Pokerstars Chests

Yeah mine went from 65000 to 335000 and I was losing during that period ... it’s so hard to understand.

Is it volume dependent?

It's because of the actual Neymar promo

It has a weird logic. I have encountered same, suddenly the cost goes x5-x10 even without promotions. And sometimes it's cheap as *****. Most likely has a lot to do with volume etc.

If you play a huge amount, suddenly you find yourself faced with chests you can't achieve without over-playing.

This is my big problem with volume-based rewards.
All sites make a show of promoting "responsible gaming" (whatever that is) yet all of them have promotions that encourage excessive play.

Honestly I think that’s true about volume... when I stopped playing on stars for a while then started again the chests were a lot more achievable than now

Than you need to wait for 30 days or so. Than the chest will be reset, but that cost you as well. Especially if you are close to finish a chest.

Originally posted by VorpalF2F
All sites make a show of promoting "responsible gaming" (whatever that is) yet all of them have promotions that encourage excessive play.

This is how economics works. In Finland all major market companies have their own loyalty bonus. The more you buy, the more you get "cashback". You can often find promotions like "every 10th pizza for free" etc. Companies like to reward customers, who use their products over others. Poker sites are no exception. To reward loyal customers doesn't collide with responsible gaming. I play responsible poker, and I focus my playing on one site to maximize the value from promotions.

But of course responsibility vs. maximizing profits is an interesting topic, and for gambling site it's always about balancing on a razors edge. The more responsible you are, the less you make profits. So if you want to make profits AND be responsible, it's impossible to be really good in both. Some sites do the minimun for responsibility, that's required in regulation and some sites do a little bit more.

Originally posted by Kyyberi
This is how economics works. In Finland all major market companies have their own loyalty bonus. The more you buy, the more you get "cashback". You can often find promotions like "every 10th pizza for free" etc. Companies like to reward customers, who use their products over others. Poker sites are no exception. To reward loyal customers doesn't collide with responsible gaming. I play responsible poker, and I focus my playing on one site to maximize the value from promotions.

There is nothing bad about rewarding loyal customers. However based on my experience, PokerStars doesn't reduce chest points for regulars with big volume and win. They reduce points if you are lost a big in the previous few weeks, because they want you to sit back at the tables. They do the same with Exclusive Poker Challenges. As far as I know they only give you a challenge, if your volume dropped significantly or you are in a big downswing.

It's like they say: "You lost big? Come and play more! You quit poker? Come back and play more!" I think Vorpal meant that this mentality doesn't fit with promoting responsible gaming.

For example I started to play on PokerStars in last May, and for one chest I had to collect 300 points on NL2. When I arrived to my 10th blue chest, I had to collect 2850 points. After that I played a lot, points didn't change. However when I had a 20+ BI downswing, they reduced the points to 400 for a blue chest. It took less than a session to get a chest on NL10. I could upgrade my chest to bronze, than to silver and at the moment I have to collect 2.750 for a silver chest, the same ammount of points that I needed last month for a blu one. At the same time they give me an Exclusive Poker Challenge (the first time ever), so they did everything to keep me at the tables, when my downswing last.

Originally posted by Kyyberi

Originally posted by VorpalF2F
All sites make a show of promoting "responsible gaming" (whatever that is) yet all of them have promotions that encourage excessive play.

This is how economics works. In Finland all major market companies have their own loyalty bonus. The more you buy, the more you get "cashback". You can often find promotions like "every 10th pizza for free" etc. Companies like to reward customers, who use their products over others. Poker sites are no exception. To reward loyal customers doesn't collide with responsible gaming. I play responsible poker, and I focus my playing on one site to maximize the value from promotions.

Yup I get that.
This is exactly how the previous reward system worked. You played a certain amount, you would get a certain reward.
The current system relies on random reward. PokerStars is not the only poker room to use similar tactics to attempt to encourage increased volume.

