Sky Poker Rewards

MRBURNS4

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards : Mr B, This wouldn't make any sense though would it, in terms of helping the site grow. You help the site grow from the bottom up so the above suggestion wouldn't happen. The change that actually has happened however is a change to help the site grow. Ryan is a perfect example of someone who regularly earns ALOT of C4P so as you say he will be losing more than just a couple of quid, but he's seeing the longer term picture of the poker economy. Also, a couple of quid is all relative. If someone gets £3 C4P that's quite alot if you've only just deposited say £15 on the site and played with that all month. Conversely, someone getting £100 less might sound like a big difference, but if they are regular 200NL players then it's only 50xBB to them and will be a small loss for the greater good. Generally speaking, if you're a good player then a C4P payout will probably be considerably smaller than what you can expect to win in profits in a given month.
Posted by Lambert180

Have you genuinely missunderstood what I have said? I wasnt suggesting that was done please reread my post

Lambert180

I'm not suggesting you did, I'm saying it's a nonsensical comment.

It's like saying 'wouldn't there be complaints if Sky said we're now taking 50% of whatever profit you make'.

Well of course there would, but that is not what's happening. If what you suggested happened, then yes there would be lots of complaints and rightly so. People wouldn't say 'I don't mind because it's for the good of the site' because it wouldnt be for the good of the site. THIS is for the good of the site.

DEL560

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards : ha ha its not a bad job. some people think that because of my position on the TV channel that clouds my judgement.  but 90pc of my income last year came from actually playing poker and not talking about it. unlike certain grinders, I don't see poker as something to get as much money as possible in as little time as possible.  I'm in poker for the long term and want to have a healthy balance in liquity.  thats why I personally don't mind giving up a certain amount of my rakeback (which for me could easily amount to a few grand a year) in the hope that the money will get redistributed to the right kind of players. there was this discussion recenetly on another forum about live cash games, something that is not at all related to Sky, and what I wrote about it was exactly the same.
Posted by scotty77

U need to get a pay rise then m8...

Donttelmum

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards : U need to get a pay rise then m8...
Posted by DEL560

and he gets paid for spending time with Anna........I'm in the wrong job!

ajs4385

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards : Can't see what limiting multitabling would achieve. I play with loads of regs who play up to 10 tables at the one time and the time the take to make decisions has never bothered me in the slightest.  Just been on to 888 because I couldn't believe they would try to limit multitabling and from what I've read it doesn't sound like they are. In fact it sounds the complete opposite http://www.888poker.com/multi-hand-poker/
Posted by jdsallstar

I believe its 6 tables

ajs4385

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

Limiting multi tabling is just lol
Posted by rancid

Why?

What level do you play? Do you get many mass multitablers?

It will be a unpopular view with regs as it will limit them including myself. But long term it will be better.

Whenever I have talked to recreational players the three things they hate about online poker are

1) online is rigged/bad beats
2) Tracking software/huds
3) people playing lots of tables (its just not poker apparantly)

gixxerk4

Having read through most of the posts there still seems to be no real response from sky regarding the concerns raised by the DYM regs and this is worrying
As some have stated the site needs a balance of regs and recreational players but also the players inbetween who are not pros but play the game for fun and also to earn a bit of extra money per month (if all goes well ;-) I class myself as one of these players and I would assume that this type of player would be hugely important to the overall liquidity of the site.
It appears that this type of player myself included are the ones who are affected most ie the DYM regular who also plays some MTTs these are the players who are talking about leaving the site and imo rightly so.
We pay higher than industry standard rake on DYM games ie gen 10% on a turbo format which lasts between 30 and 40 mins max which results in a reduced return on investment so cash for points or rakeback or rewards is very important to profibility as is multitabling.
To put this in context the narrower profit margin the more tables you need to play so the more rake sky makes overall and in return the regular player gets a proportionally higher amount back ie rakeback to compensate although its still more profit for the site and the high volume dym player does not profit as much from the games themselves as he/she is not playing optimally due to playing a lot of games at once.
If all these players move elsewhere and if this goes ahead I believe they will, then this will have a large adverse effect on the site.I think someone has made a major error here not realising the potential impact and it seems to go against the way that the site has been steadily growing with sponsored players and team sky poker playing in big live events I assume to attract more players to the site as the people who see the TSP guys playing are already playing more than recreationally so are not going to be attracted by this reward system.
The thing that has made sky my choice of site was the community the fun factor and the fact that i like the action and buzz of 9 tabling DYMs as well as playing some evening MTTs and I dont really want to go elsewhere im quite happy breaking even or making a small profit every month and having fun rather than playing against 42 tabling eastern europeans with icm calculators and heads up displays but im not prepared to play at a loss which  after looking into the rewards figures myself and probably many others would do it just isnt viable to play DYMs at a high level and volume.I generally use any profits made in DYMs to enter  MTTs or to try and sat into the bigger tournies on sky and I know a lot of the other regs do this too so without these regs numbers will fall in the MTTS guarentees will drop resulting in less people entering and a downward spiral begins? Has anyone thought of the implications ?

