New PokerStars Opt-In System Under Trial
In the past, the use of SharkScope whilst playing has been prohibited by PokerStars. In an attempt to resolve this issue and get SharkScope back on the allowed list at PokerStars we are trialing a new opt in system.
We believe that its to the benefit of all our users if we can find a way for our service to adhere to PokerStars 3rd party software rules and yet still provide the ability to rate all players by default.
The new system is as follows:
By default all ROI and Profit data is hidden. To opt-in and show this data the user must send $0.03 to the user SharkScope on PokerStars.
To block your data from all users including yourself, users need to send $0.01 to the user SharkScope on PokerStars.
Transferred money will be returned within 5 days.
Players who have not opted in can still be rated using the "Ability /100" rating, which was designed to accurately assess a player poker ability without making it possible to reverse engineer that player's ROI or Profit figures.
Note:
- This trial does not effect subscribers, they can still see all data.
- At the end of the trial if we choose to implement this system fully, it will affect all new subscription purchases.
- For the trial period, players on a leaderboard are considered opted in by default.
At this point neither ourselves or PokerStars have committed to this using this system after the trial period is over and we welcome comments to be posted here either positive or negative to help us decide whether to implement this system fully.
Edit:
In answer to some common questions that have arisen:
- This system will not be used on poker sites other than PokerStars.
- Please allow a few minutes after you get the transfer confirmation email from PokerStars for the Opt-In to be processed.
- The trial will last as long as it takes for us and PokerStars to get enough feedback from the trial to decide if we want to implement it fully or not. If we do decide to implement it fully we will make an announcement and give users plenty of advanced notice.
- Please do not just post things like "my opt-in failed" in this thread. Please wait a decent amount of time before contacting support by email if you have to.
Comments
Do i understand correct that when this system comes into effect it means as a sharkscope subscriber all i can see from players that didnÂŽt opt in is the ability figure ?
In case of that i canÂŽt see a reason why i want to be a subscriber anymore.
I really love your website and everything you wrote in it. I want yo tell you that it helped me learn lots of things in a very fast and I always want to know many things about computers and IT system.
----------
cloud computing security
I am getting the same problem. Now I am down to 1 search to see my stats for the day. I have tried 4 times. Please let me know if you can speed things up, that would be amazing! Thanks guys. I also sent an email so if you want to get back to me on there too that would be great.
AsAhAcAdCLUB
@Mefjoew: Yes we aware that we will lose some subscribers, however we're confident that experienced players will be able to use the Ability rating just as effectively as seeing all of the data on a player.
We are also confident that players who value our service highly enough will simply switch to playing on a different site that we still cover fully. We do not agree with the PokerStars rules, but we are attempting to find a compromise that keeps everyone reasonably happy. If you don't like the PokerStars rules and are going to play on a different site because of them, then please tell them - as this is the only way the rules would ever get changed.
@lilrob: All those other sites agreed a long time ago to block their data once SharkScope did. We've been resisting for so long in an attempt to find a compromise that will serve our users better.
@darksidequads: I'm not sure why you wouldn't subscribe at the moment given that the new rules do not affect subscribers - but each to their own I guess.
Although having to implement a system like this is a real pain for everyone, hopefully it will resolve the issue with Pokerstars. I for one am very excited about this and I really hope that Pokerstars will allow us to use this site again while playing. With modern technology and the ability to track the results of games, why should we not be allowed to view this information. As before, players still have the option to opt-out. Thank you SharkScope for working on a solution and hopefully Pokerstars will put you back on the "good" list!
â¢At the end of the trial if we choose to implement this system fully, it will affect all new subscription purchases.
Does this mean if we have a subscription and never let it expire we will continue to see all the data even if you do go ahead with this and it will simply affect new subscribers or would the new system just apply to everyone?
I have been a sharkscope subscriber for about 2 years now, and if this new system is implemented, I will be cancelling my subscription permanently. I find the ability rating a very weak addition and never use it when assessing players skills. Do you really think because pokerstars has banned sharkscope while playing, people are scared to use it? I garauntee 99% of stars players don't even know its banned, and would continue using it even if they did.
