"These are the least popular stakes as and we believe this will help liquidity at similar stakes as well as decluttering the lobby"
From that I extract popularity clearly being the prominent reason, and that only makes sense too because if only the decluttering was an issue then spin-up games would be removed. He mentioned three things: popularity, liquidity and cluttering. A lack of popularity leads to unnecessary cluttering which disrupts liquidity. But of course everything is open to interpretation.
Correct, he didn't say anything about 60nl. I didn't say he mentioned 60nl. I'm simply saying that one of his main defenses of 40nl games is that the player base will drop off to 30nl rather than to 50nl, i.e. he's saying an intermediate stake pulls players from the lower stake while not touching the higher stake, so Sky should keep intermediate stakes because if players are either going to play 40nl or 30nl, well, you'd rather them play 40nl. If this were true then introducing a 60nl game should work by the same principle, i.e. it should attract players from the 50nl player base, which is great right since it's a higher stake, while leaving the 100nl game untouched. I doubt this is how it works like I mentioned in my post, but that was one of his main defenses.
And then to para '40nl is the natural progression from 30nl" really? so again, you want 60nl? 80nl? And then his final point regarding spin-up games I think I mentioned in my earlier post.
"These are the least popular stakes as and we believe this will help liquidity at similar stakes as well as decluttering the lobby" From that I extract popularity clearly being the prominent reason, and that only makes sense too because if only the decluttering was an issue then spin-up games would be removed. He mentioned three things: popularity, liquidity and cluttering. A lack of popularity leads to unnecessary cluttering which disrupts liquidity. But of course everything is open to interpretation. Correct, he didn't say anything about 60nl. I didn't say he mentioned 60nl. I'm simply saying that one of his main defenses of 40nl games is that the player base will drop off to 30nl rather than to 50nl, i.e. he's saying an intermediate stake pulls players from the lower stake while not touching the higher stake, so Sky should keep intermediate stakes because if players are either going to play 40nl or 30nl, well, you'd rather them play 40nl. If this were true then introducing a 60nl game should work by the same principle, i.e. it should attract players from the 50nl player base, which is great right since it's a higher stake, while leaving the 100nl game untouched. I doubt this is how it works like I mentioned in my post, but that was one of his main defenses. And then to para '40nl is the natural progression from 30nl" really? so again, you want 60nl? 80nl? And then his final point regarding spin-up games I think I mentioned in my earlier post. Hope this clears things a little. Posted by percival09
Things were clear before.
But thanks
It looks as though you're right, as James has just confirmed, and it is mainly about liquidity.
I agree with you in that I don't see people just dropping to 30nl rather than play 50nl either.
I do think that while nl40 was there, it was the natural progression from 30nl. I think that's how it generally works. Players move up to the next stake when they feel ready,
So, Sanj, I assume you also intend to lobby for 60nl? While you're at it 70nl? 80? These additions should each have the same effect as 40nl, i.e. they'll attract players from 50nl (as 40 does from the 30 pool) while keeping the volume @ 100nl the same. I don't know how you can say, with any certainty at least, that the 40nl player pool will all fall back to 30nl rather than jump to 50nl. Added to that is whether that's even much of a problem since 30nl games undoubtedly rake more, and if not, well, the difference is almost certainly negligible. James made very clear with his post that the main reason for removal is lack of popularity, so your comment regarding spin-up games, potentially the most popular cash-game variant, seems misplaced. Sure, they clutter the lobby, but that point seems secondary in James's reasoning. Also, I know you're a business guy Sanj, but claiming 40nl tables give Sky a USP is absurd. 'hey guys, yh, guess what? Sky offer these 40nl games. usually about 2 running @ prime time. think I might make the move from stars' 'WOW 40nl?!?!? NO WAY' Posted by percival09
Percy, I am only saying what I saw last night. There was a lot more nl30 tables running than usual. The general consensus of the people who play nl40 and Nl50 that I spoke to last night where disapointed that it was withdrawn at short notice. Sky is a small site, so alienating players that put in most of their volume at micro stakes doing something without consensus is pretty poor imo.
Fair point about the spin up tables, not going to dispute your opinion there.
Good to see you like a still like a good healthy argument.
Edit: you still owe me £20 for that wager you had on Chelski finishing above Arsenal in season 2015/16. Nothing like a tight high stakes poker player ehhh .