jdsallstar

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards : I believe its 6 tables
Posted by ajs4385

Its 6?! Then why does the site advertise multitabling 8 in the link from their site I posted? I've never heard anyone complain about other people multitabling(apart from yourself), can't think of a single reason why a poker site would want to limit multitabling and can't think of a difference it makes to a game in general apart from the odd time out.

Its just not poker?! Is a bit of a lame arguement-they fold, call and raise like anyone else. They just do it on a number of tables at the same time.

Is the real problem you want to play a level of table and you can't avoid the regs because they multitable at that those levels and their beating you/reducing your profit?

Lambert180

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards : Its 6?! Then why does the site advertise multitabling 8 in the link from their site I posted? I've never heard anyone complain about other people multitabling(apart from yourself), can't think of a single reason why a poker site would want to limit multitabling and can't think of a difference it makes to a game in general apart from the odd time out. Its just not poker?! Is a bit of a lame arguement-they fold, call and raise like anyone else. They just do it on a number of tables at the same time. Is the real problem you want to play a level of table and you can't avoid the regs because they multitable at that those levels and their beating you/reducing your profit?
Posted by jdsallstar

I suspect most people don't like it because there are some players who may play 12 tables and just sit there waiting for KK+ (give or take) and it might be intimidating to a new player to go to look at the cash lobby and see that the same 4-5 people are sat on every single table running. Can make for boring games sometimes.

Not many are gonna sit there 2tabling waiting for KK+ because you'd fall asleep but 12+ tables and you won't be waiting too long for hands to come along.

FWIW, I don't like the idea of limiting it myself (I was just pointing out the possible thought process people may have for disliking it) and there are still people who multi table and still'play poker'.

jdsallstar

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards : I suspect most people don't like it because there are some players who may play 12 tables and just sit there waiting for KK+ (give or take) and it might be intimidating to a new player to go to look at the cash lobby and see that the same 4-5 people are sat on every single table running. Can make for boring games sometimes. Not many are gonna sit there 2tabling waiting for KK+ because you'd fall asleep but 12+ tables and you won't be waiting too long for hands to come along. FWIW, I don't like the idea of limiting it myself (I was just pointing out the possible thought process people may have for disliking it) and there are still people who multi table and still'play poker'.
Posted by Lambert180

I understand that new players may be intimidated about joining a table if on that table there’s a player who may be playing 6 other tables but that’s not because he’s multitabling it’s because he’s more likely to be a good player.

If said player is sitting round waiting for kings/aces then they’re playing a very tight game/strategy. This same strategy could and (probably) is employed by people playing only one table just as you say people multitabling do play poker. It’s simply a strategy and it’s the opponents’ job to try and counteract it, whatever the strategy might be.

I know you’re not arguing for limiting multitabling but based on those reasons we would be limiting multitabling to limit good players playing, people implementing tight strategies or to help players who only want to play against poor players.

I get we want new players to not feel intimidated when joining tables but If new players can’t find a table apart from ones they deem to be too difficult then I’d suggest they drop down a level or two. If they still can’t find a “winnable” game then they probably shouldn’t be playing poker.

I’m a relatively new player myself (only started Jan this year) I have came across plenty of multitabling regulars on my tables but they’ve never intimidated me in fact the opposite i enjoy the challenge taking them on or from learning from them.

Suppose i might be looking at it one dimensionally as I have achieved reasonably good results against them and on the site in general and it might be different if I was continually losing to them. I think someone mentioned it before but the introduction of beginners’ tables would be an option to ease new players in.

huuuuume

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards : I understand that new players may be intimidated about joining a table if on that table there’s a player who may be playing 6 other tables but that’s not because he’s multitabling it’s because he’s more likely to be a good player. If said player is sitting round waiting for kings/aces then they’re playing a very tight game/strategy. This same strategy could and (probably) is employed by people playing only one table just as you say people multitabling do play poker. It’s simply a strategy and it’s the opponents’ job to try and counteract it, whatever the strategy might be. I know you’re not arguing for limiting multitabling but based on those reasons we would be limiting multitabling to limit good players playing, people implementing tight strategies or to help players who only want to play against poor players. I get we want new players to not feel intimidated when joining tables but If new players can’t find a table apart from ones they deem to be too difficult then I’d suggest they drop down a level or two. If they still can’t find a “winnable” game then they probably shouldn’t be playing poker. I’m a relatively new player myself (only started Jan this year) I have came across plenty of multitabling regulars on my tables but they’ve never intimidated me in fact the opposite i enjoy the challenge taking them on or from learning from them. Suppose i might be looking at it one dimensionally as I have achieved reasonably good results against them and on the site in general and it might be different if I was continually losing to them. I think someone mentioned it before but the introduction of beginners’ tables would be an option to ease new players in.
Posted by jdsallstar