I do not like this idea for several reasons:
1) Pokerstars' policy is crap, and everyone knows it's crap. Therefore, I see bending to their will as basically admitting that their policy makes any sense at all. They say it's an "unfair advantage" to use scope, but what that really translates to is "we're tired of getting e-mails from angry fish being humiliated at the table by someone that knows they lose a ton of money." It's not an unfair advantage because scope doesn't affect the way you play a hand. All it helps you decide is if you want to play with them or not. If they argue it gives information not available if you play live, well guess what, playing over the internet also DEPRIVES you of information you would get live such as physical tells, age, drunk, clueless (asking dealer for tips), etc... Further, it's not a privacy issue when you are only identified by an anonymous username, so why the hesitancy for more detailed info such as a graph, or ROI %? If Pokerstars was honest about the problem, they would simply treat it as a chat issue and ban the chat of users who harass other players about their scope stats. All of this jumping through hoops to please Stars is because some idiot there couldn't figure that out.
2) I would be totally fine with only seeing the ability score if I thought it was an accurate measure of a player's CURRENT skill. The problem is that some players have horrible starting stats, and then they become winning players. From what I've seen of the ability score, it doesn't weight current trends in ROI strongly enough. Really all I want to see is an ROI and a graph. The graph is by far the most important tool though. Maybe an ability score and a 'last 100 games' graph.
3) Opt-in = 1% of players will have anything besides an ability score.
4) The people who depend on this site don't give a shit what rules Pokerstars puts out because they can see through the bullshit to the real reasons why Stars doesn't want scope around. They will continue to pay as long as you can continue to track stats.
5) I would likely not renew after being a subscriber for 3+ years if all I was receiving for my money was an ability score.
OMFG!! I cant state it any better then "leprechaun" just put it. I understand that most of the information he cited should be directed at pokerstars, but as he said, by giving in to their ridiculous demands, sharkscope is just cowering in fear of a site which they have been the only one with the balls to stand up to. Why suddenly follow the other lemmings off the cliff when u can be the ones to stand up agains this ridiculous policy. Yes i have seen what your response is likely going to be "@admin: All those other sites agreed a long time ago to block their data once SharkScope did. We've been resisting for so long in an attempt to find a compromise that will serve our users better." Here is your chance to distance yourself from those other sites in producing an original, top notch product, which is the reason these subscribers have deposited their hard earned winnings into your product month after month. All I ask is anyone who agrees with me PLEASE post or email someone within the sharkscope administration.
Yes, very well said leprechaun. Why would you, sharkscope, bend to the will of pokerstars when it has no jurisdiction over what you do. They still allow US players to play on the site even though it's a grey subject and half the sites no longer do. If some retarded US government rep would send them a warning you think they would stop this or just laugh it off, given that the US would have no legislation regarding their current method of operation (i.e. another country). What if other sites request this over time as well? Will you do the same and therefore render ss esentially useless?
If this goes down, I'd bet half my roll that 95% of subscribers that play a large amount at ps (which is ALOT of them) will insta drop their subscriptions in the first 2-3 months, with me being the first in line.
Horrid idea implementing this... you might want to rethink this one.
I am not a subscriber (just using the 5 searches/day part for the past year) so take my comment for what it is (or ignore if non-subscribers don't have a say 
I would like to first comment on a couple of answers the Admin issued:
Yes we aware that we will lose some subscribers, however we're confident that experienced players will be able to use the Ability rating just as effectively as seeing all of the data on a player
It doesn't make much sense. How can you use a rating that is not at all explained? You never disclosed how the ability rating is computed ("In order not to be abused") and not even mentioned what are the ranges. I have only seen something like "yeah most fish have an ability score of 50 something and some of the best players have 86-90 plus". Nobody knows what time frame is covered. How many games? What difference is between someone with 10k games and 5% ROI and one with 10 games and 200% ROI? I mean Sharkscope is A LOT more than just a shark or fish in a bowl icon. If you want to proceed like this then just make it all icons and forget even the ability score. Display fish, monkey, donkey, shark, lion and penguins and be done with it. Would be easier to follow
Those graphs showing what is someone playing, at what buyins, for how many games, are they getting better, worse - that's what Sharkscope is about.
