All Categories› Poker› Poker Chat

You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

Sky Poker forums will be temporarily unavailable from 11pm Wednesday July 25th.
Sky Poker Forums is upgrading its look! Stay tuned for the big reveal!

Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the change?

GELDYGELDY
edited October 2014 in Poker Chat
Thought this was really poor aswell.

Why just this tournament though? I relise it did say in the lobby before hand that it would be split amongst the 7.

Wp all though and unlucky again rose :(
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
«134

Comments

  • GELDYGELDY
    edited October 2014
    back in the days of the viva las vegas final the cash was spread out over the bubble boys/girls. but for the punta cana final it all went to the package winners. i thought this was very unsatisfactory and an undesirable change. the mini/main jackpot got changed to make it more inclusive, but this change is in the opposite direction. i would have been more likely to buy in direct if the original system was still in place. (AK<TT in the semi). Heart goes out to IrishRose on the pure bubble, and kimpet who had previously also bubbled a VLV final (but at least got some bubble cash that time)

    two questions

    1. why change?
    2. any chance it can be changed back for the next such promotion?

    VLV structure - thks to GaryQQQ's thread archive.
    oldboy271750001£10k Vegas Package
    GELDY02£2500
    AB015103£1500
    LOL_RAISE04£1000
    RUNITSRANN05
    PC final structure
    Eizy1600001£1295 + Punta Cana Package
    aussie0902£770 + Punta Cana Package
    rndmmuppet03£525 + Punta Cana Package
    jubb04£385 + Punta Cana Package
    smoki305£280 + Punta Cana Package
    skaggen10806£245 + Punta Cana Package
    Sir-Gary07Punta Cana Package
    IrishRose08nil
    kimpet09nil
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GBUKGBUK
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    Thought this was really poor aswell. Why just this tournament though? I relise it did say in the lobby before hand that it would be split amongst the 7. Wp all though and unlucky again rose :(
    Posted by Chris_Mc
    Defo agree,it was so heartbreaking & gutting to watch Rose bubble an not get a slice of anything,not even overlay cash :( 
    She soooo deserved to get something at least...Vwp love & Vul xx
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bbMikebbMike
    edited October 2014
    There were only 7 packages available all worth £3500. In a 'regular' sat if another £3500 was raised in entries it would create another seat, if less then there's bubble cash. In this case though it wouldn't be desirable to have the bubble paying say £3500 in cash (not as a package) because for some that would be more attractive than the package itself. Hard then to start splitting at a sensible rate below the package places. Adding the money to the top 7 made it more of a tournament less of a satellite though still with a hefty bubble.

    Who knows the reasons why, but I suspect it was driven by the finite number of packages available.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HENDRIK62HENDRIK62
    edited October 2014

    One reason may have been flight prices, given that the allowance was £800 and the package was for two people most were looking at having to subsidise their cost to get there (not really a big issue if truth be told). I wonder whether the PTB have realised this may have been a mistake and decided to add the spare cash to the top thereby effectively paying the extra costs for flights.........

    I think that a breakdown of perhaps £2k, £1k, £500 would have softened the blow and been fairer to those that bubbled.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • FlashFlushFlashFlush
    edited October 2014
    I think for this tournament they have clearly stated that nobody should enter unless they are available to travel and use the package. No transfers would be allowed. The tournament is to win a seat at Punta Cana, not to win money. So to add money to the bubble players then makes it appealing to players who do not particularly want to go to the Dominican Republic but play for the cash instead. Which is not what this promotion is about. Lets face it, £1300 is more than you can win in most tournaments on here.

    I think the fact a forum favourite has stone cold bubbled is the reason this is being looked at more deeply. If MattBates had bubbled, everyone would just laugh. ;-)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • hhyftrftdrhhyftrftdr
    edited October 2014
    Yeah I think in this instance they were right to keep everything within the top 7, however unfortunate that might be for bubble boy or girl.

    Hopefully Sky can do more of these to various locations around the world, if VLV remains unfeasible.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • The_Don90The_Don90
    edited October 2014
    Wait a minute - Doesnt a package include Flight prices. Every package tournament ive ever heard of on any site includes travel and hotel. 


    From sky's point of view - The best thing to do is split the money from 8th down. or since in this case the money would actually make an extra package - give an extra package. Even if they haven't got the ability to offer a extra package, whats the most likely way to get 8th to play this event half way across the world - let give them nothing and split the money between the people who are going or giving money to 8th, or splitting the money to 8th - 12th like a certain other site does. 

    Sky picked the worst possible option of those 3. 


    I have to say ive been alienated with alot of stuff sky have done over the past 18 months or so, but i hope this one at least gives them a kick in the right direction. 


