Reality of my situation: Two days ago I lost $180 due to not realizing my settings had changed as I was clicking the "Play" button on wheel. Over this last year that Ive been with Stake, I estimate Ive lost around $2,000 specifically because I accidentally clicked a setting and/or "1/2" or" 2x" bet size buttons and did not realize that something had changed till 20-50 bets later. This is a phenomena that occurs occasionally but it occurred twice today. The second instance happened within 5 minutes of the first instance. I realize now that this is something that will continue to happen on occasion unless something changes. There are two issues: The "Play" button is right next to the fucking setting for "Segments" and the cursor on wheel changes only in size rather than color, sound, or something actually distinguishable.
$2,000 isn't life changing, however; its an amount that if it was lost in other circumstances, I would literally go to someones home over to try and collect. $2,000 is an amount that is most certainly NOT okay to piss away because I didn't realize Wheel on high risk actually requires an ability to maintain both precision accuracy clicking and hyper vigilance over extended time periods to immediately recognize anything that may have changed. I am so pissed off that the "Play" button is so close to the settings on this game. Whoever designed the interface for wheel... wtf. What is the logic behind placing the "play" button literally FUCKING PIXELS away from the the settings for game. Other games have some UI/UX logic such as Limbo and Keno. Keno puts "Clear Table" and another button between the bet size options and "Play". Limbo completely moves the multiplier setting away from the bet sizing.
It is fucking detrimental to my chances of any kind of success when settings go from (high risk/10 segments), to (high risk/20 segments). On (high risk/10 segments) My record for misses in a row without a win is 107. On (High Risk/10 segments) settings Ive have numerous instances across numerous seed combos where wheel misses 40+ times in a row. Ive had 50 misses in a row, happen 3x in a row, each occurring after a win to reset the "misses in a row" counter. Ive had 4 instances of 70+ misses in a row and 1 other instance of it missing 97 times in a row.
Logically (high risk/20 segments) requires a reduction in bet size by like a factor of 8 if I want to maintain the same risk of ruin that I intended to have by playing a game with 10 segments at 9.9x rather than 20 segments. 20 segments compared to 10 segments, on high risk, is a completely different game that requires a much larger bankroll/balance to not go broke. If (high risk/10 segments) has missed 107 times in a row for me, that means I need to assume that 20 segments has potential to miss 240 times or more. Missing 60 times in row probably isn't uncommon on (high risk/20 segments) if you're playing a lot. The point I'm making is that Wheel on high risk, is a completely different game depending on if you are playing 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 segments.
Recap:
Problem:
1. "Play" button needs to move or the cursor for high risk needs to change colors for each setting of segments. The size difference of cursor is not enough. Ive caught the change in size a few times but more often than not, my balance is eaten up and only realize what happened once I go to review the gameplay to confirm my count of misses.
2. Setting changes on wheel (high risk/10 segments) are hard to notice. Almost impossible to notice if you are multi tasking and playing a lot. It is difficult to notice because the cursor color does not change from red, sound effect for misses does not change. The three things that do change are the size of the cursor, the multiplier number at the bottom of the screen, and the multi in the win history at the top. Both of the cursor and multiplier at bottom are inconsequential to the game. Where the cursor lands on the wheel is means nothing and there are only two possible multipliers for each setting of segments on high risk. Its either... 0 or (# of segments - .1x for each segment). Why would you bother paying attention to either of these unless you're trying to see if a setting has changed unknowingly?
3. High Risk Wheel - When the number of segments changes, the math to manage risk of ruin changes substantially as well. Bet size and balance requirements to reduce risk of ruin to a reasonable level changes by a factor that is substantial enough where if you do not catch the setting change within 30-40 bets, you're going to have lost at least a buy-in, two buy-in, and hopefully not but maybe even the balance. Lets say you use Kelly Criterion and reduce the suggested bet size to a fraction of what the formula advises, the risk of ruin still increases substantially by maintaining a bet size intended for lower number segment settings on high risk. IE: 1/8 of 5% of your bank roll per wager, losing 40 bets in a row with a delayed martingale strategy will still lose the entire balance.
Solution:
1. Change the wheel cursor color for each segment setting on high risk.
2. Change the sound for misses for each setting of segments.
3. Move the "Play" button to a place that common sense tells you is better than pixels away from a button that completely changes the game.