We are also confident that players who value our service highly enough will simply switch to playing on a different site that we still cover fully.
That's just absurd. You mean to say if someone is 15-25 tabling Stars with a good/decent ROI - he is going to switch to Cake or whatever just because he's in love with Sharkscope. Seriously ... How can you even say that? Nobody offers the volume PS has. Full Tilt is second and they have half the overall amount of players PS has. Everybody else is trailing way behind. And FT is crowded as it is. Not to mention that most of the smaller sites have horrendous software and even worse multitabling options.
That's how I see it.
1. With the voluntary opt-in option - less than 0.5% of players will end up having stats (Leprechaun is an optimist with 1%). Paying subscribers will end up seeing a crappy Ability score .. and that's about it. EVEN IF the ability score gets better/more accurate in time (which is possible and I guess that's Sharkscope's plan as well) it still seems a very small value for the money someone will pay.
2. You will lose A LOT (if not most) of your PS clients. And if that happens ... then from a business perspective .. what is the point? You're "fixing" something and end up losing most of the people you are "fixing" it for ...
ON THE OTHER HAND (now that I'm thinking about it while writing) - people adapt. After all - if you are decent player, playing a lot and always looking for an edge - do you want some information (even if it's just an ability score) or nothing at all? Even if those 3 guys at your table did not opt in (obviously) and all you see is an ability of 57-59 - isn't that good enough for you to know and target them before the other regulars notice their bad play through HUD stats? I think it is ...
And the ability score will end up being dissected and analyzed further given that it will be the only available score.
You might actually get some new subscribers from PS just because you will be legal again I bet that's one of the thoughts behind all these.
Just wanted to say that people who think that the % who opt in will be 1% or under are wildly underestimating how many PokerStars players use SharkScope. That's not to say anywhere near enough will be opted in to keep everyone happy, but it is worth noting.
We do feel that there is a genuine choice out there on which sites to play on. If you seriously can't play on any other site than PokerStars because of the extreme volume of games you need to play then how exactly are you using SharkScope? Playing that number of games you can't be table selecting and with that many tables open you can't possibly be analyzing each player's statistics in detail. All you need to know for snap decisions is if a player is good, bad or mediocre. This is exactly what the ability score can tell you. Granted the ability score requires some experience to use, and should not be read without considering the number of games played and the player's stake level, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
The users who have been basing their judgments on say total profit or ROI in isolation are categorically doing it wrong and need to appreciate that all aspects of a players results need to be considered in making a judgment of their ability, as our rating does.
To the people who are wondering how PokerStars have made us do this trial, the fact is they haven't. We don't believe PokerStars could ever stop us collecting the data, however they could plausibly make life harder for us. A technology race is just wasted time and effort on both sides. PokerStars and ourselves would much rather spend that time adding new features and other improvements. So we believe its worth experimenting to see if there is some middle ground that works for most users.
It is correct for us multitablers it is nearly impossible to check stats while playing full blast. But we aren't playing full blast all the time, usually when I start a session or ending a session I would check the stats on the first few tables and look for good playing regulars multitablers and mark them.
Unfortunately with info masked it becomes quite difficult particularly when when are you are playing sng different from the norm. I just switched over to pokerstars and have been playing Double or Nothings. When I first started I marked all good players just based on total games, ROI, and a quick graph check. Everyone else I would assume to be a fish.
After awhile I started to notice alot of these good players were making horrible plays for DON sng's, the transition is alot harder than most people would think. (particularly painful one is a regulr sng player will make alot more calls if he thinks there is an edge late game, which a regular DON fish would also do) So all of a sudden I realized that I needed to filter for DON before I passed any judgement on their skill. I honestly believe it was costly mistake, luckly I was just starting to refine my game and not playing high stakes.