In the case of PokerStars it does appear to the casual observer that the reward decreases with increased volume, so of all the examples, PokerStars seems is far from the worst

My chests have been 17,500 points for past week or so. I have been playing on everyday, except the weekend. Sometimes losing, sometimes winning. Today I filled a chest and now the new one is 4,250 points. Same chest as previous ones.

I fail to see the logic in here.

The best thing is to not play in high rake environments. So if you don't play high rake structures, you don't have to get so much back from rakeback.

The logic in the system is fairly easy, how can we trick players to pay more rake without giving them it, and since it is a gambling company they test the price elasticity also.

The best thing is to choose wisely your clients. And not count so much at rakeback. You should be winning without it, otherwise it's not worth your time though.

Easy to disagree with that.

1. With some games (like small stakes PLO) you don't really have a lot of options where to play
2. In certain games (like small stakes PLO) rake is high everywhere
3. 50% rakeback might equal 6-10bb/100 boost to winrate. For some, that is worth their time.

"Not worth your time" is interesting thought. I know a lot of people who play -EV poker, for fun. I know people who make $10/h from rakeback, are breakeven pre-rakeback but that profit beats normal dayjob.

Best option is not to play PLO? Sorry about that. Altough, it will be juicy from time time to time. It can be a fun game if you understand, which most of us don't.

Not worth your time in $ / hour. Sure there are other reasons to play the game we all love so much.

And yes there will be players playing for fun and depositing. Otherwise the games that are juicy won't run.

But if you want to have a hobby where you don't pay for it, but even get some monetary rewards, the games with high rake are not the best for a lot of us, to be clear, it has to do with your starting / reference point. In the end, the average rake to be paid is the income of the site.

And I am sure you play responsible and get some money as reward.

There will be country's where that's enough for living expensive. Not sure if you have to rely on that.

But playing for incredible chests, that have a lot of lotery in it, makes not a lot of sense for me. I see it as a benefit, getting something back from what you have paid. But then again, it has to do with your goals and things.

And I agree that my point was not very clear.

If you think from pro point of view and what is enough $/h to make a living, then playing any small stakes doesn't make sense. But at least 99% of the ones who read this are not pro's nor will ever be. They play for fun/small income/both. But even then, of course it makes sense to think about rake and rakeback. If games are similar at site A and B, but B gives you $50 more a month, that is relevant.

So to say "not worth your time", you should also define in what aspect. As it would be weird to say "you should not play, as you don't win enough".

I agree.

I not thought about it well enough.

Also as serious recreational, being competitive minded, you could think about it. And go where your $ / h is the highest. Paying less rake and getting nothing back or paying lots of rake and get a lot back. Can be in your considirations.

Still, I dislike the lottery form of the concept of the chests. So I don't play at a site a lot where they have this kinda lottery format. That's from my perspective the best you can do.

Maybe some people like it. I not met anyone yet.

That leads us to another aspect. Recreationals love the change to win big. In other words, they like variance in rewards. Spins are very popular, cos you CAN win big. That's why GG had variance-heavy Fish Buffet, and it is still an option. Lottery attracts recreationals. Now if we want to make profits in poker, we want to play with recreationals. Site with flat rakeback and no recreational-friendly things is often more reg heavy than recreational-friendly site. So sometimes playing on a site with "lottery rewards" can be better for the games.

Problem with chests is that the chance to get a big one is VERY slim. I have never got one, and I have heard/seen that happening only once ever. And it doesn't reward volume, which is often a good hook for recreationals who play with decent volume. Who ever came up with the idea of current chest rewards is probably quite dumb for casino stuff. And those who accepted the idea are also dumb ones. It wouldn't take a rocket scientists to make them a lot more attractive.

Lol, in a span of 3 chests, my requirement has gone 17,500->4,250->1,700->700

All of them are silver chests.

Originally posted by Kyyberi
Lol, in a span of 3 chests, my requirement has gone 17,500->4,250->1,700->700

All of them are silver chests.

I experienced the sam (2850, 800, 600, 400) when I had a downswing.

Did you lost a lot? Or your results and volume are the same as before?