50nl capped tables

bolly580

Can we stop spawning these please?

There destroying traffic at the regular 50nl cash tables

Diminuendo

Massive +1 to this

craigcu12

when you say traffic do you mean the loose players?

bolly580

I mean traffic, 

4 capped tables running and only 3 cash tables.

ajs4385

They are soooooo bad for site. Remind me of situation we used to have with 10 handed tables.

I will write up why later as Im meant to be working at minute.

FCHD

If that's what the players want to play, why should they stop spawning? Perhaps it's the "regular" tables that should stop?

bolly580

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables:

If that's what the players want to play, why should they stop spawning? Perhaps it's the "regular" tables that should stop?
Posted by FCHD

is this even worth responding too?

ajs4385

So I assume we all know for a table to get going there has to be a recreational player/gambler/whatever.

I will assume we all know 99% of regs dont mix the type of tables they play and/or wont want to play capped tables as they are a joke. Unless your aim is to break even play 24 tables and make supernova elite.

Scenario one:

30 gamblers turn up wanting to play 50nl on sky buying in short trying to spin it up. (sounds fun a lot better than grinding).  Ratio at the table is one or two gamblers 4 or 5 regs. So 20 tables get going. Gamblers happy, regs happy, Sky gets 20 lots of rake.

Scenario two:

30 gamblers turn up, as usual they sit at first 50nl table thats open. Poor reg who hasnt a chance of making money at 50nl sees an oppurtunity. They see a capped table and know 50nl regs wont play it. So they sit and then the gamblers sit. 5 gamblers sit with them. Poor reg thinks  $$$$$ opens another and another. Cant blame him smart move even. So now instead of 20 tables you have 6 capped tables.  So scenario 2 results gamblers equally happy, high raking regs utterly annoyed, sky losing money, Poor reg making more money and probably having a right laugh at other regs.

Conclusion: Get rid of them

Lambert180

I actually agree its better for overall liquidity to not have them or limit how many spawn...

BUT I can't take that post above seriously after the first sentence. God its so outlandish to think a reg might sit at an empty table to get it started and another reg would join him!!

ajs4385

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables:

I actually agree its better for overall liquidity to not have them or limit how many spawn... BUT I can't take that post above seriously after the first sentence. God its so outlandish to think a reg might sit at an empty table to get it started and another reg would join him!!
Posted by Lambert180

Just writing what happens, there has to be someone at the table spending money. Why dont we carry on the debate over a hu game.

Lambert180

That's cos people let it happen. I'll sit down to a table and if that means I gotta play HU v a better than average player like rancid, bighawk, ryanc7, splashies etc then that's fine. Only don't do it if I got like 10 tables on the go cos I'd rather not play 10 tables and a good player HU.

We're all 'spending money', we all invest money at the table, I assume you don't think every single sky reg is exactly equal in ability?

I'm just on my phone atm watching a DVD in bed so can't play and heading down to UKPC tomorrow.I also play 90% of my volume elsewhere now but will play you HU if ya like when I get back from Notts

pryce6

In Response to 50nl capped tables:

Can we stop spawning these please? There destroying traffic at the regular 50nl cash tables
Posted by bolly580

Recreational players should be allowed a choice as to what they want to play. If a rec logs onto the site and sees 4 regular 50nl tables with 5 regs/nits on every one of them, and 4 50nl capped tables with 1 or 2 regs/nits on them, what do you think he is more likely to choose to play? 

Why should you (a player that no doubt removes liquidity from the site) be able to tell them what they can and can't play?

I don't play any cash poker on this site and I do find short buy-in games annoying, but I don't blame recs at all for not wanting to sit in boring/tough games with a load of regs/nits. You (and any reg on this site) should have the common sense to know this. It amazes me that people who have had the braincells to beat a card game for money still think they have a divine right to guaranteed ££ and whatever they want - when infact it's probably you that's bad for the games.

If the regs on this site gave the recs a spin sometimes then maybe they wouldn't want to play capped games...

Sky should be doing all they can for the recs and they actually missed a trick removing 10 handed tables. Why remove tables that give recs a chance to play with more fellow recs? In my opinion these tables should be re-instated.

