PokerStars gives you another option to guarantee you a win in 'All-in' bets

[Shark Feeder]

This is just PS money grabbing even worse

I think this is horrible idea for the player. I tried it once or twice just to see how it works but now there’s no chance you will chop pots with me like that and i should even give more money to pokerstars addition to rake. I have even taken the option off of my games.

I don’t know if some of you see this the same thing but even I hate the new chopping option I still like running it twice every time my opponent agrees to it. I think the rake is same in total but you just protect yourself from horrible and sometimes even tilting beats. If I have to split a huge pot with my opponent just because he 2-outed me, I can live with that knowing that time will make it more fair and if everyone would have their ”Run it twice” option on (I think many don’t still even know about it or thinks it’s some kind of cheat or unfair), the money would go to the right players even shorter time.

This might not be exactly the topic here but I’d like to see 100-250bb buy-in tables in every stake level and antes in those games also and this is kind of in topic because I think it wouldn’t be such a bad idea to have even ”Run it three times” option available, especially in those deep stack Cash/Zoom games.

Am I being crazy to support the one idea (or two/three ideas) but not the other? What do you think about this guys? 🤔

 

[QA77]

I hate so many things Pokerstars does. Just improve the core game. No need to add these to a variance game. And as much as I hate it, I think some people might actually use it. The only hands I feel like I would use it would be AK vs AK but the fee applied is the killer. Is it worth it for Pokerstars to get a cut?

 

[GEORYINO]

If PS continues like that we will see a lot of people leaving that site, only 4 tables at the same time there is ZOOM but is not for every one, no opportunity to win jackpot on tables with a poker or better no to mention the rake back worse and worse. I read here that some people think that ACR is their favorite site.

 

[fundiver199]

I think this is horrible idea for the player. I tried it once or twice just to see how it works but now there’s no chance you will chop pots with me like that and i should even give more money to Pokerstars addition to rake. I have even taken the option off of my games.

I don’t know if some of you see this the same thing but even I hate the new chopping option I still like running it twice every time my opponent agrees to it. I think the rake is same in total but you just protect yourself from horrible and sometimes even tilting beats. If I have to split a huge pot with my opponent just because he 2-outed me, I can live with that knowing that time will make it more fair and if everyone would have their ”Run it twice” option on (I think many don’t still even know about it or thinks it’s some kind of cheat or unfair), the money would go to the right players even shorter time.

This might not be exactly the topic here but I’d like to see 100-250bb buy-in tables in every stake level and antes in those games also and this is kind of in topic because I think it wouldn’t be such a bad idea to have even ”Run it three times” option available, especially in those deep stack Cash/Zoom games.

Am I being crazy to support the one idea (or two/three ideas) but not the other? What do you think about this guys? 🤔

Run it twice and cash out has the same purpose, which is to reduce variance in all-in before the river situations. Run it twice actually still work on PokerStars, but as before only if both players choose it. I dont mind this new cash out feature. Sure its a new money making tool for them, but if you dont want to pay, then just dont use it.

The only serious drawback, I can see, is, that it seem like, some players use it to drag out the time, they can play without reloading. The minimum buyin for cash games on Stars is 40BB, and while people can get shorter by losing small pots, if I put someone all in before the river and bust him, he either have to reload or leave.

Now however he can choose "cash out", even when he is behind, and in that way continue to play with a smaller and smaller stack. That kind of suck for the other players, so if I was to suggest an improvement, then they should only allow cash-out, if the cash-out amount is above the minimum buyin for the table.

 

[0cean]

I don't think I would like this feature at all.

 

[ToNy70929]

PokerStars, the world’s largest online poker site, introduced a new “All-In Cash Out” feature which allows players to take a guaranteed win during an all-in bet instead of risking losing to a suck-out. While that might seem like a heck of a deal, some consider it “bad for the game.” Interesting, no? What are your thoughts?