Just because someone is what we would consider a 'fish' or a 'recreational player' doesn't mean they're an idiot.  I know several people who won't play SkyPoker because they end up on the table with the same 5 players everytime they log in. 

Some of the reasons my recreational friends don't/didn't like mass multitabling regs include:
1) they never chat
2) they play soft against each other
3) they squeeze every limp into the pot
4) they play incredibly tight
5) my friends never managed to beat them
6) the table was boring/no action

These are people who are successful and can afford to deposit/lose at poker but simply choose to play on different sites.  Each of them wins comfortably in our local poker room and none are what you would consider fish.  They just don't enjoy playing the same tight regs over and over again.

This may not be the solution to the overall problems with online poker but to suggest that people won't mind playing against multitabling regs is naive in my opinion.  generally the standout reason is that they cant win in these games and they have no real time/interest in readin strategy and finding ways to beat the games.

for example, if you sit in a nl50 game at 10pm tonight as a recreational player looking to gamble, have fun, chat, and hopefully win....you probably wont be able to

NAILS01197

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

Having read through most of the posts there still seems to be no real response from sky regarding the concerns raised by the DYM regs and this is worrying As some have stated the site needs a balance of regs and recreational players but also the players inbetween who are not pros but play the game for fun and also to earn a bit of extra money per month (if all goes well ;-) I class myself as one of these players and I would assume that this type of player would be hugely important to the overall liquidity of the site. It appears that this type of player myself included are the ones who are affected most ie the DYM regular who also plays some MTTs these are the players who are talking about leaving the site and imo rightly so. We pay higher than industry standard rake on DYM games ie gen 10% on a turbo format which lasts between 30 and 40 mins max which results in a reduced return on investment so cash for points or rakeback or rewards is very important to profibility as is multitabling. To put this in context the narrower profit margin the more tables you need to play so the more rake sky makes overall and in return the regular player gets a proportionally higher amount back ie rakeback to compensate although its still more profit for the site and the high volume dym player does not profit as much from the games themselves as he/she is not playing optimally due to playing a lot of games at once. If all these players move elsewhere and if this goes ahead I believe they will, then this will have a large adverse effect on the site.I think someone has made a major error here not realising the potential impact and it seems to go against the way that the site has been steadily growing with sponsored players and team sky poker playing in big live events I assume to attract more players to the site as the people who see the TSP guys playing are already playing more than recreationally so are not going to be attracted by this reward system. The thing that has made sky my choice of site was the community the fun factor and the fact that i like the action and buzz of 9 tabling DYMs as well as playing some evening MTTs and I dont really want to go elsewhere im quite happy breaking even or making a small profit every month and having fun rather than playing against 42 tabling eastern europeans with icm calculators and heads up displays but im not prepared to play at a loss which  after looking into the rewards figures myself and probably many others would do it just isnt viable to play DYMs at a high level and volume.I generally use any profits made in DYMs to enter  MTTs or to try and sat into the bigger tournies on sky and I know a lot of the other regs do this too so without these regs numbers will fall in the MTTS guarentees will drop resulting in less people entering and a downward spiral begins? Has anyone thought of the implications ?
Posted by gixxerk4

+1

FlashFlush

Slightly off topic, but on the trackof the DYM rake system.. If Sky halved the rake to 5% and gave it enough advertisement, do you think they would get more than double the players, and actually end up making more on rake than before..?

beaneh

do people realise playing loose/tight is defined by the player not by the number of tables they play.

I probably play 3x as many tables as some regs when I'm on a grind yet i'm much looser than the bulk of them.

Kevwinsome

As a low stakes player who has tried 10 other sites, Sky poker has given me the best rewards. Cash for points, Free-rolls, free entries into mtt's through there live T.V. which is great to watch wile you play. And why shouldn't they reward the high stake players most of them got there by putting in the hours of play every day and years of learning the game. Good luck to you all what ever you level play well my friends.

baggs

This is certainly pitched as a more progressive "tax". However scratch the surface of "tax" changes and you usually reveal the taxman isnt changing it for nothing. It would be good to hear sky confirm that this is profit neutral for them and they are essentially just redistributing the rake based on whatever model they have rather than skimming a few extra % points at the same time as changing the system

MattBates

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

do people realise playing loose/tight is defined by the player not by the number of tables they play. I probably play 3x as many tables as some regs when I'm on a grind yet i'm much looser than the bulk of them.
Posted by beaneh

I haven't posted and will do when I get the chance from a MTT player perspective but once again Beaneh nails it

Donttelmum

Are tighter players harder to beat?

