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.
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.
Comments
well i have turn that 5 quid in to thousands form starting at that level so to get rid of it is mad BAD MOVE SKY
and they are deffo not luck box games just very hard coz of rake on them
60p buyin level
# 30 BIs will cost you £18 (this is min you will need to get anywhere and progress)
# 10 BIs will cost you £6 (this you aint really got a chance and prob wont stay or reload)
30p buyin level
# 60 BIs will cost you £18 (this is plenty and will last you a good while and keep traffic on the site)
# 20 BIs will cost you £6 (this you still can enjoy poker and good taste and feel for the site, keeping you here and if you like it and lose the lot your more likely to reload because you had fun for the right amount of time)
The whole object i would have thought would be to get new players on skypoker and give them a chance to learn or progress without them having to break the bank, taking the 30p level makes a huge diffence to this imo
Even the amount of players that play them to let out frustration aswell.
From a personal point of view I feel a bit funny about the 30pers being taken away. For those of you that don't know I'm normally registered for every DYM £55-£220 most evenings. The £165 and £220 very rarely run and sadly the £110 ones have ran a lot less lately. I really want them to remain because when the DYM player pool does increase, and with the growth of SkyPoker I truly believe it will, the bigger bankroll players will want games in the three figure category.
As, rightly or wrongly, I feel I have an edge in the DYMs, I'd quite like them to stay for the possible future player pool. If they went I would be quite disappointed but I can hardly complain if they went when the 30pers which were running a lot more than these were taken away. Therefore I feel the need to support everyone who has posted requesting the 30p DYMs return. There is clearly a playerpool for it, as seen by this thread. Personally with the rake I don't think they are beatable over a decent sample (1000+) unless you run like a red hot thing, but while there is interest there is point. And not everyone plays poker just for money, thankfully most people still play for fun.
To make my spot a little more complicated I'm also a Mod. As such I would request everyone keep the debate respectful and no one individual 'over do it' by just repeating the same points, which would essentially be spamming. So far I feel the thread is perfectly fine, but if it deteriorates (Friday night is coming, always an interesting night for a Mod) I'll shut it myself. So please keep the debate fresh, respectful and intelligent as it has been.
Its disappointing to say the least i have no other comments. I think my opinion has been expressed.
I also accept that Sky are running this as a business, and have to balance their profits against the capability of the site to run various options. If the site gets overloaded and crashes or gets too laggy then everyone complains. How they need to balance their business is up to them, if they get it wrong and too much money leaves the site then they'll have to rethink, but I doubt they'll change their minds based on forum demands.
So what i am i ment to think about this?If every sit & go that run's the same or less than the 30p dym's ran get scrapped where would that leave sit & go's let alone the site?
You're right that 1 £220 games makes sky £120 in rake and to make the equivelant from 30p games, it would be 400 games, so I agreed up to that point. But even bearing that in mind, I would be really surprised if Sky said they get more rake from £220s than from 30ps. The £220 I imagine (and from Tommy's post) probably runs once a day if you're lucky, maybe less than that. Whereas I would imagine they easy get 400 game 30p DYMs a day no problem.
If I register in one at virtually any point of the day (excluding say 4am - 9am, never tried) you generally get a game in less than 3 mins. So if one game runs every 3 mins, that's 20 games an hour, I reckon that rate keeps up for at least 15-16 hours of the day. so 16 hours is 320 games, if they can get 80 games in the remaining 8 hours, job's a good 'un.
Obviously these are all estimates and I don't have the figures, but I'd imagine my figures can't be THAT far from reality. It's almost like the old MTT v Cash debate... you can either have a big bink every now and then, but not realy sure when it's gonna come or even if it's gonna come at all, or you can have a slow steady trickle of constant, reliable profit. Easy pick if it was my business
So Mathematicians I risk more for less is that correct.?
Point is are Sky by this implementation trying to force low stake players into Cash Games. ? 2p4p just asking. Hugs xx
A 60p is actually 50p + 10p, also 20% rake.
So it does work out exactly the same really in terms of risk/reward. Just that obviously people don't have the option now to risk less and win less if they want to.
horse a is called 30p dym, horse b is called 60p dym.
horse a ins 3/5 meaning you invest 30p to win 50p
horse b is 6/10 meaning you invest 60p to win £1 (100p) the bookie would then half those odds to make it more appealing ha;fing is 3/5.
Exact same
If you play 1 X 60p game, you get £1 back and so you make 40p profit.
So the rake is the same, the outlay is the same for you, the reward is the same for you. The only difference is that if you have say £10, you can only afford to play 16 games now rather than 33 games if they still had 30p DYMs
I'm guessing, as always, decisions are made for good business reasons we are not party to but I think this decision may have been a mistake.
pad
Thank goodness we've still got the caption comp!