PokerStars Rolls Out Controversial ‘All-In Cash Out’ Function

After reading this news from Dear Shells in August, I came across this feature on PokerStars in a cash game. I was not thrilled with this feature. Six times I took advantage of this feature and not one Allian gave me encouragement. After the flop, when I was guaranteed to have the strongest hands, I refused the option of guaranteed promotion, but on the river I fabulously lost. When I tried to use the guarantee of function with an initially weak hand, I suddenly won fabulously. After using the new function, my bank did not replenish, but only went into minus. This function is like roulette

 

[Shells]

After reading this news from Dear Shells in August, I came across this feature on PokerStars in a cash game. I was not thrilled with this feature. Six times I took advantage of this feature and not one Allian gave me encouragement. After the flop, when I was guaranteed to have the strongest hands, I refused the option of guaranteed promotion, but on the river I fabulously lost. When I tried to use the guarantee of function with an initially weak hand, I suddenly won fabulously. After using the new function, my bank did not replenish, but only went into minus. This function is like roulette

I still haven't used this option with PokerStars. And from what you have stated, this game sure does seem a little like roulette!

 

[fundiver199]

I still haven't used this option with PokerStars. And from what you have stated, this game sure does seem a little like roulette!

I have used it once just to try it. I am not playing much at Stars lately, but after changing my laptop I logged on to the site to set up PT4 and general settings. I opened a 2NL Zoom table for the purpose, and within the few orbits, I played, I got AK in BB all in against SB, who had KK. I was offered to cash out around 1.2$ from the 4$ pot and thought "sure lets give it a try for 1c". I bricked, so I am now up 1.2$ from this option, and PokerStars had to pay the winner some of his money out of their own pocket.

 

[valeski 28]

PokerStars All In Cash Out

I like it but it depends on the situation..I have used a similar option betting in sports(BetStars),The first time I used this option ,I got a little confused but now I get used to it.Remember that you can play the all ins as always,just press to continue the hand

 

[Richard Grant]

Hadn't played cash for awhile, and this came up. Its happened really quickly so I had no idea what was going on lol. Regs will never use it, just extra rake.

If its tilting you too much when you lose all ins, better to play at reduced stakes and reduce anxiety.

Saying that lots of people will probably enjoy it cos the tiny extra rake won't bother them. If you only got £2 left in your account probably really good then

 

[Shells]

Hadn't played cash for awhile, and this came up. Its happened really quickly so I had no idea what was going on lol. Regs will never use it, just extra rake.

If its tilting you too much when you lose all ins, better to play at reduced stakes and reduce anxiety.

Saying that lots of people will probably enjoy it cos the tiny extra rake won't bother them. If you only got £2 left in your account probably really good then

A lot of good points there, Richard.

Personally, I don't see this lasting all that long. It may only appeal to a select group of people and besides, it's a novelty, right?! I think this concept may have lost it's pizzazz already. (I looked at it but never tried it) But, I'm sure we don't have to worry...there will be another 'idea' come to fruition soon after (if this option happens to disappear)

 

[Poker Orifice]

I do not play that much cash games online but i certainly wouldnt play cash games live if they had this feature. It takes away alot in the game and imo more people would just go all in to not lose everything they already put in. Might as well play 50/50 super tight all day

But it doesn't work that way.
ie. for purpose of this example we're playing 500nl ($2/$5) and each player is sitting on 100bb's
Ok.. let's say you're holding 88 in BB.
UTG raises to $15. SB calls $15.. & you choose to 3bet it to $60... both players call.
flop 772 ($180)
SB checks.... you C-bet $95... UTG 'folds'... SB check-raises to $200...

So what I believe you were suggesting is... you can just ship it ALLIN here... take the insurance, the hand ends & you don't lose everything you'd already put in the pot. BUT it doesn't work that way.