There's a reason why these games are popular and if that's what people want to play then why shouldn't they, it's their money. Don't like it? Don't play it.

rancid

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables:

In Response to 50nl capped tables : Recreational players should be allowed a choice as to what they want to play. If a rec logs onto the site and sees 4 regular 50nl tables with 5 regs/nits on every one of them, and 4 50nl capped tables with 1 or 2 regs/nits on them, what do you think he is more likely to choose to play?  Why should you (a player that no doubt removes liquidity from the site) be able to tell them what they can and can't play? I don't play any cash poker on this site and I do find short buy-in games annoying, but I don't blame recs at all for not wanting to sit in boring/tough games with a load of regs/nits. You (and any reg on this site) should have the common sense to know this. It amazes me that people who have had the braincells to beat a card game for money still think they have a divine right to guaranteed ££ and whatever they want - when infact it's probably you that's bad for the games. If the regs on this site gave the recs a spin sometimes then maybe they wouldn't want to play capped games... Sky should be doing all they can for the recs and they actually missed a trick removing 10 handed tables. Why remove tables that give recs a chance to play with more fellow recs? In my opinion these tables should be re-instated. There's a reason why these games are popular and if that's what people want to play then why shouldn't they, it's their money. Don't like it? Don't play it.
Posted by pryce6

^ this

nice post


But Sky I think you should consider reducing the max number of capped tables per level.... it is and will take action away from 100bb tables....

Even if you run 100% 100bb tables it doesn't stop anyone from buying in for 30bb and taking a punt.

alex1229

Original Poster, your sound like a crying girl, not a good luck. let the people choose where they wanna play. geez

bolly580

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables:

Original Poster, your sound like a crying girl, not a good luck. let the people choose where they wanna play. geez
Posted by alex1229

Read up at Pyrce post, dont you think thats a much better way to word a response? 

"You Sound like a crying girl" just making you look a bit silly really.

bolly580

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables:

In Response to 50nl capped tables : Recreational players should be allowed a choice as to what they want to play. If a rec logs onto the site and sees 4 regular 50nl tables with 5 regs/nits on every one of them, and 4 50nl capped tables with 1 or 2 regs/nits on them, what do you think he is more likely to choose to play?  Why should you (a player that no doubt removes liquidity from the site) be able to tell them what they can and can't play? I don't play any cash poker on this site and I do find short buy-in games annoying, but I don't blame recs at all for not wanting to sit in boring/tough games with a load of regs/nits. You (and any reg on this site) should have the common sense to know this. It amazes me that people who have had the braincells to beat a card game for money still think they have a divine right to guaranteed ££ and whatever they want - when infact it's probably you that's bad for the games. If the regs on this site gave the recs a spin sometimes then maybe they wouldn't want to play capped games... Sky should be doing all they can for the recs and they actually missed a trick removing 10 handed tables. Why remove tables that give recs a chance to play with more fellow recs? In my opinion these tables should be re-instated. There's a reason why these games are popular and if that's what people want to play then why shouldn't they, it's their money. Don't like it? Don't play it.
Posted by pryce6

Meh, cant argue with your reply your logic/ reasoning all pretty bang on. 

I do however feel you wouldnt be as quick to voice your approval of them if you were grinding sky cash games. As for the 10 seater tables, yes by all means re instate them. They were great!

The problem with the capped tabbles are that nobody really wins, it all just gets thrown down the rake shoot. Also they do still get reg filled, just by regs who cant beat the regular 100bb tables.

kidwiz10

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables:

In Response to 50nl capped tables : Recreational players should be allowed a choice as to what they want to play. If a rec logs onto the site and sees 4 regular 50nl tables with 5 regs/nits on every one of them, and 4 50nl capped tables with 1 or 2 regs/nits on them, what do you think he is more likely to choose to play?  Why should you (a player that no doubt removes liquidity from the site) be able to tell them what they can and can't play? I don't play any cash poker on this site and I do find short buy-in games annoying, but I don't blame recs at all for not wanting to sit in boring/tough games with a load of regs/nits. You (and any reg on this site) should have the common sense to know this. It amazes me that people who have had the braincells to beat a card game for money still think they have a divine right to guaranteed ££ and whatever they want - when infact it's probably you that's bad for the games. If the regs on this site gave the recs a spin sometimes then maybe they wouldn't want to play capped games... Sky should be doing all they can for the recs and they actually missed a trick removing 10 handed tables. Why remove tables that give recs a chance to play with more fellow recs? In my opinion these tables should be re-instated. There's a reason why these games are popular and if that's what people want to play then why shouldn't they, it's their money. Don't like it? Don't play it.
Posted by pryce6

Agree with price 100%!! im not even goin for priority this month due to as it seems theres better offers for not making it might come back and bite me but agh well!.

Another thing what price said about 4/5 regs to a table if i see this i dont join the table , if im on a table with 5 unknowns and 3 of them get replaces with ABC regs i instantly stand, this doesnt class me as bum hunting its basically common sense that the games are so boring and there is no action at all as most of them are nut peddling.

Also im not a fan of these cash races they only apply to the higher players 90% of the time and ruins the cash tables as every single table has 3+ ABC regs on them which kills the games.

Ive not played much at all this month and doubt i will just looking at every table its reg infested and i dont blame players to play cap tables they are pretty good and usually lively but also ive noticed the omaha tables have been busy over the past few weeks so might be why ive turned my attention to these for the action.

gazza127

People who think all regs are nut peddling robots really are kidding themselves.