Stake used to be the obvious choice
I hope wheel gets updated to ensure no one else has this kind of negative experience with wheel that is preventable with better design. Its an easy update and will make a huge difference in terms of not screwing people over for unintended inaccuracies of clicking the "Play" button. I'm not a game developer but it seems counter-intuitive to implement a win condition or mechanic into the game where perfect "point & click" accuracy must be maintained consistently over extended periods of time or the consequence of potentially losing a substantial portion of balance because you clicked 10 pixels off the mark one time. More importantly.... this experience with wheel, in viewed as an isolated incident, is a relatively minor problem, it could be described as a poor design" choice that had unintended consequences.
Negative experiences like this experience with wheel and the interaction I had with chat support providing incorrect information in an arrogant manner hyper compounds the frustration I feel with Stake as a product. The same exact product now provides market rate EV instead of EV that was by far better than all competitors in the space. Stake's website works quite well, Stake has a nice selection of games, and I prefer Limbo and Plinko w Stake compared to Hacksaw's Limbo/Plinko. This is the best I can do to "steelman" why Stake should be chosen over other providers. Previously I praised and defended Stake constantly by pointing out they by far were the industry leader in terms of the value provided to players. This value made the gambling experience much more enjoyable and therefore because you could with honesty tell yourself, "At least Ill get a decent weekly/monthly". Stake was without question the best place to play online after considering the bonus and loss rebate on monthly/weekly. Stake does not offer food/drink, free play, free lodging, sometimes free travel, free entertainment to live shows/events, concierge service, and loss rebate between 10%-20% after loss thresh holds met, however; an argument to play at Stake over a live casino could be made because Stake does not require something like $80,000 to $100,000 loss thresh holds to be met before any rebate is provided.
Chat Support needs better training
In 2024 I asked two separate chat support agents if there was a place to provide feedback or feature requests. Both advised there was no place for that.
The other day a Stake support agent told me they answered my question about where I can find information on rake structure/fees with their previous comment: "There is no rake on Stake Poker, its a social casino. The rake is provided to players in the form of rakeback." This employee didn't even attempt to find the URL for the fee schedule and instead wasted my time with service that I describe as Dunning Kruger. I gave examples, I explained a poker room does not make money unless a rake or time fee is paid, and I was cordial until this guy decided to triple down. I found the link to the rake. I sent him the URL, sent a screenshot that it says the rake is 7% + caps and included a messaging saying: , just for your information. The customer service rep claimed he was again correct and he clearly explained what rakeback is to me. I explained that isn't what i asked him, I also provided examples of what I meant by rake, and clear he didn't even show an interest in trying to work with me to get the correct answer. This guy was not interested in listening, doing a good job, or trying to help me.
I don't expect people to know everything, maybe its a new employee, maybe he has never played Poker, maybe hes having a bad day, however; to triple down with incorrect information after confirming that isn't what I'm asking about, being provided examples of my question, and being provided the link for "Stake.US official card room rules" is comical to me. This person truly couldn't care less about trying to do their job with any kind of professionalism or to try and actually help.
There are two parts to support: technical knowledge and human connection. Does support staff not get training on either of these fundamental aspects of the job?... The lack of knowledge is so bad that I'm having to try and educate them which is highly concerning. Is this poor management or employees who couldn't care less about doing good work? Ive attached a chat log for reference. EDIT: I am unable to attach the chatlog due to file type.
Stake Poker's Cash Game Rake - Poor management?
I made a post previously about Stake Poker's rake. The cash game rake structure is now capped, the rake fees were reduced, and added short-handed game discounts which means a player is no longer punished for opening a new table. Stake Poker's rake on cash games is still the highest of all online providers I can find while having one of the smallest player pools. It truly feels like Stake Poker is a project being lead by someone who has no domain expertise related to Poker. So I'm going to take more time out of my day to explain my perspective and not just talk trash.