In this example, let's say you chose to re-raise allin & SB calls. THere's now $1,133 in the middle.... & Pokerstars offers you 'Cashout'?? (SB has flipped over 22 btw).
IF you choose to take the Cashout option you're only receiving the calculated equity you have at this stage (here you're a 16.8% to win)... & SB is 83.23%.
The CASHOUT option is offered to both players. If SB chose to take the CashOut option here, they would receive 83.23% of the money that's in the pot... 'minus' the rake ($1,133 - rake = x,... X x 0.8323 = SB's share of the pot).

 

[Poker Orifice]

I still haven't used this option with PokerStars. And from what you have stated, this game sure does seem a little like roulette!

imo it actually makes it much less like roulette. fundiver sums it up quite well.

fwiw, I just used the feature a few times this evening just because I felt like it.
After the hand played out, I shut down the poker client & opened up Pokerstove 'just to see'... to see what Stars was actually giving me... if I was actually seeing my equity % and where I was losing the '1% fee'. The hand I calculated I didn't lose the 1% fee (which seems odd obviously).
Over time though, it's a losing option for sure. In all-in pots instead of paying 3% rake (or whatever the rake is?) you're paying 4%
For someone who plays very little amount of hands on cash tables & who perhaps frequents them on occasion hoping to pick up enough to play a few sng's or mtt's, the 'cashout' option might not be such a bad thing. Especially if your bankroll is limited or your patience for suckouts is limited. Can you imagine if you could use this feature in the 'Spins', lol. (I got 2-outtered today in one on the river... AA losing to A5o on a J-8-5 flop lol). Pretty sure I wouldn't have hit the 'cashout' btn if there was such a thing... unless perhaps it was during a multiplier game.

 

[oneybiggs]

imo it actually makes it much less like roulette. fundiver sums it up quite well.

fwiw, I just used the feature a few times this evening just because I felt like it.
After the hand played out, I shut down the poker client & opened up Pokerstove 'just to see'... to see what Stars was actually giving me... if I was actually seeing my equity % and where I was losing the '1% fee'. The hand I calculated I didn't lose the 1% fee (which seems odd obviously).
Over time though, it's a losing option for sure. In all-in pots instead of paying 3% rake (or whatever the rake is?) you're paying 4%
For someone who plays very little amount of hands on cash tables & who perhaps frequents them on occasion hoping to pick up enough to play a few sng's or mtt's, the 'cashout' option might not be such a bad thing. Especially if your bankroll is limited or your patience for suckouts is limited. Can you imagine if you could use this feature in the 'Spins', lol. (I got 2-outtered today in one on the river... AA losing to A5o on a J-8-5 flop lol). Pretty sure I wouldn't have hit the 'cashout' btn if there was such a thing... unless perhaps it was during a multiplier game.

Saw three of those in a row when i started this morning,all 35c spin n gos,all favs to the river,lowest was 75% ,as the third one unfolded i clicked my recorder wasnt on,won the next two with no sign of beats.Honestly if im not recording those beats come like waterfalls lol.Often it was all day every day..the recorder has been absolute magic 100%
Oh and btw lol im one of those players you mentioned earlier that wouldnt have a clue what ICM is...seriously,i finally found out what GTO was the other day,i knew it would jump out at me sooner or later without studying.I tend to think outside every square that GTO and the likes present to us,i believe that will eventually give me the edge on a lot of those that aim for the near perfect game.

 

[fundiver199]

Personally, I don't see this lasting all that long. It may only appeal to a select group of people and besides, it's a novelty, right?! I think this concept may have lost it's pizzazz already. (I looked at it but never tried it) But, I'm sure we don't have to worry...there will be another 'idea' come to fruition soon after (if this option happens to disappear)

I played on Stars last night, and while cash out was originally only offered at 10NL and below, now it is also offered at 16NL. Did not try any limits higher than that, but at least they have expanded it upwards. Some people were using it and others not. See no reason, why they would remove it. Its basically extra profit for Stars with no downside for them.