To make a long story short, there is big differences between headsup,multitable,DON sng's. Making the assumtion that a player knows how to play your particular game based on ability score can actually hurt more than help.
Another problem will be seeing how many games that person is playing, its a huge advantage know that a player is playing lots of games at once.
Only brightside I see is that of the people that will open their stats it will be entirely winning players. Too bad though it was always nice to check out how much a bad player was losing after take a horrible beat from them.
I don't think I will get a sharkscope membership again if this is implemented, the only reliable use to me is to check my own stats.
admin, what people were getting at was either miscommunicated or misunderstood on your part. Yes, a lot of players are going to opt-in, however it will be mainly non-subscribers who just use this to see their own stats. what people were trying to say is that a ton of players were going to pay $0.01 to have their stats blocked. if you are a strong player, (9-15% ROI for Single-Table SNGs) why would you want only average, slightly winning players who ROI like 1-5% in non-high stakes or slightly losing players who use this site to be able to see your stats if it would deter them from playing in a SNG you are registered for when these types of players are players you would want at your table? the ability rating doesn't tell you dick, i have seen people who are rated a whopping 69-70 that ROI 15% at an avg buy in of $16, with a profit graph that is just a straight-sloped line going up and theyve played over 10k games. i agree 100% with i think it was leprecaun who said it, i think stars's main reason for their policy is the number of e-mails they get from fish who get embarassed when they bad beat someone and that person berates them and brings up their stats.
my point is that most winning players are not going to change the site they play on just to use your product. PS offers the most volume, and thus the best table selection, plus it has the best VIP rewards program. people are not going to change sites and have to adjust to a whole new blind structure for SNGs if theyve been beating SNGs on stars for some time. dont know why you would bend to pokerstars's will when many of your subscribers were using this site while playing on stars regardless of their policy. i mean you said it yourself admin that people underestimate how many sharkscope subscribers play on stars which means that despite being on the banned list, people still use your site. just leave it the way it was, unless you as a business are looking to slash your profits bigtime. no one, sharkcope included, benefits from this new system.
Am I missing something here? PS says "don't use Scope during play" but they don't know and can't do anything about it if you are and just keep your mouth shut at the table. Scope can still track stats on PS play, at least for SNG, and is using what amounts to public information to collect those stats. Why is Scope now bending to conform to the will of PS? I'm a subscriber and will not renew if this policy becomes implemented. Subscribers obviously see a value in the information provided by Scope but without the bulk of that information being available on the bulk of the players we are evaluating, the value is gone. There is an option on Scope to block your own stats and that can certainly be used by anyone that chooses which gives everyone a chance to block their information if they decide they want to.
I applaud the effort to get in the fold and make the system work between the two companies but this doesn't seem to be the answer to me. I'd like to see how many people will renew their subscriptions based on this current platform? Anyone going to renew, speak up and tell me what you're seeing that makes it a value for you please.
Quick Qusetion SS... how long do you intend on trialing this new opt in system for??
Im a regular playing HU on PS, and in my veiw the new system is totally useless. there is no way i will consider subscribing to SS if all im getting is a rubbish "ability rating".
SS you guys are obviously trying to increase your customer base by becoming legit with PS but in the process your pissing off (and gonna loose if you dont abort) all your loyal customers. along with that the value of the service that your selling has decreased by like 99%
seriously guys... stupidest play ever
@SharkScope Admin:"...A technology race is just wasted time and effort on both sides. PokerStars and ourselves would much rather spend that time adding new features and other improvements...."
I would like to participate as a software developer on that technology race!
XD
How does a player with -43 % (fish bowl) ROI result in a rating of 65?
Where as players with much better ROI share similar rating?
So, knowing this - will SS make any efforts to improve the accuracy of its rating system?
I truly hope so, otherwise it will become USELESS for players that do not wish to change poker sites. If the rating system remains unchanged, than that would be just stupid business on the part of SS.
I REALLY hope that SS does not become USELESS for the most popular poker site in the world, all because of a broken rating system.