    For those that made it though, enjoy
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MattBatesMattBates
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    I think for this tournament they have clearly stated that nobody should enter unless they are available to travel and use the package. No transfers would be allowed. The tournament is to win a seat at Punta Cana, not to win money. So to add money to the bubble players then makes it appealing to players who do not particularly want to go to the Dominican Republic but play for the cash instead. Which is not what this promotion is about. Lets face it, £1300 is more than you can win in most tournaments on here. I think the fact a forum favourite has stone cold bubbled is the reason this is being looked at more deeply. If MattBates had bubbled, everyone would just laugh. ;-)
    Posted by FlashFlush
    Who would have played the sat to win £1300 for a £770 entry though? I understand that if it was £3500 cash it would have made it an interesting dynamic and people might have gone for the £3500 rather than the package. Maybe they could have gone for money back for those finishing outside the packages if they weren't adding more packages. I would have thought adding the £ to the packages would stop some being regging compared to having the traditional 1 in X format.

    With these sorts of sats there will always be someone who gets pipped at the post. I agree with flash that the reason people are looking into in as much detail is because of who bubbled. It really shows how highly thought of someone is when you saw the number of people on the rail and willing her to win. The fans favourite missed out this time but she will come back fighting!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • FlashFlushFlashFlush
    edited October 2014
    Obviously they wouldn't pay the full £770, but I mean tried to satellite in to play for any left over money. 
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GELDYGELDY
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    I think the fact a forum favourite has stone cold bubbled is the reason this is being looked at more deeply. If MattBates had bubbled, everyone would just laugh. ;-)
    Posted by FlashFlush

    • with respect even though i am an IrishRose fan i would hold this view no matter who bubbled. Even matt. and yes if there is a lot of cash left over give some to the seat winners. But providing a glide path on the bubble to smooth the cliff just makes it a nicer tournament to play. i certainly felt a lot better with my vlv bubble cash than if it had been a stone cold bubble. and i thought well of skypoker. 
    • and if i had played this and bubbled and got nothing knowing there was loads of overlay i would not have been happy. Which is the main reason i didn't buy in direct to the final. 
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MacMonsterMacMonster
    edited October 2014
    I don't think it was of who the bubble person was has caused more interest in this, I think I would have the same opinion whoever it was.

    I can understand why they put the cash above the line but if I was the bubble boy and didn't get a seat because there was only a finite number of packages available I would not be happy to hear Sky have today emailed people to advertise a freeroll next weekend to win a package. So there was obviously a package available.

    The sats in the lead up were to win a package and enough money was collected to pay for more than the number of pakages given, I think its a shame one was held back for this freeroll given that enough was collected to provide a further package.

    Just my opinion

    Ian
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DivsDreamsDivsDreams
    edited October 2014
    In regards to what Geldy posted first , regardless to whoever bubbled- this for sky players is no doubt the way it should be imo. Most players aren't big hitters and was a chance in a lifetime..
    The play by chip leader at the time with 8 left was correct imo... he went all in knowing that jubb and rose cant call with weak cards and a £3500 package up for grabs. But if say 8th paid £2000 and 9th £1500 woulda stopped him going all in every hand and made it a better watch and game..
    Also there was only 7 packages but now an 8th has magically appeared to be determined by a freeroll. Get a grip sky, that is a joke really is. A luckbox player will win a £3500 holiday for gaining 20 points and jamming every hand.. Round of applause from me!.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • FlashFlushFlashFlush
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    I don't think it was of who the bubble person was has caused more interest in this, I think I would have the same opinion whoever it was. I can understand why they put the cash above the line but if I was the bubble boy and didn't get a seat because there was only a finite number of packages available I would not be happy to hear Sky have today emailed people to advertise a freeroll next weekend to win a package. So there was obviously a package available. The sats in the lead up were to win a package and enough money was collected to pay for more than the number of pakages given, I think its a shame one was held back for this freeroll given that enough was collected to provide a further package. Just my opinion Ian
    Posted by MacMonster
    Agree with this.

