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.

NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in?

2456

Comments

  • hhyftrftdrhhyftrftdr Member Posts: 8,036
    edited August 2014
    In Response to Re: NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in?:
    I won't stoop to your level hhy... of course you are always right & i'm always wrong. end of.
    Posted by devonfish5
    Really? And you are how old?

    As numerous people have said, including myself, it's the rake that is the big issue at the micro stakes. Adding these tables is pointless whilst the rake is still sky high (no pun intended).
  • hhyftrftdrhhyftrftdr Member Posts: 8,036
    edited August 2014
    In Response to Re: NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in?:
    In Response to Re: NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in? : what about GaryQQQ's diary... kind of counters that point, imo.
    Posted by devonfish5
    Gary was/is an experienced player with many 1000's of tournaments under his belt. And I don't believe he dabbled in cash once whilst he spun himself up to a grand.

    To a person new to the game, they will generally be oblivious to the rake element of it initially.
  • TeddyBloatTeddyBloat Member Posts: 1,419
    edited August 2014
    In Response to Re: NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in?:
    In Response to Re: NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in? : what about GaryQQQ's diary... kind of counters that point, imo.
    Posted by devonfish5

    gary is a winning reg who played ZERO cash in his challenge

    he got out of the micros by game selecting HUSNG's where the rake is lower than on DYM's and cash.

    that's right a huge winner in £10 games GAME SELECTED v recs at that level.

    DYM's, cash, .55p hypers, hyper HUSNG's in general are all unbeatable except for the few crushers on the site.

    in gary laud's first diary he was a pre-rake winner in hsi games by some margin yet was a HORRENDOUS loser after the rake was taken. if the micro rake was similar to the level above he would have broke even.

    micro players cant even heater in their games as even a sick run will result in a meagre ROI post rake

    you must be able to see why this is a bad thing for new players who want to give poker a try by putting a few uid from their betting / bingo accounts and giving games a go?
  • jordz16jordz16 Member Posts: 2,253
    edited August 2014
    Is there a site where you can compare the rake for cash, husngs, dyms etc amongst all the main sites? i Must of played 1000plus husngs in the last 2 months, would be interesting to see how my profit would have looked on other sites.
  • TeddyBloatTeddyBloat Member Posts: 1,419
    edited August 2014
    the rake for low stakes  turbos and speed husngs here is better than industry standard.

    the rake for hypers is by some distance below, and it gets worse the higher you play:

    you can find some info here:

    http://www.husng.com/content/heads-up-sit-and-go-husng-structures-and-buyin-information-most-poker-rooms
  • devonfish5devonfish5 Member Posts: 4,291
    edited August 2014
    I kind of thought it would be pointless putting this question out there, but i did just the same as i honestly thought it might be a good idea, especially for new/low bankrolled players.
     anyway, i hope someone at sky reads it, if only to have a good laugh for 5 minutes..
    I certainly have had one, some of the replys are well constructed others are a joke but then this is sky poker, so i should have known better by now, I guess.
  • TeddyBloatTeddyBloat Member Posts: 1,419
    edited August 2014
    as an aside re micro cash:

    assuming an average pot of 90p [seem reasonable looking at the lobby]

    and say 80 hands an hour [dunno how many is average on 6max, seems ok guess]

    that means that sky will in four and a half hours rake 6 buyins off the table. one buyin for each player gone in rake, in 4.5 hours.

    i'm not a cash player but that seems like a difficult enviroment to play in as a recreational.
  • hhyftrftdrhhyftrftdr Member Posts: 8,036
    edited August 2014
    In Response to Re: NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in?:
    I kind of thought it would be pointless putting this question out there, but i did just the same as i honestly thought it might be a good idea, especially for new/low bankrolled players.  anyway, i hope someone at sky reads it, if only to have a good laugh for 5 minutes.. I certainly have had one, some of the replys are well constructed others are a joke but then this is sky poker, so i should have known better by now, I guess.
    Posted by devonfish5
    TYVM.
  • jordz16jordz16 Member Posts: 2,253
    edited August 2014
    I guess when it comes to the rake paid you have to factor in what kind of rakeback you are getting.... i mainly play £10-£30 hypers on here and probably would be far better off playing somewhere else but seriously have never looked into it, maybe i should now.
  • TeddyBloatTeddyBloat Member Posts: 1,419
    edited August 2014
    the standard will be much much tougher than here, esp on stars.

    in hypers, if you are planning playing on stars, they have groups at each stake over $60's where the regs will instasit anyone who isnt in the group, and without paying for a registration software you will have ZERO chance of opensitting first at $15+ [it will outclick you as soon as a lobby is available]. and all the regs have this software. if you do want to have a crack at $15's get sharkystrator and you will be able to opensit a lobby.

    you can opensit $7s on stars and get plenty of fish, $15+ it becomes progressively more difficult without registration software and, ultimately, admittance to the group at that buyin.



  • shakinacesshakinaces Member Posts: 1,590
    edited August 2014
    a) lower the micro cash rake... let the noobs win a bit more, see the cash trickle up the levels a bit

    b) NL2 may hold some fans, but I'd guess the rake was/would be even more horrific and even then, Sky wouldn't deem it to earn enough to warrant starting - especially as it'd lower liquidity at NL4 and action5/5

    c) Dev, you seem to be more so after a low-stakes cap-game here? Agreed, that seems to find a lot of favour with players on other sites and even on here the tables capNL10 and NL20 seem to get good use. It's a lot more gamble-y and I'm sure recs/noobs would like that element, especially those that go on an early heater. But yeah, rake would make it unbeatable for almost all. Shame, as it probably would be a good way in for noobs to learn the basics.