So here's my suggestion:
Fish < 45 ,
Losing players but not fish > 45 < 55
Decent players > 55 < 65
Good players > 65 < 80
Mini Sharks > 80 < 90
Sharks > 90
I'm curious about this number. Can I see this number with a search filter? I.e. if I want to see how good they are at 9man, 180man, headsup etc.?
Because let's face it these games are all extremely different.
The way I see it, if it doesn't work for filtered searches, it's like picking a football team based on a 'sportiness' rating. We'd end up with Roger Federer up front and Tiger Woods in goal.
And sharkscope would be saying 'we'll win, we'll win, they've got a good sportiness rating don't you see, they MUST be good!'
Sharkscope was good because of the richness of the data. Individual poker players can analyse individual poker players based on their individual needs.
A number based on a mysterious unknown quantity is not good for me - I don't know about anyone else?
i think the fact that this thread has been open for over a week now and the only people who have posted on behalf of the new system are sharkscope admins says what your customer base thinks about this new system. that it is pure garbage. who cares if you are on pokerstars's list of banned software. despite that people have, and will continue to use sharkscope the way it was prior to this system.
Wow. I agree with everyone. This new "system" stinks.
I've noticed that many fellow SSers have posed the question:
"HOW LONG WITH THIS 'OPT-IN' TRIAL LAST?" but I have not seen a response. If anyone (including you guys at Admin) knows, will you please post ASAP?
I can't deal with this much longer. YIKES...it REALLY was a bad idea!
Sis 
Perhaps SS needs to make this more clear, or people just need to learn to read, "Note:
This trial does not effect subscribers, they can still see all data.
At the end of the trial if we choose to implement this system fully, it will affect all new subscription purchases." So for EVERYONE who is a current subscriber, NOTHING will change. Except the addition of the ability rating. People are so quick to complain without reading, or understanding what they just read. Is the poker community really becoming this ignorant?
"just a fish"...
I don't know about everyone else, but I did read those words - I just interpreted them differently.
I.e. What is a 'new subscription'? What you're saying MIGHT be true for people who subscribe on a yearly basis - but then what about after the year - When they buy the next year's subscription does it count as 'new'? And what about people (like me) who work full time and can only play heavy poker at certain times of year, so want a break in their subscription? I subscribe to SS about 5-6 months of the year. Do I need to double my spending so I don't lose the sacred 'old style' system? Also, is it really fair on new subscribers to pay for something which is a fraction of what old subscribers have?
And most people's responses have been regarding the new rating, and how misleading it can be. This form of criticism is the best way for SS to improve the functionality. Yes as you say, there is only the 'addition of an ability rating' but why don't we strive to make this addition useful?
If you have answers to all of these questions, please please fill me in - Help rid me of my ignorance.
just a fish,
i did read what you mentioned above, i was considering getting a 1-month subscription the day this system went into effect just to see if it was worth getting a longer subscription later or if i thought that the options available to you for free at poker prolabs were sufficient enough. when i saw this system go into effect i opted not to purchase the 1 month "trial subscription" i was going to purchase because what if they decided to implement the system within the month i had my subscription? then i'd be looking at paying for the system they are trying out right now which is absolutely balls awful.
Here's the full details of the "grandfathering" process we would use *if* we went ahead with the full optin. Note, its a little complicated and may not appear entirely logical in some places as we having to work around our payment processing system which wasn't designed with this in mind.
The moment we decide to go ahead with the optin for subscribers we would post a message on the site stating the switch over date, which would be a least a month in the future of that date to give subscribers plenty of warning.
After the switch over date any purchases made would only see the full data for opted in users. Purchases made before the switch over date would still see all the data until that purchase expires.
For recurring monthly credit card subscribers the purchase date counts as when the subscription was created and so access will continue until the subscription gets canceled (note this could be through the credit card expiring or by payments failing) at which point a new subscription has to be made that follows the new rules.
For recurring monthly PayPal and Moneybookers subscribers each monthly payment counts as a new purchase on that date.
Basically you will always get whatever you have paid for at the time of purchase regardless of how the rules change.
I've transferred the funds. How long does it take until I can check my recent stats?
I really do not like this new system!