Justify it how you want, but people who insta stand when table fish stands are bumhunting.

And FWIW, this cap table phenomena that has come upon us is killing the normal games.  I didnt think they were at first, but they are.  You can argue that the demand is there, yes, but IMO capped isnt the form of poker that sky should promoting. It promotes bad play, you cant apply it to live scenarios and players will find it hard to improve their cash game.   Ultimate winner IMO is the rake.

kidwiz10

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables:

People who think all regs are nut peddling robots really are kidding themselves. Justify it how you want, but people who insta stand when table fish stands are bumhunting. And FWIW, this cap table phenomena that has come upon us is killing the normal games.  I didnt think they were at first, but they are.  You can argue that the demand is there, yes, but IMO capped isnt the form of poker that sky should promoting. It promotes bad play, you cant apply it to live scenarios and players will find it hard to improve their cash game.   Ultimate winner IMO is the rake.
Posted by gazza127

I stated if there was 3+ regs not if one left table selection is key for sure so why a i gunna sit at a table with 5 regs who as pryce pointed out is pointless and is what is ruining the games hence why you look at the cap tables there is so many unkknown players then you look up through all the 100BB levels and its the sae 4 players per table to every level?

Im happy with promoting bad play it creates action and keeps the games juicy the way they should be so im more for the capped tables.

Btw why do you think sky changed the points system last year to "rake paid"? because players were previously fold fold fold and getting points which ruined all the games and just showed that all these constant regs per table with the add of cash races are not good for the site one bit.

Only way sky can ever sort out the games and make them more intresting is add in "Anonymous" tables where then players wouldnt choose where and who they wanna play and it would also sort out the heads up tables.

Jac35

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables:

People who think all regs are nut peddling robots really are kidding themselves. Justify it how you want, but people who insta stand when table fish stands are bumhunting. And FWIW, this cap table phenomena that has come upon us is killing the normal games.  I didnt think they were at first, but they are.  You can argue that the demand is there, yes, but IMO capped isnt the form of poker that sky should promoting. It promotes bad play, you cant apply it to live scenarios and players will find it hard to improve their cash game.   Ultimate winner IMO is the rake.
Posted by gazza127

Killing the game is a bit dramatic.

Promotes bad play? Really? Why?

Isn't it all about choice?

Why are these games an issue at all? If it's a problem for you because it takes away the people you want to stack, isn't your comment about bumhunting a bit hypocritical?

You concede that the games are in demand but say Sky shouldn't be promoting them. That makes no sense. They're hardly likely to bin games that they get a good return from.

Get confused by people bothering about these things. I don't much care for Omaha. I don't think it should be banned though, so that some weak players can come and play Dyms.

I'm not convinced that traffic is being taken from standard 50Nl tables anyway. I think the attraction for many is that they know the maximum they llose is £15. Less than one third of anormal 50Nl buy in. They probably wouldn't sit at 50Nl anyway.

NAILS01197

Your just like me kidwiz. ill play any cash tab that's going be it capped or not. But if there are 4 or 5 regs on there ill not waste my money. Call it Bum hunting, call it what u want. As for priority I aint bothered with it no more. IMO there are better promos for non prio members anyway.

DOHHHHHHH

Same argument that's been going on for ages on here, dyms v standard sngs.

DYMS have been 'anti poker' and 'killing the game' for years apparently.

They're still going strong.............

I think all cash games and mtts shud be scrapped so everyone has to play HU sngs v me.

Not gonna happen.

kidwiz10

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables:

Your just like me kidwiz. ill play any cash tab that's going be it capped or not. But if there are 4 or 5 regs on there ill not waste my money. Call it Bum hunting, call it what u want. As for priority I aint bothered with it no more. IMO there are better promos for non prio members anyway.
Posted by NAILS01197

Yea mate i dont blame you why anyone would wanna play on a table with nut peddlers is beyond me and you cant exactly avoid them as there on every table right through the levels.

I wouldnt class it as bum hunting as such more of looking for action more than anything.

One thing i will say tho is a big % of cash players on this site must rely on cash back at the end of month for there big % of profit.

I know they say play for profit which is very true then take the cash for points as a bonus but when you have the same 4+ regs to most tables i cant see how everyone is actually making a profit from nl10 up through to nl100 i would say. , I know im goin off topic here but would love sky to comment if they have actually thought about introducing anonymous tbles to the site?.

gazza127

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables:

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables : Killing the game is a bit dramatic. Promotes bad play? Really? Why? Isn't it all about choice? Why are these games an issue at all? If it's a problem for you because it takes away the people you want to stack, isn't your comment about bumhunting a bit hypocritical? You concede that the games are in demand but say Sky shouldn't be promoting them. That makes no sense. They're hardly likely to bin games that they get a good return from. Get confused by people bothering about these things. I don't much care for Omaha. I don't think it should be banned though, so that some weak players can come and play Dyms. I'm not convinced that traffic is being taken from standard 50Nl tables anyway. I think the attraction for many is that they know the maximum they llose is £15. Less than one third of anormal 50Nl buy in. They probably wouldn't sit at 50Nl anyway.
Posted by Jac35

By killing the normal games I obviously just mean that instead of 6 x 50nl tables running at once we now have a max of 2 going plus 6 x capped tables.

