Your point about higher rake potentially evening out the winrate discrepancies between PLO and NLH is an interesting one and I'd be curious to see if anyone has the numbers to back up/disprove it.

As somebody who has just decided to move from MTT as my main game to PLO (starting at 25PLO zoom) my gut reaction is that this is pretty bad news for me personally, and might mean I have to reconsider my choice of format (or indeed whether to play online at all - I play live NL locally and might make this my regular game if the increases prove to be as bad as people suggest). As a relative PLO noob I have a big challenge just learning to beat the game under present conditions - additional rake at the stakes above could make moving up and sticking there impossible for newer/weaker players like myself. I'll reserve judgement however as there will no doubt be people on here with far better analytical skills and databases who can offer a more solid opinion than mine.

Lots of comments/thoughts on 2+2 including people wanting a selective boycott of PS on certain days.

I'm thinking of moving the Limit Hold Em and PLO part of my roll away from PS....the Stud/O8 part/TD could be trickier until other sites step to the plate a bit more...

Just became unemployed. Lets see if MTT Co will accept me back

http://i.imgur.com/zZi6n61.jpg

Having looked at this table, it doesn't actually seem like Zoom players will be affected below 25/50, being that zoom tables are always 6 handed. Regular tables should be fine too as long as they remain 3+ handed. What it might do is hurt the number of regular games running at SS/MS, as there is now no incentive to start tables off with the new double rake HU cap. I would also assume this spells the end for HU cash games at .5/$1 and lower, and stakes above that will possibly take a big hit too.

What I take from this, is that Stars may be attempting to end what it views as the most predatory forms of poker by killing off low stake HU (excluding reg-on-reg matches, HU is as predatory as it gets) and encouraging people away from regular tables into the zoom pool where they can't be bumhunted as effectively (less tables started=less available seats at regular tables=fish load up zoom instead). This is just a theory as to why they chose these specific places to increase cash game rake (ignoring the obvious overall reason of more profit). Although the bumhunting situation in HU poker needs to be addressed I don't agree that raking the games out of existence is the best way of going about it, and feel pretty bad for the SS/MS HU regs who are getting hung out to dry by this.

2+2 thread:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29/news-views-gossip/pokerstars-increasing-rake-ending-bop-promo-who-will-become-new-1-site-1485517/

It really disheartens me (and some other feelings), that the entire RIO crew hasn't jumped on this topic. Clearly the economic health of this game is at risk and it would be both helpful and interesting to here some dialog with some better known and well learned players. Is not the profitability and the sustainability of the game of great interest and importance to us all?

It seems to me clear that these aspects of the "poker economy" are at risk, and yet the players may have some options available to them if they can collectively make favorable decisions. If we don't teach and talk about the importance of the sustainability and profitability of the game, we might slip into a terrible and over regulated environment with arbitrary exchange rate and tax rules, and unnecessary restrictions on players pools.

Is there a more relevant or significant topic in the poker world today? Do some people feel it is not in their interest since the play in a pool segregated from this monopolistic/industry rake setting standard?

MrComputerScreen? :-)

I have been paying rake that is higher than the increase at stars for a long time now. Plus I get no rake back, ofc my player pool is not nearly as tough. (The HU rake increase is steeper than the current rake on the site I play, but every other increase is lower (to the best of my knowledge, and shamefully I haven't looked into this as much as I should)).

this just confirms what we've all known for a long time. don't become a poker player unless you love it so much that you can't be happy doing anything else. You're not going to make more money playing poker than you would if you applied similar brain power and work to other fields, and you're going to face more stress and uncertainty. Plus the market will always be getting worse and not better despite the occasional uptick.

And this is coming from a 7 year professional who can't bring himself to leave the field because somehow despite the variance and crap I love the life. I wish I could take my own advice. lol.

Well before becoming a poker pro I was on my way of becoming a barrister and was hugely succesfull in the career field but I was utterly miserable. Poker gave me more than I could imagine and even when I run badly I am still overall gratefull. I met great people I travel every year and enjoy the life. At some point we are all going to die so instead of trying to achieve some success or have a career I choosed to create a great experience and story out of my life.

When it goes the rake I think it is less of an issue than people think. The only poker rooms that are succesull lately 888,Bodog,Adjarabet have a fairly big rake, no vip program or almost none. Yet they are succesfull because they focus on creating a better enviroment for recreational players.
There is a huge group of regs that have enittlement issues when they use seating scripts,berate fish, insta sit out when fish sitouts but still complain how they dare to change anything (look at the 2+2 and regs defending seating scripts).

Regs have no clue about what is good for them in the long run. Remember situation on 2+2 when merge get rid of bad beat jackpot tables. I still remember full ring regs saying hell yeah thats awasome less rake FTW. Suprise suprise the games were dead within 3 months or so?
Because that was one of the biggest factor for the full ring games to run on merge so much. (thats also the reason why there is so many full ring games on 888 on nl100, solely due to jackpot).
Another example are rake races wherever I play I see no value in rake races because most of the time when there is one the games get so bad it gets laughable and I doubt that any of the regs makes more money due to rake race factor given how much worse the games get when there is one.

@vastifini11514
http://www.pokernews.com/news/2014/11/pros-comment-on-stars-rake-increase-19706.htm

Interesting what you say about rake races. I dont play on speed ipoker, but I hear its the hardest game in town. And its funny how all the rack back providers claim its super soft European fish compared to stars.

Always never seen the point in all this rack race and rack back. Seems like an unnecessary tax if you will. You take you money and then give a bit back, oh and some middle men (i.e goverment jobs in keeping with the tax analogy) make a living.

Interesting what you say about rake races. I dont play on speed ipoker, but I hear its the hardest game in town. And its funny how all the rack back providers claim its super soft European fish compared to stars.

Always never seen the point in all this rack race and rack back. Seems like an unnecessary tax if you will. You take you money and then give a bit back, oh and some middle men (i.e goverment jobs in keeping with the tax analogy) make a living.

What can we do to influence PokerStars to care more about the pros like us?