In Response to Re: Happy Days returns......... : They lose their money quicker because they're in tougher games. Therefore, they most likely pay less rake than usual. All this promo does for recreational players is increase the speed at which they lose their money. Posted by The--Don
I play low stake s&gs and if....I have read this offer correct ............ for two days the fifteen points needed to enter 8.30 free roll give away..... will be that much easier with double point.? That must be a plus ......but if your asking for much more......... good luck with that.
In Response to Re: Happy Days returns......... : I play low stake s&gs and if....I have read this offer correct ............ for two days the fifteen points needed to enter 8.30 free roll give away..... will be that much easier with double point.? That must be a plus ......but if your asking for much more......... good luck with that. Posted by goldon
I don't play SNG's, so I haven't given much, or any thought to how those games will change because of this promotion.
I was talking exclusively from a microstakes players perspective and presenting a case from a net losing players position.
I'm not a net losing player FWIW but I feel these guys barely have a voice in the poker community and are hard done to by sites compared to the winning regs.
I focus on £5 tdyms and when points promotions are on, I do notice more familiar names (as in the stars of this site) on those tables. That is especially the case when there is a points race type promotion taking place. Alot who are used to normal DYMs struggle with TDYMs however.
A wider issue is how to support the net depositers as this is a benefit to all. Perhaps a "deposit £xx, get a percentage back in tokens if you lose it" type offer would be good.
(I have no vested interest BTW having not been a net depositer since April 2015 - I was pretty shocking before then though! To be mercenary, more recs is more profitable than more rate back. Especially on the TDYMs where you can win without playing a hand if the rest of the players are wild enough!)
In fairness there's probably an element of truth in his post here, poker sites probably could do more to attract/retain those at the bottom of the pyramid.
Whether a happy days promo hurts the low stakes losing player, I would have thought the extra volume of recs is likely to matched by an increased volume of new/low stake players. Also aren't regs more likely to move up stakes rather than down in such promos?!
@The_Don You have made some good points about the general poker economy, but I still fundamentally disagree with your OP saying that x2 points is bad for micro stakes recreationalplayers.
I don't play much cash, but I don't see the 4nl tables becoming reg infested and imo 20nl isnt micro stakes, but I can imagine that some regs will move down for some tables to take advantage (more later).
I do play SNGs and double points are exceptionally good value for micro stakes players as per this table I posted elsewhere, a micro stakes player can actually get 92% rakeback!
Normal points games total total
Entry Rake Game BI pts /100 pts stake rake rb rb %
0.25 0.05 0.3 1 100 30 5 2.3 46%
2 0.25 2.25 3 34 76.5 8.5 2.3 27%
3 0.3 3.3 3 34 112.2 10.2 2.3 23%
Double points games total total
Entry Rake Game BI pts /100 pts stake rake rb rb %
0.25 0.05 0.3 2 50 15 2.5 2.3 92%
2 0.25 2.25 6 17 38.25 4.25 2.3 54%
3 0.3 3.3 6 17 56.1 5.1 2.3 45%
As QUICKFEET posted regs do "move down" the SNG BIs in double points, especially when a rake race is on, so I do see regs at 5 and even 3 who normally play bigger. I think some of that was also caused by MTT players looking to make priority, especially before the recent MTT schedule changes.
I can imagine a similar effect on cash, but not down to "micro" stakes so I suppose it does depend on your definition of "micro". According to the filters it's up to £1 SNGs on and up to 10NL.
I myself have got caught out pushing for a points level and losing at reg full £5 SNGs, I have learned my lesson there and tend to set less challenging targets.
However for the micro stakes, as above, double points are a great thing.
In terms of rewards/rake in general, I think the sites need to look after both the high volume regs and the micro stakes players. Poker sites need to make a profit or we lose them, so they need the grinders and they need recreational depositors.
We all need recreational depositors so anything that helps there then great. Crossover promotions from other parts of the site, the SKYBLUE promotions etc help all but are of most relative value to the micro recreational.
I think the changes to the Sky Poker Rewards do that very well with the £2.30 token for just 100 points and the freerolls.
I really dislike the current reward system. Works for anyone who earns between 100 and 230 points but sucks for people like me who earn between 300-400 points per week.