    Also noticed that there is a £2000 bubble prize as well which goes against the theory in my earlier post. I'm confused now.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • IrishRoseIrishRose
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    I don't think it was of who the bubble person was has caused more interest in this, I think I would have the same opinion whoever it was. I can understand why they put the cash above the line but if I was the bubble boy and didn't get a seat because there was only a finite number of packages available I would not be happy to hear Sky have today emailed people to advertise a freeroll next weekend to win a package. So there was obviously a package available. The sats in the lead up were to win a package and enough money was collected to pay for more than the number of pakages given, I think its a shame one was held back for this freeroll given that enough was collected to provide a further package. Just my opinion Ian
    Posted by MacMonster
    "The sats in the lead up were to win a package and enough money was collected to pay for more than the number of pakages given, I think its a shame one was held back for this freeroll given that enough was collected to provide a further package.
    "
    Hi all - excuse typing as on mobile and can't see screen very well.  I was obviously the bubble girl last night.  I had read all along that there was min 7 seats guaranteed for the final.  In my naivety I assumed (wrongly) that this was a min number of seats - not total number of seats.  It was only on day of final that I saw Tikays thread which said any excess distributed among top players.
    When I bubbled I felt dreadful - as anyone would - but I accepted that there was only 7 seats available and Sky couldn't magic any extra from thin air.  I now actually feel really sick to my stomach at receiving the email inviting me to try a freeroll for an extra seat.  It just feels like a kick in the teeth.  I wish those who won their seats all the luck in the world - but yes - at this moment in time I'm disallusioned with Sky poker.  Why say 7 seats due to limits when it obviously wasn't limited number of packages?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DivsDreamsDivsDreams
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change? : " The sats in the lead up were to win a package and enough money was collected to pay for more than the number of pakages given, I think its a shame one was held back for this freeroll given that enough was collected to provide a further package. " Hi all - excuse typing as on mobile and can't see screen very well.  I was obviously the bubble girl last night.  I had read all along that there was min 7 seats guaranteed for the final.  In my naivety I assumed (wrongly) that this was a min number of seats - not total number of seats.  It was only on day of final that I saw Tikays thread which said any excess distributed among top players. When I bubbled I felt dreadful - as anyone would - but I accepted that there was only 7 seats available and Sky couldn't magic any extra from thin air.  I now actually feel really sick to my stomach at receiving the email inviting me to try a freeroll for an extra seat.  It just feels like a kick in the teeth.  I wish those who won their seats all the luck in the world - but yes - at this moment in time I'm disallusioned with Sky poker.  Why say 7 seats due to limits when it obviously wasn't limited number of packages?
    Posted by IrishRose
    +1
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • LARSON7LARSON7
    edited October 2014
    Agree with OP

    I would just have thought it was a sat like any other, seats plus any excess paid as £ to the bubble for the seat.

    Pretty sure most people would have been under this impression too, when they had played all the sits into the "final sat"

    IMO, the bubble should atleast be refunded the buy in for the Sat, would only seem fair.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cenachavcenachav
    edited October 2014
    Looks like people forgot to check the T+C's of the punta cana promo.  It clearly says how the excess prize money would be distributed


    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GBUKGBUK
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change? : +1
    Posted by DivsDreams
    Rose should get that 8th seat IMO!! Divsdreams is spot on!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DTWBANDITDTWBANDIT
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    In regards to what Geldy posted first , regardless to whoever bubbled- this for sky players is no doubt the way it should be imo. Most players aren't big hitters and was a chance in a lifetime.. The play by chip leader at the time with 8 left was correct imo... he went all in knowing that jubb and rose cant call with weak cards and a £3500 package up for grabs. But if say 8th paid £2000 and 9th £1500 woulda stopped him going all in every hand and made it a better watch and game.. Also there was only 7 packages but now an 8th has magically appeared to be determined by a freeroll. Get a grip sky, that is a joke really is. A luckbox player will win a £3500 holiday for gaining 20 points and jamming every hand.. Round of applause from me!.
    Posted by DivsDreams


       +1

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • FlyingDaggFlyingDagg
    edited October 2014
    As a good friend of Rose I have to say that the play on the bubble was hard to watch. Fair play to the winner for shoving every hand to take the top prize but it's 100% certain he wouldn't have done it without the extra cash incentive. Unfortunately it killed the game for the 2 shorties and must have been so frustrating for them both.

     Rose if Sky have sent you an email inviting you to a FR for an 8th place tell em to shove it where the sun don't shine!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cenachavcenachav
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    As a good friend of Rose I have to say that the play on the bubble was hard to watch. Fair play to the winner for shoving every hand to take the top prize but it's 100% certain he wouldn't have done it without the extra cash incentive. Unfortunately it killed the game for the 2 shorties and must have been so frustrating for them both.  Rose if Sky have sent you an email inviting you to a FR for an 8th place tell em to shove it where the sun don't shine!
    Posted by FlyingDagg
    Nah.  He did it because it was the correct thing to do.  

    The T+C's were clearly laid out before hand.  To have people arguing it's wrong after the event is a bit silly IMHO.