In Response to Re: Cash tables removed at 4p/8p and 20p/40p : Percy, I am only saying what I saw last night. There was a lot more nl30 tables running than usual. The general consensus of the people who play nl40 and Nl50 that I spoke to last night where disapointed that it was withdrawn at short notice. Sky is a small site, so alienating players that put in most of their volume at micro stakes doing something without consensus is pretty poor imo. Fair point about the spin up tables, not going to dispute your opinion there. Good to see you like a still like a good healthy argument. Edit: you still owe me £20 for that wager you had on Chelski finishing above Arsenal in season 2015/16. Nothing like a tight high stakes poker player ehhh . Posted by ACEGOONER
haha. I think we'll wipe the £20 after the 40nl USP blunder we had double or quits for 2016/17. I know you're just sticking up for the games you play, but as an outsider I felt James's points were getting more heat than they deserved.
In Response to Re: Cash tables removed at 4p/8p and 20p/40p : That's the nature of heads up games. Not along ago we reduced the spawning of these at the higher stakes. In any case you can filter HU games out. Posted by Sky__James
Fair enough James. I see you say it's mainly down to liquidity in another post, I just picked up on the de-cluttering part and it just seemed like me saying I'm going to de-clutter my garage, then going and throwing out two paintbrushes!
In Response to Re: Cash tables removed at 4p/8p and 20p/40p : Things were clear before. But thanks It looks as though you're right, as James has just confirmed, and it is mainly about liquidity. I agree with you in that I don't see people just dropping to 30nl rather than play 50nl either. I do think that while nl40 was there, it was the natural progression from 30nl. I think that's how it generally works. Players move up to the next stake when they feel ready, Posted by Jac35
Yeah. Cluttering can't be the primary reason for removing a game since if it's popular enough the cluttering doesn't matter (to sky at least). so naturally it's a secondary concern. I know it's probably nice to have a limit in between 30nl and 50nl for those players playing 30nl wanting to try out a higher stake, but for everyone else it seems pointless. 50nl players surely dislike it. If it is a 'natural progession' from 30nl, whatever that means, then there should be limitless intermediate stakes. I'm not having a go, it's just I've been playing poker a while and Sky is the only site that has 40nl games (USP right sanj), and I just don't see them as particularly useful.
In Response to Re: Cash tables removed at 4p/8p and 20p/40p : haha. I think we'll wipe the £20 after the 40nl USP blunder we had double or quits for 2016/17. I know you're just sticking up for the games you play, but as an outsider I felt James's points were getting more heat than they deserved. Posted by percival09
Double or quits?!!! Now you are bluffing for sure!
With regards to nl40 percy there are a lot of nL50 regs that will start or sit at running nl40 tables. I really don't think it bothers them. Regardless, the feedback I have had from other regs at the tables is they aren't happy with nl40 being removed.
At the end of the day, it's the people who play these tables who really should have an input on whether sky keep them or not, and with the greatest of respect I haven't seen you at nl40 for years. I appreciate you are trying to give a balanced view, but I genuinely think sky poker is on the decline in terms of player numbers and liquidity these days. Even I have been flirting with other sites over the last few months.
There are several reasons to leave sky, with some of the stuff going down in recent years that have worked against not just regs but serious recreational players too (rakeback deals for newbies, alleged bots etc). Despite this sky still have a band of loyal players, that have supported the site for many years.
In Response to Re: Cash tables removed at 4p/8p and 20p/40p : Double or quits?!!! Now you are bluffing for sure! With regards to nl40 percy there are a lot of nL50 regs that will start or sit at running nl40 tables. I really don't think it bothers them. Regardless, the feedback I have had from other regs at the tables is they aren't happy with nl40 being removed. At the end of the day, it's the people who play these tables who really should have an input on whether sky keep them or not, and with the greatest of respect I haven't seen you at nl40 for years. I appreciate you are trying to give a balanced view, but I genuinely think sky poker is on the decline in terms of player numbers and liquidity these days. Even I have been flirting with other sites over the last few months. There are several reasons to leave sky, with some of the stuff going down in recent years that have worked against not just regs but serious recreational players too (rakeback deals for newbies, alleged bots etc). Despite this sky still have a band of loyal players, that have supported the site for many years. Posted by ACEGOONER
*sweating* *leaves room*
I suppose this is why we'll have to agree to disagree.
The removal of nl8 doesn't appear to have helped nl10p. At this time of day I used to have 4 tables up 2 were nl8p and 2 were nl10 but all I can have now is 1 nl10p and 1 deep stack.
