Re: Party Poker Shortstack Abuse
 

I like some of your guys ideas and responses.

And I'm 100% sure that if either you weren't allowed to come back to the table at 20% max or min was increased to 40%, that players like CDU and Fancy become extinct.

Re: Party Poker Shortstack Abuse
 

i sent mr. curious' letter as is, with this addition at the end:


"ps. cduhong is a good example of a player who abuses this policy and rountinely causes players to leave the table and not play HU, 3, or 4 handed if he is sitting."

Re: Party Poker Shortstack Abuse
 

Any letter to Party needs to strongly emphasize the difference in structure between the Party games and the games on other sites and suggest that Party risks losing high stakes players to other sites if it doesn't switch to a more attractive structure.

You shouldn't even mention the playing style of the short stacks. I assure you that Party doesn't give a [censored] about that issue.

Re: Party Poker Shortstack Abuse
 

[ QUOTE ]
Party risks losing high stakes players to other sites.


[/ QUOTE ]

This shouldnt be mentioned. Sites dont want "high stakes players." Instead it should be said that "people in general prefer" or... "most players whom i know prefer" a different blind structure. Party would have no problem losing its multi-tabling pros.

Re: Party Poker Shortstack Abuse
 

[ QUOTE ]
Party would have no problem losing its multi-tabling pros.

[/ QUOTE ]

are you kidding? which do you think a site likes more, having sharks clean out the fishies very quickly or having several weak tight nits trading small amounts of money back and forth, producing a max rake on every pot all the while?

Re: Party Poker Shortstack Abuse
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Party risks losing high stakes players to other sites.


[/ QUOTE ]

This shouldnt be mentioned. Sites dont want "high stakes players." Instead it should be said that "people in general prefer" or... "most players whom i know prefer" a different blind structure. Party would have no problem losing its multi-tabling pros.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't say anything about pros. Party clearly considers it a competitive necessity to offer high stakes games. Otherwise they wouldn't do so. I find it hard to believe that they offer the games but don't want anyone to play in them. In any case, most of the money does not come from the big games, no matter who is playing in them. All that being said, I agree it doesn't make sense to mention stakes.