MattBates

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

Are tighter players harder to beat?
Posted by Donttelmum

Good point, that is what is being discussed

ajs4385

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards : Its 6?! Then why does the site advertise multitabling 8 in the link from their site I posted? I've never heard anyone complain about other people multitabling(apart from yourself), can't think of a single reason why a poker site would want to limit multitabling and can't think of a difference it makes to a game in general apart from the odd time out. Its just not poker?! Is a bit of a lame arguement-they fold, call and raise like anyone else. They just do it on a number of tables at the same time. Is the real problem you want to play a level of table and you can't avoid the regs because they multitable at that those levels and their beating you/reducing your profit?
Posted by jdsallstar

I am not complaining about multitabling. I love it. Its just about protecting people who fund the site. Plus when
someone mass multitables it can ruin the games. watchin someone take ages to fold all the time. Doesnt bother me but I bet it would bother someone only on one table.

Its just not poker isnt my argument? thats the people who fund the sites argument.

Of course I would like a tables without regs who wouldnt.

rancid

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards : Why? What level do you play? Do you get many mass multitablers? It will be a unpopular view with regs as it will limit them including myself. But long term it will be better. Whenever I have talked to recreational players the three things they hate about online poker are 1) online is rigged/bad beats 2) Tracking software/huds 3) people playing lots of tables (its just not poker apparantly)
Posted by ajs4385

Even though yes limiting multi tabling would be good overall.

For a site to limit the amount you can play would just push business elsewhere.

So yes at the moment you may play 16 tables on SKY - if SKY limit to 6 then you would play 10 elsewhere

For SKY to push away a large chunk of their clients would be silly imo

IF somehow they could limit muulti tabling but still guarentee new clients coming onto the tables then I would personally love it. It could just end up with you playing lesser tables but against the same regs.

From what I see is a lack of people trying to start new tables, people not wanting to play HU or short handed to get action going. And this is something I can't understand because new tables starting attract new playing to join.

Don't think the problem is with multi tablers, the problem is in general most online players are selfish and do not even understand the give action to get action standpoint of regs like myself.
Complete smash and grab attitude to nut peddle and bum hunt ATM's.
Do these bum hunters actully give up some EV to ATM's just to guarentee action in future ?
I don't think so, they just want to rip into ATM credit card and run.

Then wonder why ATM doesn't comeback and they can't play regs because they would be giving up too much EV!
So you end up with no tables running and people refusing to play each other !

like lols

Seriously!

jdsallstar

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards : I am not complaining about multitabling. I love it. Its just about protecting people who fund the site. Plus when someone mass multitables it can ruin the games. watchin someone take ages to fold all the time. Doesnt bother me but I bet it would bother someone only on one table. Its just not poker isnt my argument? thats the people who fund the sites argument. Of course I would like a tables without regs who wouldnt.
Posted by ajs4385

I've never noticed any significant difference between multitablers and single tablers in relation to time taken to make a decision. In fact in some instanes the regs are quicker to act (clicking the early fold button because there in involved in a more intense hand elsewhere for example). 

re tables with no regs - there's going to be regs at all levels of poker (it's just the nature of the game) if they make money they're gonna come back again i.e. become regular players. There is some regs out there who are terrible though and I love seeing at my tables.

I really dont get this whole arguement in general, sorry. it just looks like to me people are complaining that good players are allowed to play several tables at once. In my opinion people can't really complain about having to play good players. The time they take to make a decison to me is just a excuse and not really a valid complaint.

ajs4385

Your missing the biggest point

People who spend money on poker dont want to play against people who are playing 15 tables.

They think its not poker, they think its a bot  etc etc   Iv heard numerous reasons over years.

Obviously someone playing 15 tables is going to take more time than someone playing 2 tables

rancid

In Response to Re: Sky Poker Rewards:

Your missing the biggest point People who spend money on poker dont want to play against people who are playing 15 tables. They think its not poker, they think its a bot  etc etc   Iv heard numerous reasons over years. Obviously someone playing 15 tables is going to take more time than someone playing 2 tables
Posted by ajs4385

You deffo have a valid point, they want to join games online and have a gg.
They don't want to lose all the time and they don't wanna feel like they are being abused.

As said before these people are not idiot's

The issue here is how can Sky attract new players, would limiting number of tables really make a differance.