Phantom66, that does look decent for SNG players. I know a decent number of the SNG regs are losing money before rakeback, so I can see how this is good for them,
My interest though is in the effects these promotions have on cash games in the short term and how sites should change their policies long term.
Online poker currently works on an unsustainable model where it gives money to already winning players and does nothing at all for those that actually keep games alive right at the bottom of the ladder.
Most regs are too caught up in the present to think about the long term and they're contributing heavily to the decline of the game.
I really dislike the current reward system. Works for anyone who earns between 100 and 230 points but sucks for people like me who earn between 300-400 points per week. Posted by jdsallstar
All the more reason for you to use double points to hit 500?
If you assume there are broadly 3 types of players on the site.
It makes sense to rewards players in categories 1 and 3 more than 2 for the reasons outlined above.
Personally sometimes I just play enough to get 100pts, sometimes I push on to hit 500. Often I play on to 2-300 because at the end of the day I am just playing for fun and the rewards don't make a big difference to me and I am not going to stop the fun just to eek out a higher % rakeback. I do like saving tokens though.
I don't agree that sites should be rewarding high volume regs.
They should reward table starters, much like live casino's pay props but not those that jump on waitlists, never start games, or join short handed games to create action.
Hey Don... You know I have a lot of respect for you and what you're doing in the low stakes cash arena, with the coaching and videos you make etc, but a lot of what you're saying here is kind of hypocritical.
You're saying that we should all do what's best for the 'recs' and make their money last longer, but one of the things you emphasise the most in your videos is to target weak players and look for 'good' tables. You actually teach people to bum hunt! (I totally agree with that theory by the way, but I don't publicly come out and say that I'm on recreational poker players union!)
Your whole debate is based on what you believe is best for you, because you want recs to keep their roll longer so you can bum hunt them more. Plus I'm guessing you don't want to see more rake back pros at the tables while you're trying to find 'good' tables.
I would say 99% of players on this website welcome any promotion that sees them making more player points and therefore more money from the games they play. I really struggle to believe that if you grinded 1,000 hours of normal points compared to 1,000 hours of double points that you would earn less in the double points period. You can still table select, granted it would be a lot harder, but there's ALWAYS going to be recs to play with.
These promotions are critical to Sky in terms of trying to build traffic and attracting new players (regs and recs) to the website.
I just can't get my head round why any player (Pro, Semi-Pro, Amateur) would rather earn say 25% rakeback when they're having 50% offered to them, but I'm a self confessed rakeback grabber and would never claim to be anything better than that. I know some very casual recs would never get to the stage where they're earning 25% anyway, but I really don't think they care. They just want to come on at random times and play poker. They don't come on and table select etc, they just want to gamble, that's why they are net depositors at the end of the day. Promotions like this would never put a recreational player off playing, in fact I bet there's 100s of players on the site playing in the next few days that don't even know it's 'Happy Days'... Like I said, a lot of them just log on and fancy a gamble.
I just think you should be more positive about 'Happy Days' and 'Sky Poker Premiership' etc etc, they are amazing promotions. I know we've briefly discussed it before and we have exact opposite views on it... I just think you're missing out on soooo much value, and you should take full advantage of all the rakeback that's there for the taking.
Just my opinion mate, keep up the good work. I can't wait to hear why I am so wrong about all this!
Parts of your post are exactly what I thought as I read it TheDons opening post.
Champion of the recreational player and talking about making the experience good for all? This from the same guy who spent most of his time on that dreadful twitch abusing players.
The same guy who snap left any table when competent players arrived.
His post is all about what would be better for him and nothing more than that.
I don't agree that sites should be rewarding high volume regs. They should reward table starters, much like live casino's pay props but not those that jump on waitlists, never start games, or join short handed games to create action. Posted by The--Don
^^^^^^^^ You're not wrong at all. Parts of your post are exactly what I thought as I read it TheDons opening post. Champion of the recreational player and talking about making the experience good for all? This from the same guy who spent most of his time on that dreadful twitch abusing players. The same guy who snap left any table when competent players arrived. His post is all about what would be better for him and nothing more than that. Posted by Jac35
Yes Jac, and let me quote " Mumsie, from Eastbourbe, an absolute nit, probably 90 and asleep."
