partypoker proposes new changes to cash games by the end of June

partypoker has been making changes of late with most changes having been geared to recreational players. So now there will be a change for cash game players coming soon. According to a tweet by the official PartyPoker account on Twitter, players will soon be required to buy into cash games with a minimum of 100 times the big blind.

How do you feel about this proposed change for cash players?

Partypoker Switching to 100 Big Blind Minimum Buy-In at Cash Game Tables

Far as I know pokerstars does that as well. Minimum 50BB buy in. And I think it does make sense because if you allow players to decide their own buy in (no lower limit or upper cap) most players would buy in for very very little BB ratio, which cannot allow you to play a proper game. Like for example, what is the plan of the player, shove or fold with short stack to topple up? ---> doesn´t seem fair for other players just because someone comes in and decides to do that. or maybe the plan of such a player is lottery style - but this fails long term too... with the upper limit its geared towards fairness too i think that you have to earn it to have chips on the table like a chip leader... IMHO. Dunno... waiting for other thoughts here.

I am not a 'live poker' player at all, but isn't 100x the standard for live poker cash games? To me this is ok and it's good that partypoker is giving folks a heads up.

I play at Stars and 888, and on both sites the buyin for cash tables is 40-100BB. I always buy in for the maximum, so for me it would be completely fine, if the buyin was simply fixed at 100BB. However that being said its mostly recreational players, who buy in short. So if the whole idea is to accommodate them, then this seem to almost go in the opposite direction.

I don't see how this move benefit recreational players at all.

It has been one step forward, ten steps back for party poker recently.

I cannot figure it out how the change will benefit any players or even the rooms themselves. Maybe more stack at table may equal more play and more rake.

Shells said:

I am not a 'live poker' player at all, but isn't 100x the standard for live poker cash games? To me this is ok and it's good that partypoker is giving folks a heads up.

Click to expand...

That is kind of the old standard for NL, but a lot of rooms went away from that around 15 yrs ago both live and online. Casino near me has a 1-2 game with a $40 buyin, no more no less. Its a terrible game, but always multiple tables full.

You can get in $1-$2 games for as little as $20 at some places and most common is probably around $50... Then to add, they might have a $300 cap. So you have people with vastly different bankrolls at the same table. Totally destroys rec players of course and eventually you end up without new players to take the place of busted bankrolls.

I think this is great especially if it's capped at 100x. This should protect lower players from playing beyond their means (article mentions this), prevent monsters from steamrolling, and make it the fair, exciting game people love.

joeisi said:

I cannot figure it out how the change will benefit any players or even the rooms themselves. Maybe more stack at table may equal more play and more rake.

Click to expand...

[emoji348][emoji348][emoji348][emoji348][emoji348]

Pretty much. Larger stacks means more money can possibly exchange hands at any given deal. More money exchanging hands means more rake. So it helps the room.

Well i knew what it meant when 1 and 2c coins went in NZ and when 5c coins went,this is no different and is harder everywhere to find a small entry.The God damned bank wanted to charge me $5 to change a fifty the other day...enough said?:idea:
and hey,i just spent like a week at party with 11c looking for a buy in lol day or two before this click card promo where u need to buy in to get next card conveniently i find a 4c buy in...just in time to drain the account before promo lmao,obviously it wasnt enough said! omg lol.its what i mean when i say these little tricks they fill all sites with to get that nxt deosit sooner lol.EVERY SITE!gl all,u know the odds...now beat them.

LotharMcDowner said:

This should protect lower players from playing beyond their means (article mentions this)

Click to expand...

If someone has 63$ in his poker account, he can still put 50$ of that on a 50NL table and lose it all in a single hand. So in no way, shape or form does this prevent people from gambling away their deposit.

Which is also kind of not the sites responsibility. If someone wants to keep only a small amount of money in their poker account and make regular new deposits before playing, its their choise. There is nothing wrong with that per se, as long as people are not playing for money, which was needed for household purposes.

puzzlefish said:

[emoji348][emoji348][emoji348][emoji348][emoji348]


Pretty much. Larger stacks means more money can possibly exchange hands at any given deal. More money exchanging hands means more rake. So it helps the room.

Click to expand...

This is most likely, what its all about. Short stacking does kind of ruin the quality of cash games, but a 40-50BB minimum buy-in is enough to solve the problem. A 40 BB or cap stacker is deep enough, that you can 3-bet with intentions to fold, if he jam. And in single raised pots there is stack enough for 3 streets of betting. So 40 BB stacks still give room for a decent amount of play. Overall I do think, its more player friendly to allow a certain flexibility in buy-in sizes.

I'm really looking forward to the change. I usually play 2NL and I think it will be really nice to not have people who buy in with $0.80 and go all in on every flop you play with them. Also I think that getting good at deep stack poker can end up being incredibly profitable, and this way we can already be deep from the time we buy in it sounds like, as opposed to have to win chips before you can work on situations. Thirdly I think it will be really cool to play with more money on the table but still at stakes people have played in the past and are comfortable in. Hopefully it will lead to more profits too as when you get it all in good there should be more BBs in the pot!!

I very much these changes for the better as long as all good

fundiver199 said:

If someone has 63$ in his poker account, he can still put 50$ of that on a 50NL table and lose it all in a single hand. So in no way, shape or form does this prevent people from gambling away their deposit.

Which is also kind of not the sites responsibility. If someone wants to keep only a small amount of money in their poker account and make regular new deposits before playing, its their choise. There is nothing wrong with that per se, as long as people are not playing for money, which was needed for household purposes.

Click to expand...

Actually this is exactly what they are trying to prevent. If you have $63 you could NOT join a 1/2 game, as you would have less than 100bb. It doesn't stop you from buying in with your whole roll... It just stops short buying in, including short buying in for your whole roll. The theory is that it would prevent people from just continuously short buying and donking until they triple up or better. Incredibly common in low limits. Same problem hits micro unlimited re-entry tournaments.

Good and bad

Good
It's obviously good for better players to have recreational players deeper stacked.

Bad
The move likely chases recreational shorter stacks away from cash games to sng's

LotharMcDowner said:

The theory is that it would prevent people from just continuously short buying and donking until they triple up or better. Incredibly common in low limits.

Click to expand...

I dont know, how the cash games on PartyPoker tend to play, but on sites like PokerStars and 888 I really dont think, this is much of a problem. Sure you find some "donks", who like to just ship it all in before the flop with whatever, they have, forcing other players to either fold or gamble with them.

But its not common, and the kind of people, who will do it for 40 BB, will typically also do it for 100 BB. Its not like, open jamming is a winning strategy with a 40 BB stack either, so people doing this are just playing for fun.

As a serious player I would rather have a 100 BB "fish" on my table than a 40 BB "fish", because then there is more money for me to win. But at the same time I would rather have a "fish" buy in for his last 7 dollars and 69c to my 10$ game than not buy in at all. So I think, this is a bit of a dubble edged sword.

I don't see how this will benefit to recreational players because they will be obliged to invest more money into the game

Shells said:

PartyPoker has been making changes of late with most changes having been geared to recreational players. So now there will be a change for cash game players coming soon. According to a tweet by the official PartyPoker account on Twitter, players will soon be required to buy into cash games with a minimum of 100 times the big blind.

How do you feel about this proposed change for cash players?
Partypoker Switching to 100 Big Blind Minimum Buy-In at Cash Game Tables

Click to expand...

Great idea no more bingo to get a starting stack at low levels . Keeps people in games they should be in