Re: Party Poker Shortstack Abuse
 

perhaps a mention of the term "rat-holing" and it's unacceptableness in live games would be appropriate in this letter.

Re: Party Poker Shortstack Abuse
 

There are two fundamental problems with your letter:

#1 It sounds like you are whining about short stack players

#2 You are not focusing on the one way to ensure that Party makes a change: lost revenue


Your letter should go along the lines of:

Party Poker,

Myself and other high stakes no limit players would like to point out a problem that is costing you revenue and could lead to you losing most of your players.

The problem is that people are not forced to re-enter a game with the same size stack that they just left the same game with. The biggest abusers of this problem are people who buy in for the minimum and once they double up, they immediately leave and then re-enter the game for the minimum again. This causes many other players not to play with them, decreasing the size of the pot and the amount of money that you can rake. Since many other poker websites dissallow this type of behavior, many of the high stakes players are leaving party and going elswhere.

We can think of three solutions to this problem:

#1 Doubling or tripling the minimum buy-in. This would remove the short stack people's ability to do their "all-in over the top" move and ensure that other players would be willing to play with them.

#2 Force people who leave a game to re-enter the game with the same size stack that they left with. You could expand this to include a time out where if the person does not wish to re-enter the game with that many chips, they are forced to wait an hour before they can re-enter.

#3 Make the buy-in a fixed amount.

Thank you for taking the time to consider this problem.

Sincerely,
Non Short Stack Players

Re: Party Poker Shortstack Abuse
 

i think appealing more to their lost revenue is a great idea.

what does everyone else think?

Re: Party Poker Shortstack Abuse
 

The problem is, I don't think short stacks decrease their revenue. Assume for the most part that most short stacks are losing players. They will contribute significantly more in rake with 5x $400 buyins than 1 $2k buyin.

Re: Party Poker Shortstack Abuse
 

[ QUOTE ]
The problem is, I don't think short stacks decrease their revenue. Assume for the most part that most short stacks are losing players. They will contribute significantly more in rake with 5x $400 buyins than 1 $2k buyin.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe so, but if they cause crazy LAGs to sit out and therefore cause good players to play fewer tables or sit out, then they're definitely costing PP rake in the long-run.

edit: clarity

Re: Party Poker Shortstack Abuse
 

Along those lines, I think asking party to open 6max, SH & HU tables similar to Pokerroom or Prima is the approach most likely to have success, emphasizing that there is a market for such tables & the revenue generated by their highter # of hands per hour. I seriously doubt the argument as put forth will have much weight with Party simply because short stack players tend to play on a decent # of tables & play their hands quickly and hence in Party's eyes are a decent revenue source. Emphasizing that you play a substantial # of hands at sites other than Party specifically because of short stacks seems the most persuasive argument to party under the circumstances.

Re: Party Poker Shortstack Abuse
 

Well-written. This is a much better letter; good job taking the initiative.

With enough high-stakes SNs attached with an associated email, I could see this being reasonable effective.

They may still decide that it's just not important enough to care, but you never know.
-mark

Re: Party Poker Shortstack Abuse
 

[ QUOTE ]
i think appealing more to their lost revenue is a great idea.

what does everyone else think?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is unlikely that short-stack artists are costing PartyPoker money. Even the argument about about players sitting out when the short-stacks are in is bogus. What are those other players going to do? Sit out for 24 hours, 48 hours, a week? No, they'll sit out for a few minutes and either get bored and play, go to another table or leave and come back later. In the meantime, someone else will fill the seat and even if the seat remains vacant, no limit poker is hardly reliant on having eight-way flops to max out the rake.

I also think the letter sounds like sour grapes over short-stack players excercising their right to move all-in. Any player can move all-in at any time in no limit; that's why it's called no limit. Whining about players coming over the top in a no limit game is absurd. More attention needs to be payed to the ratholing angle because ratholing is a legitimate problem. There is no excuse for PartyPoker to let someone pick up $1,000 from a table and sit back down two minutes later with $400.

SpaceAce

Why are you guys whining?
 

Shortstack strategy is a strategy just like everything else. Ed miller is an advocate of this strategy, as it allows players to beat better opponents. He saws NL is a flawed game because of it...
Anyway I think you guys better get use to shortstack all-ins.

Re: Why are you guys whining?
 

maybe i dont know so much about this, but i dont think the first solution would work.

with so many tables on party, the shortstack abusers will just double up then go to another table. that said the second solution seems to be a good idea.

also the key reason i think should be pointed out re: loss of revenue is that the company is losing respect in the eyes of one of its groups, which will result in less players than otherwise possible at the high stakes games, as players move to other sites.