• PokerStars VIP Structure Changes Hurt High Stakes Players

    03 November 2015

    Big pokerstars changes

    Since the Amaya Gaming Group acquired PokerStars back in the middle of 2014, changes like the ones they recently announced have gotten them in a lot of hot water with players. It started off with players reacting negatively towards announcements that PokerStars would offer casino games and other forms of gambling in 2015, and they rallied against this thinking that it would pull recreational players away from the tables. In the long-run, the thinking was that it would draw more recreational players to the site who would want t play more than just poker.

    Changing the Rewards Structure

    Other than adding casino table games, slots and other ways to gamble, they've also fundamentally changed how they reward poker players. The rewards at PokerStars have been a part of the situation that has gained them a ton of publicity over the years, and people who have went for the "Supernova Elite" status have been rewarded with huge percentages of what basically amounts to rakeback. Starting in 2016, those high-level rewards will be gone.

    Replacing the VIP Rewards

    One complaint about the previous setup for PokerStars' program is that it contained a lot of complications with Stellar Rebates, FPPs/VPPs, Milestones and other bonuses. Now, everything boils down to one item that players need to know about: the StarsCoin. Each StarsCoin is worth $0.01, and they will be used to simplify how rewards are given. Details on how these will be earned aren't available just yet, but the idea is interesting.

    Redistribution of Rewards

    What's basically going to happen now is that somewhere between two and five percent of players are going to see a huge reduction in the amount of rewards they earn, and most other players should expect to see a small increase. How that works out as being fair isn't clear, but it looks like they're trying to discourage the high-volume, multi-tabling grinders that have made PokerStars their home and largely made the games difficult. This is just one in a number of changes that have been made to benefit the long-term health of the poker player ecosystem, even though it might seem unfair initially.

    It's also worth noting that high stakes players will no longer earn VPPs. In an odd twist, $5/10 and up big bet games and $10/$20 and up fixed-limit games will no longer award VPPs for some odd reason.

    Related News

    • 26 March 2017

      PokerStars Casino Creates Three New Millionaires

      PokerStars has only been offering online casino games for a relatively short time now, but they've shown that they definitely belong with an amazing feat recently. Inside of only 27 days, they made three different players into millionaires at their games. this is a pretty big deal since around $4.2 million was paid out to three players with three big jackpots. Details on the Jackpot Wins

      Read full article
    • 21 January 2016

      Irritated High Stakes Players Meet With PokerStars

      One of the tools that online poker players have is boycotting and organizing sit-out protests. Several years ago when France first introduced legislation for regulating the online gambling industry, they set the rules for taking a rake in online poker games so high that it made no sense for anyone to play them. A big boycott and sit-out protest on the French-facing PokerStars site was enough to get the attention of officials and to get those rules changed.

      Read full article
    • 10 December 2015

      Effectiveness of the PokerStars Boycott Questioned

      High stakes and high volume players on PokerStars staged a boycott for the first three days of December, and it's not clear how effective it was. While they definitely brought attention to their complaints, the main effect was in the high stakes games, and how much that effects the company or the general player pool is difficult to measure. Overall, it would seem that the timing was poor and that there are too many variables to determine its effectiveness. The Problem With the Boycott

      Read full article