As a player the much more important change on Stars is their 4 table cap. This has really loosened up the games especially at a limit like 10NL full ring, which used to be a bit of a nit-fest. Now the mass multi tabling nits are either gone or limited to 4 tables, and as a result players per flop is now above 20 on most tables.

The waiting lists have also become much shorter, because there is no point for regulars in being on waiting lists, if they are not allowed to add more tables anyway. There is no dought in my mind, that this has made cash games on Stars a ton more appealing to rec players, which is exactly, what Stars wanted, and frankly also what those games have been needing for years.

 

[Mundug]

i guess its not guarantee. sometimes take monet from players. example AKvs AT . pot 100 cashout 70 AK choocse no cashout flop T .cashout 85 AT choose no cashout . turn k .
But sometimes lucky players both wins.

its protect few buy in players. exmaple nl 1 2 table. player1(SB) only 100 usd bankroll. utg raise to 6 player1(SB) 18 and BB call utg call. pot 54 . flop AhKh9s SB bet 18, BB call , utg push . SB push BB call . SB KcKh(60) UTG QhJh(33) BB AsJs (6). player1 no risky and cashout 60% 180usd.

 

[sunirico]

This becomes more like gambling than skill. If the option was presented to you after you see your opponents cards then the guarantee based on the odds might make sense as an insurance but this is not why we choose all-in.

You would've chosen to either go all-in based on your hands strength against your opponents range or in an attempt to knock your opponent off their hand by getting them to fold.

Especially if this is applied at micro stakes where players already go all-in way too often, it doesn't help teaching them how to play.

I would have to side with the "it's bad for the game" crowd.

 

[fundiver199]

If the option was presented to you after you see your opponents cards then the guarantee based on the odds might make sense as an insurance but this is not why we choose all-in.

This is, how it is of course. When two players have put money in the pot, and one of them is all-in, then the cards are shown, and the players are offered the option to cash out their equity, which is shown in dollar amount.

For example the pot is 20$ after rake, you have 70% equity, Villain has 30% equity. Then you are offered to cash out 13,86$, and Villain is offered to cash out 5,94$. When both players have made their choise, the cards are run, and if the winner has cashed out, the pot goes to PokerStars.

 

[fundiver199]

I would have to side with the "it's bad for the game" crowd.

I dont think, it has any major effect on the games, but overall I would say, its positive. The reason is, many casual players have a policy of firing only one bullet. Then they keep on playing, until they are broke or have won enough, that its worth it to them to bank the winnings.

By allowing these players to reduce their variance, the average duration of their sessions will be longer, and the chance they book a winning will be lower. This is good for PokerStars, because it generate more rake, and its also good for serious players, because it makes the games softer.

 

[Polytarp]

Good thread.
First, Poker Orifice is spot on with his analysis and assessment(s).

Second, for any "waah-waah..boo hoo.." types who rant (as opposed to perfectly healthy venting) about bad beats, this game style is perfect for them because it will illustrate what "the long run" actually means in practice.

Third, I'm playing the "Cardex" promotion at the minimum stakes and have found that the option is reasonable. When going all-in with QQ facing KK the odds are good that KK will take it down so I cash out as I "almost always" follow the math. Now, I have cashed out holding 10%..45% odds and would have won the hand had I stuck to my guns (a good beat for me) BUT without supplementary information on the card range of the other player this would have been a foolish thing to do (in my opinion) because that`s how you lose money..by a trickle, flood or tsunami. Just note that the opposite is true, minus the rake.:nurse:

 

[VictorOd]

Well, it's good to have more options. Recently I faced the situation yesterday when played Zoom nl2 (Cardex challenge), my opp caught lucky turn, I could save few cents, not much, so I've chosen to move on and lost.

 

[akgross]

I think this is a normal function. Knowing the unpredictability of the situation in this room, it is always possible to insure your straight from the flop, which will lose a full-havs on the river.))