I don't agree that sites should be rewarding high volume regs. They should reward table starters, much like live casino's pay props but not those that jump on waitlists, never start games, or join short handed games to create action. Posted by The--Don
As Mr Bates notes, Sky Poker have "Jump Start", HERE
I'm not personally aware of any UK based B & M casinos that pay props or shills to start cash games.
Hey Don... You know I have a lot of respect for you and what you're doing in the low stakes cash arena, with the coaching and videos you make etc, but a lot of what you're saying here is kind of hypocritical. You're saying that we should all do what's best for the 'recs' and make their money last longer, but one of the things you emphasise the most in your videos is to target weak players and look for 'good' tables. You actually teach people to bum hunt! (I totally agree with that theory by the way, but I don't publicly come out and say that I'm on recreational poker players union!) Your whole debate is based on what you believe is best for you, because you want recs to keep their roll longer so you can bum hunt them more. Plus I'm guessing you don't want to see more rake back pros at the tables while you're trying to find 'good' tables. I would say 99% of players on this website welcome any promotion that sees them making more player points and therefore more money from the games they play. I really struggle to believe that if you grinded 1,000 hours of normal points compared to 1,000 hours of double points that you would earn less in the double points period. You can still table select, granted it would be a lot harder, but there's ALWAYS going to be recs to play with. These promotions are critical to Sky in terms of trying to build traffic and attracting new players (regs and recs) to the website. I just can't get my head round why any player (Pro, Semi-Pro, Amateur) would rather earn say 25% rakeback when they're having 50% offered to them, but I'm a self confessed rakeback grabber and would never claim to be anything better than that. I know some very casual recs would never get to the stage where they're earning 25% anyway, but I really don't think they care. They just want to come on at random times and play poker. They don't come on and table select etc, they just want to gamble, that's why they are net depositors at the end of the day. Promotions like this would never put a recreational player off playing, in fact I bet there's 100s of players on the site playing in the next few days that don't even know it's 'Happy Days'... Like I said, a lot of them just log on and fancy a gamble. I just think you should be more positive about 'Happy Days' and 'Sky Poker Premiership' etc etc, they are amazing promotions. I know we've briefly discussed it before and we have exact opposite views on it... I just think you're missing out on soooo much value, and you should take full advantage of all the rakeback that's there for the taking. Just my opinion mate, keep up the good work. I can't wait to hear why I am so wrong about all this! Posted by The_Reflex
Why does it matter whether OP is highlighting this alleged rakeback inequality for his own benefit? The point still remains, and I don't think much of what you say here actually gets to the heart of the issue.
I would say 99% of players on this website welcome any promotion that sees them making more player points and therefore more money from the games they play.
Perhaps that's true, perhaps not, it doesn't really matter. What matters is is there a more effective way of distrubuting reward money.
I really struggle to believe that if you grinded 1,000 hours of normal points compared to 1,000 hours of double points that you would earn less in the double points period. You can still table select, granted it would be a lot harder, but there's ALWAYS going to be recs to play with.
I don't see your point. OP isn't arguing for the winning player. He's arguing for the microstakes recreational player who a) isn't getting rewarded for consistent action, in spite of the fact they're the ones driving action & b) as a result of these promotions, is facing a net increase in the amount of regulars in their games (most likely).
I just can't get my head round why any player (Pro, Semi-Pro, Amateur) would rather earn say 25% rakeback when they're having 50% offered to them, but I'm a self confessed rakeback grabber and would never claim to be anything better than that.
OP is proposing a model that should have a net outcome of a) decrease of breakeven winning regulars (seems like you'd be in trouble, perhaps that's why you're on the defensive - perhaps you're not too dissimilar to OP in that you're campaigning for your own interests - shocking) b) inc of rewards for recs. A decrease in breakeven regulars & an increase in money for recreationals should result in an increase in potential winnings for (already) winning regulars. That's the basics of why certain regulars would actually benefit from this sort of thing, and why the absolute % of RB available isn't the most important thing.
The poker ecology is not something Sky Poker are unaware of, far from it. The challenge is to try to make a balanced offering. They well know - obviously - the value of net depositors, but its a Business, & those that play a lot are entitled to be looked after too.
