You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
CashOut transfers to poker?
Tikay10
Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 172,092
in Poker Chat
Thought that was interesting, what do you guys think?
https://www.pokerstrategy.com/news/world-of-poker/PokerStars-to-launch-All-In-Cash-Out-in-cash-games_108250/
Comments
If one player chooses this new option and the other does not, the player who has not chosen it plays the remainder of the hand against PokerStars, who keep the money if they win
My only worry is maybe Stars is becoming too complicated. One of NLH's big draws is it's simplicity. Once you get buttons all over the table asking if you want to run it twice, rebuy, or do you want insurance, it can give you a headache.
Yeh, don't know what I think of this to be honest.
But losing recs take the low variance option, probably won't realise they're getting raked on top of the rake they're already playing, then realise they're not losing because of luck and quit the game sooner. Hurts everyone except Stars.
Also makes people w/ gambling issues even more likely to keep playing, knowing if they get it in bad they can cash out their 20% equity or w/e and have another shot.
Absolutely despise it.
Evolutionary wise where are they heading ?
Snap?
I’m old , hence dislike change, poker is a simple game... don’t make it less so.
Guy with (say) 10% equity is going to snap take the deal
Guy with 90% is gonna refuse
Cue miracle river ,and “It’s rigged”
End in tears.
Can't see it bringing any real benefit to regs or even serious recs. Think degens will love it though.
No thanks I'll just hope my 70% equity holds up or my 30% equity runs it down.
Firstly definitely an additional income stream for the poker site as it gets the rake and "buys" the equity at a discount. Variance to the poker site will be smoothed out as it will have an interest in every cashed out hand.
Personally I like the idea of the equity being shown on the table when the players are all in. It might come as a surprise to some players what their equity is in a particular hand. I think that indirectly it might be quite educational as not every poker player will review their play after a session and perhaps player which believed he / she was subject to bad beat or the extent of the bad beat might be able to reconsider when the equity is actually displayed on the screen.
For infrequent players which are more conservative than gambling in nature and where variance might be more pronounced owing to a small sample size of hands played I can see this being attractive. After all we the hope is that our winnings will trend towards our equity in the hand and the skill we had in engineering that equity. This option seems to achieve that goal, albeit at a 1% discount. For higher volume players this would be less attractive, as the hope would be that over a wide sample size they would achieve this and save 1%.
Not everyone plays according to their bankroll. Some will play at much higher stakes than they should. If you were playing at too high a level and were all in with 80% equity might some be attracted to cashing out rather than losing the buy-in? I think that some would. One concern might be that it encourages some players to play at too high a level with the thought that they can cash out to preserve their cash if they are in bad shape and then for whatever reason (tilt) might decide not to cash out. This is perhaps a danger to that player.
Finally, this feature is optional. If a player does not want to take advantage of it then he /she does not have to.
Sorry but i'm really a ignoramus when it comes to this sort of thing.
Or bet sizing, hand ranges, multi tabling etc.
Obviously winning, well rolled regulars won't use the feature. I also think it might give some long term losing players a better experience if they can make their deposits last a little longer, which in turn might lead to them having a larger net deposit over the course of a year.
It will be bad for the poker economy on Stars if it doesn't lead to more money being generated by extra deposits from losing players than is being taken out of the economy by the 1% juice Stars will be collecting every time someone cashes out.
It will definitely be more popular than the initial reaction I have seen in various places. Folk love insurance. Think of all the punters that cash out their acca's every week on the football. They take a bad price on the original bet, then they take a bad deal when cashing out and they're as happy as a pig in ****.
Regs never like any changes. This will no doubt make more money for Stars but it might also make more money for regs if it means less people quit the game because they don't like getting annihilated in double quick time every time they redeposit.
Anything that gives losing players the chance of making their money last longer and that might encourage losing players to keep on trying their luck is just fine by me.
I'd give them all the money put aside for promotions too but that's another debate altogether and one that gets me shot down in flames every time I mention it
If you keep getting your money in bad then just because you have the insurance it doesn't make your plays any better. If you have 20% to win then that is what you win long term. The benefit of a system like this is you realise that equity now but at a long term cost of the fee charged by stars.
A benefit to players is to reduce variance if games are higher stakes than normal or the game has got a lot bigger than it may ordinarily do.
Am I right in assuming this would replace the option to run it twice? Both are, in effect, insurance.
I think that if there was no additional rake or percentage fee for cashing out your equity then it would be optimal to cash out every hand as you would ensure that you received the return that your play merited. Otherwise the only way of getting a better return is by being more lucky than unlucky. Would a poker site offer such a feature by buying the equity without a discount? It would certainly reduce the income stream and unless every player cashes out then the poker site is the one subjected to the variance. Now it could be that cashing out results in some players losing money less quickly and thus playing more hands which are subject to rake. The more raked hands the greater the income for the poker site. Whether this would compensate for variance that the poker site takes without the benefit of buying equity at a discount, I would doubt it, but I would have expected this to have been modeled to some degree by pokerstars before launching this change.