Rake has a direct affect on player profitability and churn rate of player pool. Unprofitable recreational players are not capable of decision making that generates enough value in the pots won to break even on the losses from variance and randomness of poker. Having high rake bleeds unprofitable players more quickly. The ideal blend of the players imho is: 70% recreational players, 30% are for profit whether part-time or full-time. You want recreational players to survive for as long as possible without needing a break to rebuild a bankroll or funds. A new poker rooms goal should be to grow the player pool, which opens more tables, which means more hands dealt, and more pots to collect rake on. Maximizing profit vs creating a sustainable player pool must be balanced.
Stake poker has a tiny player pool. What is the business reason for charging the highest cash game rake of any online card room (with usa access) because that doesn't promote growth of the player pool. The listed rake for other provider cash games are lower than Stake Poker and this is true without considering rakeback offers which all the rooms have.
Stake Poker - Tournament fees
A few streams ago, someone in chat mentioned Stake Poker's fees and Eddie mentioned the 10% tournament fees and I can't recall exactly what was said but it essentially was that 10% isn't bad. I can confirm that 10% is a common tournament fee on USA sites for multi-table large tournaments that take hours to finish. Why is it 10% across the board? You charge 10% on heads up sit and go... lol. 2 players playing 1v1 for 20-30 minutes is charged the same tournament fee as multi-table tournaments. Why are Heads Up SNG capped at $11 buy ins?...
Conclusion:
I signed up around Apr24 but didn't start playing till Sep24. I played maybe once every 4 weeks with an amount that earned 200ish tickets. This was my norm until I found bonus drops which was probably around Oct24. I ramped up my play to get to Plat5 by probably around Mar25. I've reduced my play drastically because its not fun to play a lot now. You can check, stake ID: itsmeek0 Before you reduced loss rebate on monthly/weekly and the value of GC, if I lost in a session but earned a decent amount of tickets, it felt reasonable to tell myself "At least you'll have a decent monthly/weekly". Even if I lost, I could look forward to the weekly/monthly because it was significant enough that even when you lose, you will have another opportunity. Since the weekly/monthly bonus reduced the loss rebate, the amount received is inconsequential in comparison to the amount played/lost and if you lose, there is no hope. This is why I rarely played on Casinos and I play mainly Poker. Since the reduction in monthly/weekly, I play a lot less, and Ive gone back to poker because trying to play with any kind of regularity on Stake is a bad financial choice. Casino gambling is a service is quite possibly the best example of a service with elastic demand... If the cost to play goes up substantially, the demand for the service goes down substantially so... no surprise I'm back playing poker.
I praised Stake constantly as an industry leader that provided, by far, the most value of any other social casino. Stake was a competitive option compared to live casinos because a loss thresh hold requirement doesn't exist and the amount Stake provided wasn't far off from live casinos typical offers for rebate. Stake provided players a lot of value and reason to not drive/travel to live casino with rebate on loss which I felt was around 8% ish. Since Stake cannot offer food/drink/show tickets/gift cards.. The rebate on loss amount was the only thing that made Stake special.
Last night, I was thinking about my choice to increase my play on Stake and I concluded that I first need to answer if I thought it was possible that Stake would do this. How can I answer that honestly? By asking myself, "was I surprised by the changes and by the amount of change?" I absolutely was surprised. Back to the first question, how do I feel about increasing my play last year? Was it taking advantage of the offers or was this a mistake? David Sklansky, one of the early authors of Poker books, defines a mistake in games of imperfect information as "If you knew what they had, would you take the same action?". If I knew Stake was going to do this, would I have increased my play? No, I wouldn't have increased my play and I greatly overvalued the benefit received since I was very surprised by the changes. Being surprised by the changes meant I didn't think it was possible Stake would do this. I thought Stake's strategy was to produce to best product, offer the most value to players, and the players will come because the choice is obvious. I severely overvalued the situation in retrospect and my choice to increase play was based upon that perceived value.
Welp Stake, you pulled all the value out from under my feet. You got me real good. I'm left holding this Plat5 level that is worth a fraction of what it once was (because of GC devalue and increase in overall cost to play) I dont have a desire to play very much because live casinos are the clear choice again. I had a funny thought. I would bet my life that current Stake 2025 wouldn't have made these changes if Stake 2024 was a competitor. HAHH. Stake 2025 = Drake after "Not Like Us"... a shadow of what once was. HAH. Ill end with a quote because it seems fitting.
"It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it" - Warren Buffet