By getting rid of nl8p regulars on micro stakes are having mix in some nl4p along side nl10p tables because the recs have diverted from nl8p to nl10p capped tables.
The removal of nl8 doesn't appear to have helped nl10p. At this time of day I used to have 4 tables up 2 were nl8p and 2 were nl10 but all I can have now is 1 nl10p and 1 deep stack. By getting rid of nl8p regulars on micro stakes are having mix in some nl4p along side nl10p tables because the recs have diverted from nl8p to nl10p capped tables. Posted by craigcu12
I don't think we can say whether a change has been successful or not after one day Craig. Sample size.
The removal of nl8 doesn't appear to have helped nl10p. At this time of day I used to have 4 tables up 2 were nl8p and 2 were nl10 but all I can have now is 1 nl10p and 1 deep stack. By getting rid of nl8p regulars on micro stakes are having mix in some nl4p along side nl10p tables because the recs have diverted from nl8p to nl10p capped tables. Posted by craigcu12
It's too soon to be drawing conclusions especially on a hot Thursday afternoon.
In Response to Re: Cash tables removed at 4p/8p and 20p/40p : It's too soon to be drawing conclusions especially on a hot Thursday afternoon. Posted by Sky__James
you must be joking, I'm wearing a coat when going outside and sometimes had the living room fire on
In Response to Re: Cash tables removed at 4p/8p and 20p/40p : you must be joking, I'm wearing a coat when going outside and sometimes had the living room fire on Posted by craigcu12
In Response to Re: Cash tables removed at 4p/8p and 20p/40p : Percy, I am only saying what I saw last night. There was a lot more nl30 tables running than usual. The general consensus of the people who play nl40 and Nl50 that I spoke to last night where disapointed that it was withdrawn at short notice. Sky is a small site, so alienating players that put in most of their volume at micro stakes doing something without consensus is pretty poor imo. Fair point about the spin up tables, not going to dispute your opinion there. Good to see you like a still like a good healthy argument. Edit: you still owe me £20 for that wager you had on Chelski finishing above Arsenal in season 2015/16. Nothing like a tight high stakes poker player ehhh . Posted by ACEGOONER
In an ideal world, yes, it'd be great to get concensus on such decisions, but it's just not possible, I don't ever recall ANY decision made by an online poker site that achieved "concensus" as such. Its the Holy Grail, that one.
And it's perfectly natural that some players see these things differently to the way the Sites do. Players know what they like, & dislike change, but the sites see & know the real numbers. And, in almost every case, its the numbers which are the fuel for decisions.
Comments
From that I extract popularity clearly being the prominent reason, and that only makes sense too because if only the decluttering was an issue then spin-up games would be removed. He mentioned three things: popularity, liquidity and cluttering. A lack of popularity leads to unnecessary cluttering which disrupts liquidity. But of course everything is open to interpretation.
Correct, he didn't say anything about 60nl. I didn't say he mentioned 60nl. I'm simply saying that one of his main defenses of 40nl games is that the player base will drop off to 30nl rather than to 50nl, i.e. he's saying an intermediate stake pulls players from the lower stake while not touching the higher stake, so Sky should keep intermediate stakes because if players are either going to play 40nl or 30nl, well, you'd rather them play 40nl. If this were true then introducing a 60nl game should work by the same principle, i.e. it should attract players from the 50nl player base, which is great right since it's a higher stake, while leaving the 100nl game untouched. I doubt this is how it works like I mentioned in my post, but that was one of his main defenses.
And then to para '40nl is the natural progression from 30nl" really? so again, you want 60nl? 80nl? And then his final point regarding spin-up games I think I mentioned in my earlier post.
Hope this clears things a little.
While you are at it, why not get rid of 10p/20p and 15p/30p and replace with 10p/25p.
Thanks for the reply.
Greg.
At the end of the day, it's the people who play these tables who really should have an input on whether sky keep them or not, and with the greatest of respect I haven't seen you at nl40 for years. I appreciate you are trying to give a balanced view, but I genuinely think sky poker is on the decline in terms of player numbers and liquidity these days. Even I have been flirting with other sites over the last few months.
I suppose this is why we'll have to agree to disagree.
Do they have 40nl games?
And it's perfectly natural that some players see these things differently to the way the Sites do. Players know what they like, & dislike change, but the sites see & know the real numbers. And, in almost every case, its the numbers which are the fuel for decisions.