Now the Sunday Major is IMO a successful tournament. If you look at the player pool, a number of the runners only play that event on Sky as they are either cash players or they add Sky in to the Sunday grind. If that is reduced to a £55 they wouldn't bother.
The Major competes very well against similar tournies on similar sized networks.
It keeps those guys coming back for the UKOPS weeks, and also the SkyBet for their sports action too.
The buy ins for the mains over the full week are £337, this includes rakes, and entry, rebuy, and add on, on Friday. Do you think this could be spread in a better way over the 7 nights than it is currently.
Now the Sunday Major is IMO a successful tournament. If you look at the player pool, a number of the runners only play that event on Sky as they are either cash players or they add Sky in to the Sunday grind. If that is reduced to a £55 they wouldn't bother.
I was thinking in terms of a £50 rebuy. If you had a cheap main in the week, like £11, wouldn't the players enter a 6k bounty hunter like the 7.30 on Sunday, in addition?
1. “Be careful what you wish for”. The main reason I like playing on Sky and particularly the MTT schedule is that the field sizes and the structures really suit me as a recreational player. Yes I can play on other sites with huge guarantees and fields that mean I may get a Top 10 finish once in a blue moon and require me to stay up till the early hours to bust in 13th for the equivalent of double my buy in. Sky really has the closest experience to playing live with great camaraderie and a close knit feel to it meaning you get to play the same opponents on a regular basis. What I do not want is for SkyPoker to become another one of those faceless sites where the fun side disappears and all anyone worries about is BB/100 or ROI. At the moment SkyPoker definitely has a uniqueness within the market and long may that survive.
2. As others have said I do think there is a gap in the MTT schedule in the early evening. I think the 6:30pm £1k is a nice little tourney but do wonder if there is room for a £15 tourney somewhere in the following hour. I do find it a bit strange how we have £5, £7, £10, £20 and £30 buy ins but not £15. I also wonder if the Mini should start before the Main rather than after it, as the Mini is more aimed at the true recreational player would it not make more sense for it to have an earlier start and therefore an earlier finish. My only other suggestion would be for Satellites to give you a ticket to spend when you choose rather than registering into a specific tournament.
At the very least, can the 11:30 be made into a £11 Bounty Hunter with a normal structure, which allows for a longer late reg, even if the guarantee was £750.
It used to be a £1k Gtee, Normal Structure Bounty Hunter
At the very least, can the 11:30 be made into a £11 Bounty Hunter with a normal structure, which allows for a longer late reg, even if the guarantee was £750.
It used to be a £1k Gtee, Normal Structure Bounty Hunter
As with all feedback, I will pass this up to the office.
Please understand that if they don't implement it, it does not mean it has been ignored.
Posting here but some parts crossover to the "Now what do we do" thread. Apologies for turning into Marky!
I am all for trying things and forum is a great way of engaging and seeing if there is any ideas that seem popular. There are often the same ideas that appear on the forum every now and again and these have been tried (and if it is an MTT related one I most likely played it to try and help it work). Lots of these ideas don't work on sky though, they have been suggested and tried and failed. To make a new MTT work you need a decent amount of rec players to play it.
There are a core number of players who will play pretty much any tournament sky put on over a certain buy in (this buy in level will vary from player to player). If you dont have enough recs in that game then you have regs playing regs and the worse regs will drop out of the game as they will be playing a hard game and most likely to losing in that game and then you suffer overlay and before long the game dies. This is what has happened in some games sky has tried over the years.
So when people come up with suggestions that have been tried and failed of course the people that have seen these ideas not work will say so. I don't know the % of people that post on the forum compared to those that play on sky is but it is relatively low so an idea can seem popular on here but it doesn't mean it will work.
Also, suggestions have to work within the poker ecology on here. This is an MTT thread so people are obviously seeing things from an MTT perspective but we don't know if the people not playing many MTTs are then playing other poker related games on sky or using other products on sky. While the MTT players will want them to play as many MTTs as possible I doubt sky overly care whether they play another MTT or play a DYM and they would prefer them to play a spin up table. Also, some ideas just aren't possible with the software, like tournament tokens.
Some players want massive guarantee games, some want smaller field games. Neither is right or wrong just different horses for courses. With guarantees and player numbers it is a tricky balancing act. Some players are attracted to bigger guarantees and some wont play a game if the guarantee is too low
There is a balancing act between high guarantees and overlay. Sky have the data so it is easy for people to say tournaments always met the guarantee but I doubt sky would randomly reduce guarantees, it is going to have been done with logic behind it and probably because it wasn't meeting the guarantee. Also just because you want a certain structure/game type even if lots of people on the forum agree doesn't mean that the majority of players agree as those that frequent the forum represents a small amount of the overall player base.
