemlins/blush.gif /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[David]

NO!!!! I am very realistic about my abilities ( although one of these days I am gonna win a Zoo tourney)lol. I really haven't played enough hands to make any concrete conclusions but I have changed my style of play on Stars and my win rate has been very good since I have made this change. I am playing the middle limit games there and the only thing I will say is I am playing them unlike I play in many online games. I now play the 5/10 and 10/20 at Stars exactly like I play a tough B&M 20/40.

[Rushmore]

One quick thing:

Good players will always have more bad beats put on them because they are chasing far less than the bad players.

In some perverse way, having bad beats put on you (if that is truly what they are) is a positive indicator of your abilities.

Man, how's THAT for the glass being half full?

[jek187]

[ QUOTE ]
Seems someone else on here (maybe jek) posted he had figured out how to consistently beat the games at Stars

[/ QUOTE ]

I never posted that. I believe it was Rusty Jedi who did so. Just for the record though, I have also been able to beat the games there, but find it much less of a strain to do so just about anywhere else.

[tiltboy]

I am in the black at stars a couple hundred overall but in the red with table results (actually am in the red for ring games but have positive results for tourneys). Thank god for promotions.

However, the last promotion I was trying to get got me so frustrated I just gave up on it and deleted the software. I only reinstalled to railbird the $100/200 game the other day.

Stars is the most frustrating site I play and I don't need that.

[NoChance]

I just wanted to add....I started out playing at PokerStars. It was only until recently I started reading this forum (and many others) that I left there for greener pastures. I thought all were tough like that.

Anyway, I started off winning when I made my first deposit. This lasted about a week. I guess I contribute that to luck and not really knowing how to play the game properly. Once I purchased a few books and learned how to play "better" I started to lose. For example, I never knew anything about position. I didn't know what and when to raise, etc. Anyway, I took a break and reread my books. When I returned, it was the same old thing, more losing.

Many have said this before and I agree. I think the rivers are "rigged". Because of this, more people stay on crap hands. More people chase to the river. Basically, it teaches you to play bad poker. Anyway, based on this thinking, I made an adjustment and started winning again. No, I didn't start playing the bad hands. I simply stopped raising and stopped betting. Everyone seemed to call anyway. Instead, I simply played tight, and waiting until I had seen ALL my cards and then hammered the final bet when I thought I was best. At this point they were still calling.

To sum it up: play tight, put as little as you can into the pot until you see your last card. If you think you have the best hand, pound it. It is the only way I could beat it. I know longer play there because I don't enjoy that style but I was survivng while I was there at the end.

Even in tournaments, if two people were all in, heads up....it seems like one guy would always make his hand on the turn and the other would river him. Things were just way to crazy there.

[MS Sunshine]

I can't win in PS live games. I also struggle in their tournaments, but that is a different issue since everyone knows I suck at tournaments.

I'm putting it down to tougher games and I rarely play there, except for the $215's. I do find it surprising that I win up to $15-30 at other sites and struggle at baby NLH and $2-4 at PokerStars.

MS Sunshine

[RollaJ]

[ QUOTE ]
Have the recent news from PokerStars that their shuffling algorithm has been submitted to agencys of some sort alleviated your fears?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, Enron and Worldcom and Tyco etc. all had their financial statements evaluated by big accounting firms. So if an "independant" (dont forget who hired them) firm has stated that their algorithm is sound, I could care less. I see what happens there day in and day out, it is not right.
When was the last time you heard someone say that the Paradise Poker shuffle was rigged?? I wonder why? Many, many more hands have been played there and the allegations never come up. Yet, obviously there have been so many allegations at stars that they had to go out, have their shuffle evaluated, and then issue a press release of sorts. Even though all other major sites have their shuffle undergo the same tests, they never have the need to release statements in regards to the topic.

As for the other comment that was made, I VERY RARELY suck out on someone when I play NLHE. I may out flop someone, and then the money goes in, but very rarely does a large % of my stack go in when I am behind, unless I am bluffing of course. But I wont call huge bets when I can tell Im way behind, unless I have a good read on the player. That being said I got rivered at that damn site so many times it was crazy, and when you are playing NL it hurts a lot more than when playing limit poker, and it has the potential to cripple your account.

(Seems its NOT)JMHO, but that site sucks /images/graemlins/mad.gif!!

[Bob L]

I too find the games waaaay tougher at pokerstars.I have a tough time winning there but I really don't think there is a rigged deal.Generally the players play better at stars compared to other sites.Also I don't know why but I go on tilt real easy at stars.I get the same suckouts at party but I seem to hold it together there.I get on stars and its not long before I'm wide open.I find it best just to avoid stars but like I said a few months ago the tournies at stars are run top notch and are so dam good. I find it hard not to play them-and with the WCOOP coming ,I will be there making more donations.

CG -compulsive gambler

[eMarkM]

Haven't played much ring games at Stars and when I have, I'm about even. Much tougher compared to the fishfry going on at Party. I would never play the ring games there on a regular basis when there's far softer games on other sites.