The new Rewards Scheme introduced in June specifically tried to address the lower staked players - making Rewards Payments weekly instead of monthly, for example. Many don't like that, but for some, it's very important to get a bit of cash or a £2.30 token back every week, & of course, access to £5,000 worth of Freerolls every week. It's populated largely by lower stakes players.
That £1,000 Rewards Freeroll, assuming it gets 1,000 runners (pure guess, I have no idea) is worth £1 per player per day (assuming 1,000 runners) in hard cash. It quite often has added seats to stuff like UKOPS, too.
The (daily) Sunday Major Freeroll is worth £330, so that probably worth about £1 per head per day too.
This month, the Winter Giveaway is awarding £60,000 in 24 days, which is £2,500 per day on average. It "costs" just 15 points earned on the day to enter.
The vast majority of players in most Freerolls (but not all) are lower stakes players.
It'd be rather nice to have no barrier to entry by way of points earned, but all that would happen is that thousands of freerollers from the poker population who never play on Sky Poker would play & skidaddle with the cash, & in doing so, deprive those who play here regularly the opportunity to get something back. You can hardly blame Sky Poker for that, sometimes the players are to blame for these problems.
Meanwhile, notwithstanding all this, you'll be pleased to know (or not....) that Happy Days returns today, & runs until 23.59 on Friday.
I'll be playing my usual amount of games tonight, against my usual opponents, & so I'll earn myself an extra tenner this week. I'm happy enough with that but I guess my glass is always half full.
Some good points and some bad points. One thing I disagree with is the blanket statement that micro stakes players will automatically lose money. Your basically saying they are all bad. I'm a micro stakes player and I'm a winning player. There are a lot of players playing higher stakes who are worse than me.
People play how they want at what stakes they want. Your also missing the fact that when regs up volume it's a fact that they don't maximise there 'edge' as things become more automatic. They can't possibly follow the flow and changing dynamics at every table for every hand they play. It becomes robotic and % thinking.
The poker ecology is not something Sky Poker are unaware of, far from it. The challenge is to try to make a balanced offering. They well know - obviously - the value of net depositors, but its a Business, & those that play a lot are entitled to be looked after too. The new Rewards Scheme introduced in June specifically tried to address the lower staked players - making Rewards Payments weekly instead of monthly, for example. Many don't like that, but for some, it's very important to get a bit of cash or a £2.30 token back every week, & of course, access to £5,000 worth of Freerolls every week. It's populated largely by lower stakes players. That £1,000 Rewards Freeroll, assuming it gets 1,000 runners (pure guess, I have no idea) is worth £1 per player per day (assuming 1,000 runners) in hard cash. It quite often has added seats to stuff like UKOPS, too. The (daily) Sunday Major Freeroll is worth £330, so that probably worth about £1 per head per day too. This month, the Winter Giveaway is awarding £60,000 in 24 days, which is £2,500 per day on average. It "costs" just 15 points earned on the day to enter. The vast majority of players in most Freerolls (but not all) are lower stakes players. It'd be rather nice to have no barrier to entry by way of points earned, but all that would happen is that thousands of freerollers from the poker population who never play on Sky Poker would play & skidaddle with the cash, & in doing so, deprive those who play here regularly the opportunity to get something back. You can hardly blame Sky Poker for that, sometimes the players are to blame for these problems.
Comments
I focus on £5 tdyms and when points promotions are on, I do notice more familiar names (as in the stars of this site) on those tables. That is especially the case when there is a points race type promotion taking place. Alot who are used to normal DYMs struggle with TDYMs however.
A wider issue is how to support the net depositers as this is a benefit to all. Perhaps a "deposit £xx, get a percentage back in tokens if you lose it" type offer would be good.
(I have no vested interest BTW having not been a net depositer since April 2015 - I was pretty shocking before then though! To be mercenary, more recs is more profitable than more rate back. Especially on the TDYMs where you can win without playing a hand if the rest of the players are wild enough!)
As QUICKFEET posted regs do "move down" the SNG BIs in double points, especially when a rake race is on, so I do see regs at 5 and even 3 who normally play bigger. I think some of that was also caused by MTT players looking to make priority, especially before the recent MTT schedule changes.
I can imagine a similar effect on cash, but not down to "micro" stakes so I suppose it does depend on your definition of "micro". According to the filters it's up to £1 SNGs on and up to 10NL.