It does promote bad play.  Just playing at these tables you can see why. £15 cap lets people be more adventurous with less risk to their entire stack so people get the money in the middle with the oddest spots.

These games are an issue because everyone seems to have shifted from NL to capped... meaning those that want to play NL at 50nl are stuck to one or two tables.

No i do not bumhunt.  I just want to play more than 2 tables... so i cant say im being hypocritical at all.  Believe me when I say id play on any table quite happily.

No Sky wont bin them if they are doing well.  It just sucks as now theres not nearly as much 50nl NL action as there used to be.

That is my only annoyance.

AJ_Rockets

Traffic is being affected at 50nl no question. I would say 30 and 40nl are affected as well. Anyone not convinced they are dont play those levels regularly. There are other factors that are bad for traffic, no doubt, but capped tables just arent good for regular games.

bolly580

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables:

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables : Yea mate i dont blame you why anyone would wanna play on a table with nut peddlers is beyond me and you cant exactly avoid them as there on every table right through the levels. I wouldnt class it as bum hunting as such more of looking for action more than anything. One thing i will say tho is a big % of cash players on this site must rely on cash back at the end of month for there big % of profit. I know they say play for profit which is very true then take the cash for points as a bonus but when you have the same 4+ regs to most tables i cant see how everyone is actually making a profit from nl10 up through to nl100 i would say. , I know im goin off topic here but would love sky to comment if they have actually thought about introducing anonymous tbles to the site?.
Posted by kidwiz10

Ive gotta disagree with you here Kidwiz, you use "looking for action" as different way of saying looking for soft games. Also sitting on table with nut peddlers is much more beatable than you think if your smart enough to tweak your game. I can also say from my standpoint that cash for points/rakeback < 15% of my overall profit from cash poker, although i dont grind as hard as some of the other regs. Last month made like 13k C4P and this month propably on to make around 18-20K C4P.

In my experiences with online and live poker for that matter. The guys who ridicule others for being "ABC or "Plays face up" are guys who cant beat the games.

NooGooood

Shouldnt be an argument here, lets just get rid of them.

pryce6

I'm not voicing my approval of these games in particular, I'm just voicing a disapproval at the attitudes of a lot of regs.

Just because you think something is bad for you right now does not mean it is 'bad for the game'. What is bad for the game is 5 regs grinding the game 10 tables all day, taking turns to stack the one fish that bothers to play with them. And that is precisely the reason why capped games are gaining popularity.

pryce6

"The problem with the capped tabbles are that nobody really wins, it all just gets thrown down the rake shoot. Also they do still get reg filled, just by regs who cant beat the regular 100bb tables." - Bolly

A rec losing money at a slower pace is far better for the game than if they lost £50 to reg1 who withdraws that £50 at the end of the month. 

If there are regs filling those games then it's because they are just as sick of the regular games as the recs!

pryce6

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables:

You can argue that the demand is there, yes, but IMO capped isnt the form of poker that sky should promoting. It promotes bad play, you cant apply it to live scenarios and players will find it hard to improve their cash game.   Ultimate winner IMO is the rake.
Posted by gazza127

It promotes action and FUN. Something the recs cannot get from their clashes with reg1,2,3,4 and 5 on the other tables.

Remember poker for these guys is fun, if they can't get that at normal tables why shouldn't they at these?

There is of course skill to playing 20bb deep, there are many tournament pros who make a very good living using skill with these stacks...

gazza127

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables:

In Response to Re: 50nl capped tables : It promotes action and FUN. Something the recs cannot get from their clashes with reg1,2,3,4 and 5 on the other tables. Remember poker for these guys is fun, if they can't get that at normal tables why shouldn't they at these? There is of course skill to playing 20bb deep, there are many tournament pros who make a very good living using skill with these stacks...
Posted by pryce6

Im not denying people the opportunity to have fun and play on capped tables.

But from my point of view... these spawning cap tables are taking all of the traffic from the 50nl tables.

So when I want to play and have what I deem to be fun... I cant, as my game of choice has a fraction of the tables than it used to have.

I tried playing 50nl this afternoon at 3pm and couldnt get a table going.  There were two NL tables on the go with another 4 and a bit capped tables.

Noone would sit with me on another 50nl table as I didnt want to be to wait for others to stand.

I gave up.

THAT is why I dislike these ever spawning capped games.  I cant play when I like anymore.