    Does anyone REALLY think that Sky have magiced another seat out of thin air and decided to give it away in a freeroll or do you think that this was the plan all along?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ra1dra1d
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change? : Nah.  He did it because it was the correct thing to do.   The T+C's were clearly laid out before hand.  To have people arguing it's wrong after the event is a bit silly IMHO. Does anyone REALLY think that Sky have magiced another seat out of thin air and decided to give it away in a freeroll or do you think that this was the plan all along?
    Posted by cenachav
    With regards to the package, I completely agree, however I do think the excess should have gone to the bubble or split between the losers. say 8-13... ;)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • FlyingDaggFlyingDagg
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change? : Nah.  He did it because it was the correct thing to do.   The T+C's were clearly laid out before hand.  To have people arguing it's wrong after the event is a bit silly IMHO. Does anyone REALLY think that Sky have magiced another seat out of thin air and decided to give it away in a freeroll or do you think that this was the plan all along?
    Posted by cenachav
    Can't agree with that Mark. The correct tactic in a standard SAT with that chip lead would be to sit it out and not jeopardise your place.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cenachavcenachav
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change? : With regards to the package, I completely agree, however I do think the excess should have gone to the bubble or split between the losers. say 8-13... ;)
    Posted by ra1d
    If people were so concerned about this then why hasn't been raised before now?  It was clearly said in the T+C's before hand.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cenachavcenachav
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change? : Can't agree with that Mark. The correct tactic in a standard SAT with that chip lead would be to sit it out and not jeopardise your place.
    Posted by FlyingDagg
    The chip leader had more then enough chips that they could still cruise through if they would of been called and lost so it makes it the right move IMHO
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • hhyftrftdrhhyftrftdr
    edited October 2014
    Gotta say I'm Mr Chav.

    Sky will have had X packages available for this whole promo, and obviously the last one has been held back for this freeroll. It has not just been invented. I think 8 packages and no freeroll would have been better but its a moot point.

    I didn't see the bubble but with the jumps in cash also factored in, the CL should be doing everything they can up to and on the bubble to amass as many chips as possible for a run at 1st place.

    I do feel for you Rose though. Very unlucky, and then to see that email must have been hard to take. But you'd have got that email regardless of whether you finished 1st, 8th or rock bottom.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bearlytherbearlyther
    edited October 2014
    Just seen there is a freeroll on sunday.  Have to say this doesnt make any sense at all to me.  Why not have an extra package in the sat? Rose understandably feels gutted after seeing this.  Theres very few people that win a package this sunday that are going to be able to book the time off work for the week after to go to the dominican republic aswell as there wife/husband having to book the time off work.  Thats not to mention how expensive the flights are going to be by the time that person wins the package.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cenachavcenachav
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    Just seen there is a freeroll on sunday.  Have to say this doesnt make any sense at all to me.  Why not have an extra package in the sat? Rose understandably feels gutted after seeing this.  Theres very few people that win a package this sunday that are going to be able to book the time off work for the week after to go to the dominican republic aswell as there wife/husband having to book the time off work.  Thats not to mention how expensive the flights are going to be by the time that person wins the package.
    Posted by bearlyther
    Possibly so Sky can say that one person has got to Punta Cara on a total freeroll.  Someone could of got there on a freeroll on Sunday but this way it guarantees it
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • IrishRoseIrishRose
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    There were only 7 packages available all worth £3500. In a 'regular' sat if another £3500 was raised in entries it would create another seat, if less then there's bubble cash. In this case though it wouldn't be desirable to have the bubble paying say £3500 in cash (not as a package) because for some that would be more attractive than the package itself. Hard then to start splitting at a sensible rate below the package places. Adding the money to the top 7 made it more of a tournament less of a satellite though still with a hefty bubble. Who knows the reasons why, but I suspect it was driven by the finite number of packages available.
    Posted by bbMike
    But as no freeroll had been announced at that point surely they could have added that package as exactly 40 players?   And given the freeroll planned a cash sum instead of maybe £1000?  I'd even pay the £1000 personally lol.  

    I know I know - stop thinking of the what ifs and maybes and just suck it up - I'm trying but it's not as easy as it sounds :(
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cenachavcenachav
    edited October 2014
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change?:
    In Response to Re: Bubble cash in sats for live tournaments - why the awful change? : But as no freeroll had been announced at that point surely they could have added that package as exactly 40 players?   And given the freeroll planned a cash sum instead of maybe £1000?  I'd even pay the £1000 personally lol.   I know I know - stop thinking of the what ifs and maybes and just suck it up - I'm trying but it's not as easy as it sounds :(
    Posted by IrishRose
    Just because it's not announced doesn't mean it's not planned.  The next UKOPS hasn't been announced yet but I bet you it's been planned.  It was announced when the promo started what the prize structure was.  As no one complained all through the promo about it why should Sky change it now?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.