I myself have got caught out pushing for a points level and losing at reg full £5 SNGs, I have learned my lesson there and tend to set less challenging targets.
However for the micro stakes, as above, double points are a great thing.
In terms of rewards/rake in general, I think the sites need to look after both the high volume regs and the micro stakes players. Poker sites need to make a profit or we lose them, so they need the grinders and they need recreational depositors.
We all need recreational depositors so anything that helps there then great. Crossover promotions from other parts of the site, the SKYBLUE promotions etc help all but are of most relative value to the micro recreational.
I think the changes to the Sky Poker Rewards do that very well with the £2.30 token for just 100 points and the freerolls.
If you assume there are broadly 3 types of players on the site.
1. Depositing low volume recs
2. Competent mid volume recs
3. High volume regs
It makes sense to rewards players in categories 1 and 3 more than 2 for the reasons outlined above.
Personally sometimes I just play enough to get 100pts, sometimes I push on to hit 500. Often I play on to 2-300 because at the end of the day I am just playing for fun and the rewards don't make a big difference to me and I am not going to stop the fun just to eek out a higher % rakeback. I do like saving tokens though.
I'm not personally aware of any UK based B & M casinos that pay props or shills to start cash games.
I would say 99% of players on this website welcome any promotion that sees them making more player points and therefore more money from the games they play.
Perhaps that's true, perhaps not, it doesn't really matter. What matters is is there a more effective way of distrubuting reward money.
I really struggle to believe that if you grinded 1,000 hours of normal points compared to 1,000 hours of double points that you would earn less in the double points period. You can still table select, granted it would be a lot harder, but there's ALWAYS going to be recs to play with.
I don't see your point. OP isn't arguing for the winning player. He's arguing for the microstakes recreational player who a) isn't getting rewarded for consistent action, in spite of the fact they're the ones driving action & b) as a result of these promotions, is facing a net increase in the amount of regulars in their games (most likely).
I just can't get my head round why any player (Pro, Semi-Pro, Amateur) would rather earn say 25% rakeback when they're having 50% offered to them, but I'm a self confessed rakeback grabber and would never claim to be anything better than that.
OP is proposing a model that should have a net outcome of a) decrease of breakeven winning regulars (seems like you'd be in trouble, perhaps that's why you're on the defensive - perhaps you're not too dissimilar to OP in that you're campaigning for your own interests - shocking) b) inc of rewards for recs. A decrease in breakeven regulars & an increase in money for recreationals should result in an increase in potential winnings for (already) winning regulars. That's the basics of why certain regulars would actually benefit from this sort of thing, and why the absolute % of RB available isn't the most important thing.
The poker ecology is not something Sky Poker are unaware of, far from it. The challenge is to try to make a balanced offering. They well know - obviously - the value of net depositors, but its a Business, & those that play a lot are entitled to be looked after too.
The new Rewards Scheme introduced in June specifically tried to address the lower staked players - making Rewards Payments weekly instead of monthly, for example. Many don't like that, but for some, it's very important to get a bit of cash or a £2.30 token back every week, & of course, access to £5,000 worth of Freerolls every week. It's populated largely by lower stakes players.
That £1,000 Rewards Freeroll, assuming it gets 1,000 runners (pure guess, I have no idea) is worth £1 per player per day (assuming 1,000 runners) in hard cash. It quite often has added seats to stuff like UKOPS, too.
The (daily) Sunday Major Freeroll is worth £330, so that probably worth about £1 per head per day too.
This month, the Winter Giveaway is awarding £60,000 in 24 days, which is £2,500 per day on average. It "costs" just 15 points earned on the day to enter.
The vast majority of players in most Freerolls (but not all) are lower stakes players.
It'd be rather nice to have no barrier to entry by way of points earned, but all that would happen is that thousands of freerollers from the poker population who never play on Sky Poker would play & skidaddle with the cash, & in doing so, deprive those who play here regularly the opportunity to get something back. You can hardly blame Sky Poker for that, sometimes the players are to blame for these problems.
Meanwhile, notwithstanding all this, you'll be pleased to know (or not....) that Happy Days returns today, & runs until 23.59 on Friday.
I'll be playing my usual amount of games tonight, against my usual opponents, & so I'll earn myself an extra tenner this week. I'm happy enough with that but I guess my glass is always half full.