    New ideas are always worth debating. Lots/most aren't feasible for one reason or another, but can't be any harm than seeing if there is something new that might work!
  • LARSON7LARSON7 Member Posts: 4,495
    edited August 2014
    In Response to Re: NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in?:
    In Response to Re: NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in? : then y cant sky drop their rake, so as to fall in line with other sites?
    Posted by devonfish5
    Good point and would be nice.

    It has been brought up before and like a lot of stuff, been sweeped under the carpet.

    The unfortunate truth is that while Sky can get away with charging such high rake they will never alter it as it would mean a reduction in their revenue.

    For the vast majority of players they won't even think about rake, especially at 4nl.
  • dabossmandabossman Member Posts: 213
    edited August 2014
    The question was asked a few weeks back about the rake at the micros and we were promised a view of it by Mr Kendall. I think the suits must have gotten a hold of him and pointed to the carpet and said "get sweeping"!!!!!

    I am not having a dig at Tikay but it was pretty obvious that someone didnt want this discussed and lets be honest there is no clear case for why the rake is so high other than pure greed.

    Back onto Devs idea, as much as it pains me to admit I have to agree with Bob and as is always the case Teddy talks mucho sense regarding how the rake is a killer.
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH Member Posts: 17,929
    edited August 2014
    In Response to Re: NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in?:
    the standard will be much much tougher than here, esp on stars. in hypers, if you are planning playing on stars, they have groups at each stake over $60's where the regs will instasit anyone who isnt in the group, and without paying for a registration software you will have ZERO chance of opensitting first at $15+ [it will outclick you as soon as a lobby is available]. and all the regs have this software. if you do want to have a crack at $15's get sharkystrator and you will be able to opensit a lobby. you can opensit $7s on stars and get plenty of fish, $15+ it becomes progressively more difficult without registration software and, ultimately, admittance to the group at that buyin.
    Posted by TeddyBloat
    Have played around 600 15s recently and I'm surprised to learn it gets so serious/competitive with game selection so low down the stakes.

    I seemed to get quite a few fish/bad regs without using any sort of game selection.

    Suddenly a lot more satisfied with my ROI though :)
  • seanallenseanallen Member Posts: 114
    edited August 2014
    In Response to Re: NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in?:
    In Response to Re: NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in? : I agree mate... but on said other site, there was no discusion, etc, it just happened overnight, ALL 1c/2c TABLES BECAME 50BB BUY-INS, & players had to adjust their games accordingly. I think it would be a great addition to this site for most low playing 'micro' cash players, new & old alike, hence my question/suggestion.
    Posted by devonfish5
    Wouldn't have just done it on a whim. Probably just figured it was the best way to make money from there customers same as pretty much any other business. Only difference I can see with Sky is that they're the only site with a forum?
  • stokefcstokefc Member Posts: 7,890
    edited August 2014
    In Response to Re: NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in?:
    In Response to Re: NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in? : Wouldn't have just done it on a whim. Probably just figured it was the best way to make money from there customers same as pretty much any other business. Only difference I can see with Sky is that they're the only site with a forum?
    Posted by seanallen
    exactly,and it has to be paid for so does 861
  • seanallenseanallen Member Posts: 114
    edited August 2014
    In Response to Re: NL4 cash tables with max 50bb buy-in?:
    I kind of thought it would be pointless putting this question out there, but i did just the same as i honestly thought it might be a good idea, especially for new/low bankrolled players.  anyway, i hope someone at sky reads it, if only to have a good laugh for 5 minutes.. I certainly have had one, some of the replys are well constructed others are a joke but then this is sky poker, so i should have known better by now, I guess.
    Posted by devonfish5
    This is why I like that we have a forum, so we can do this. Doesn't matter that the ideas that we put out are maybe going to be a bit 'hit or miss'. Sky probably quite like hearing people talk about the service they offer, whether its positive or negative. I'm sure it at least plays a little part in how they decide to take things forward.

    Keep putting ideas out there, a lot of what you say makes a lot of sense I've always thought. 
  • Lambert180Lambert180 Member Posts: 12,197
    edited August 2014
    Only read the first few replies but it doesnt seem to have been mentioned yet so... in short, it's already a level playing field because of effective stack size...

    If I sit down with 50xBB, then it doesn't matter if you have 51xBB or 99999xBB, it makes zero difference to the fact that every pot I play is 50xBB effective. If you're saying people feel intimidated then it's a case of educating them that it's illogical to feel that way. If someone does have 999999xBB and is playing like a nutcase cos they think they got lots of chances to try and bust you then that's great for us, let them play like a nutter.
  • Tikay10Tikay10 Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 172,752
    edited August 2014

    Am pokering right now guys, but will reply in the morning.

    And no, the suits did not ask me not to reply before, & will not do so now.

    Have a good evening. ;) 
     
  • Tikay10Tikay10 Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 172,752
    edited August 2014

    Morning all.

    Don't quite  know where to start with this, so many different views on so many different subjects, but I'll try.

    Am happy to try & answer any questions, though I'll swerve the sarcy stuff if you don't mind, life's too short & all that.
Sign In or Register to comment.