Tournaments have been different for me. Ever since that first Zoo tourney, I've been hooked and I've done very well in the multitable tournaments there. Those final tables I've made have helped fund my losses everywhere else /images/graemlins/crazy.gif No complaints from me.

[RockLobster]

Count me in. My first two $120 bonuses cost me about $125 each /images/graemlins/confused.gif. The 2/4 games there really killed me.
I decided to play strictly 1/2 on this last attempt and made a few bucks on top of my $120 (finally).

Stars is a tough site, imho.

[lil']

I stumbled across Pokerstars one day and learned how to play poker there. I had never played before that. I guess since I learned there I have never had any trouble.

Having said that, I don't play there as much because they don't have the players the other sites do. Also, my laptop freezes up on me at random intervals when I play at Stars (but not my desktop computer).

I have always thought their 6 handed games were tough, but fun (and sometimes expensive).

[lefty rosen]

Pokerstars is even harder to beat than Paradise if that is possible, I have never played there but you will only get 2 callers on flop and it's raise almost every hand. The dillema that you face is the raiser raising Ace high card or KQ or does he have a monster over pair, because if the board is brick city nobody has a piece of it........ Now I have noticed there 30/60 game can beaten as they have some crackheads trying to slash ace rag very hard, but I'm not rich so I can't play there. I really dont know why anybody would bother with the site as you can be a garunteed winner at so many other sites.........

[J_V]

30/60 is pretty good usually. Exactly for the reasons you mentioned...crackheads isolating with Arag. Speak of the devil, they are doing that at 100-200. At low limits, players lose cause they aren't aggressive enough. At high limits, they lose cause they are to aggressive.

[mbpoker]

Rolaj - how many hands did you play at Stars? Didn't you say once that you played there only one session?

Did you lose your chat there? Any other sore memories?

What you say about Paradise is nonsense. Before Stars, Party and UB came into existence there were hundreds of posts claiming that Paradise is rigged.

[M2d]

Half the posts here complain that the players are too tough. The other half complain that there are too many bad beats (too many bad players chasing). Which is it? good players or bad?
IMO, the players there are pretty bad up to the 10/20 level. whole lot of chasing going on. The swings are huge, but that works both ways.
For the record, I'm winning there after a couple of months. Not sure how many hands that is, but I play about fifteen hours a week or more in the evenings, mostly between 1-2 and 5-10.

[MrGrob]

I was winning at Stars and losing at Paradise before I learned how to play well. Now that I know how to play, I believe the issue with Stars is the many many people from England etc on the server (or at least, that was there in the past I believe). Having played UB before the huge influx of people, I found that you had to take a different style to play to the table to beat the Europeans than you did anyone else. I am not sure what it is, but their play is aggressive and lose, and thus going to make your swings bigger. They are not bad players, just freaky. I guess they all got a copy of Killer Poker be fore we did /images/graemlins/smile.gif I have not been back, as I LOVE UB and can't bear to play anywhere else now, but I suspect that I could beat it still...but who knows...I could be just flat wrong....I have not had any issues winning at any site since I turned a corner a bit ago, but I have yet to play Stars again...I might, however, as I like a challenge /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[RollaJ]

Ive probably played there about 2000 or so hands + quite a few 1-2 table tourneys and a few multis (dont expect much at the multis).

Ive never had any negative experiences there outside of poker, on the contrary support is very good, and has gone out of their way to help me at times.

Yes, from what I hear there was a problem with Paradise software a few years ago, and the complaints seemed to have subsided 90% since 2000. I havent been playing that long, but maybe MS Sunshine or someone else can clear up the history with that.

[cero_z]

Hi JV,
[ QUOTE ]
playing head up 30-60 with 300 bucks aint a great idea.




[/ QUOTE ]
YES! And I constantly see folks undercapitalized in online games, particularly the PokerStars 30-60. It's not at all uncommon for me to sit down in a 3-handed game, where my 3000 dollar buy-in is more than triple what the other 2 have combined! These players are sitting shorthanded without enough to maximize one hand. But, rather than playing super-conservatively, they try to steamroll the table with their tiny rolls, playing in the usual reckless style that's typical of the internet games. They do this in full/nearly full games as well.
I've done well at PS, in fact better than at all other sites (though Party is catching up), and I've played there 5 times a week for 7 months. However, I have had 2 total nightmare sessions in this span, where I lost 8000 and 5000, respectively. Is this because the deal is rigged? No. It's because you can expect your fluctuations to be big when several players in your game are playing recklessly. So, the swings are bigger for me at PS, and so is the overall win. Perilous but profitable if you can stand it.

[lefty rosen]

It can't be too loose because the table averages barely break 20 dollars and 30 dollars at 2/4 and 3/6, so there are only people calling skalansky group 1 or 2 there........

[Rushmore]

Remember something: most of these players are not 30/60 players--they're either BIGGER players (playing the biggest game in the room), or smaller players taking a shot. This makes for some sort of a stew. It's not like this is a table of $30/60 players sitting in the Bellagio or the Taj grinding out a living. This is a totally different thing.

These people aren't "crackheads," they're just playing a somewhat different game than you might be accustomed to.

I must admit, it has taken some serious adjustments.