NL vs PL revisited

I need to clear up a misconception about my last post.

I am unhappy because they ruined the $25PL game. Chris Halverson is happy because in his opinion they improved the NL game. Chris isn't a PL player so he isn't commenting on the PL changes.

I'm really just upset about having to adjust to a change. I had a cash cow at Party Poker, and now they've killed it to make hamburger, when the milk is what was really desirable. I will whine and bitch all I want, but I will adjust.

I still insist that making the game at Party the same as everywhere else isn't a good thing, because having fewer options is never an improvement. But Party Poker is "The Aquarium" and I can understand people like Halverson who think that improving the odds at a game that has that many morons in it HAS to be good.

I have always stayed away from the $25NL game at Party because the Psycho level has always been intolerable. How many times do you have to seen someone go in for $25 to win $.75 in blinds and get called by someone with CRAP to realize that you're not playing "poker", you're playing some kind of weird bingo variation.

I even blogged a few days ago about actually going to a $25NL game because the avg pot was so high I just couldn't resist it. The combination of sociopaths at this table could keep a psychiatrists convention busy for months.

This is probably where I will take my game. I don't really cotton to the idea of buying in for $25 at the $50PL tables, because I am looking for idiots and they tend to clot up at the minimum buy-in tables. Whoever suggested that didn't understand my issues.

I didn't mean to stir up shit here. I am sad that my cash cow is now being served at McDonalds, but I don't intend to ruin anyone's day.