In terms of the slot which all can agree is light, I don't know whether some other games may have to be moved/adjusted to ensure you have varying buy in levels as you go along.
What a wonderful post. One of those rare posts that are worth reading twice, just to emphasise it's completeness.
It's really pretty sad that folks suggest Sky Poker don't listen to their players & ignore feedback. No site engages with it's players better, & that's partly why we have a Forum.
And yes, a lot of folks do have a chunter, but that does not necessarily mean the majority are dissatisfied, as was stated yesterday. Pleasing poker players, whilst keeping the Business healthy & viable is an amazingly difficult trick.
The more feedback, the better, imo, but the players need to give a little credit to The Business, it is not run by fools, in the same way as The Business respects & listens to its players. It's a 2 way street.
Every single piece of feedback finds its way to the Office, & is considered. And if something is not implemented, there's a reason. Always.
The thread is about MTT's, but we all need to remember that over 80% of site revenues comes from other formats - Cash & SNG's. All three formats need to be viewed in one big picture, & MTT's are not viewed in isolation by The Business.
1. “Be careful what you wish for”. The main reason I like playing on Sky and particularly the MTT schedule is that the field sizes and the structures really suit me as a recreational player. Yes I can play on other sites with huge guarantees and fields that mean I may get a Top 10 finish once in a blue moon and require me to stay up till the early hours to bust in 13th for the equivalent of double my buy in. Sky really has the closest experience to playing live with great camaraderie and a close knit feel to it meaning you get to play the same opponents on a regular basis. What I do not want is for SkyPoker to become another one of those faceless sites where the fun side disappears and all anyone worries about is BB/100 or ROI. At the moment SkyPoker definitely has a uniqueness within the market and long may that survive.
2. As others have said I do think there is a gap in the MTT schedule in the early evening. I think the 6:30pm £1k is a nice little tourney but do wonder if there is room for a £15 tourney somewhere in the following hour. I do find it a bit strange how we have £5, £7, £10, £20 and £30 buy ins but not £15. I also wonder if the Mini should start before the Main rather than after it, as the Mini is more aimed at the true recreational player would it not make more sense for it to have an earlier start and therefore an earlier finish. My only other suggestion would be for Satellites to give you a ticket to spend when you choose rather than registering into a specific tournament.
The highlighted part is spot on, though nobody else thought to mention or refer to it.
Whilst the Big Boys deserve looking after, we must never forget the Little Guys who are the backbone of this & every other site. They want to log on & play their £3 or £5 MTT, a bit of 2p-4p cash, a £2 or £3 SNG. These are guys playing for some R & R in the evenings, & to them, the Community, the good craic between players, the ability to play some affordable fun poker is what keeps them here.
"Community", in all its forms, is hugely important to Sky Poker, & always will be. Look across the Forum & you'll see any number of Freebies donated each week to Community Comps, Leagues & the like. No other site does this.
On we go, keep the feedback coming, but please, let's keep it real. The Site does get things wrong sometimes, no doubt about it. Whisper it quietly, but so do the players, & not all feedback makes sense.
If Sky changed the mtt schedule tomorrow, and half the players immediately disappeared, then you would probably say big mistake, and revert back to what it previously was, the following day.
You would be thinking that the players don't like the new schedule.
Yet if you look at the actual figures on the 25 tourneys Aussie covers every day. Over 40,000 unique players last year, who on average played 25 games in total, over 14 days throughout the year, (on average). The fact that less than 5% of the total played, (on average) each day, means that over 95% didn't. Yet nobody seems to think there is anything wrong with the schedule.
Every suggestion seems to be greeted with, yes we tried that for 10 mins, when Winstone Churchill was playing on here in 1947, and it didn't work then. Maybe none of the suggestions are any good, but surely somebody could come up with some that are.
If Sky changed the mtt schedule tomorrow, and half the players immediately disappeared, then you would probably say big mistake, and revert back to what it previously was, the following day.
You would be thinking that the players don't like the new schedule.
Yet if you look at the actual figures on the 25 tourneys Aussie covers every day. Over 40,000 unique players last year, who on average played 25 games in total, over 14 days throughout the year, (on average). The fact that less than 5% of the total played, (on average) each day, means that over 95% didn't. Yet nobody seems to think there is anything wrong with the schedule.
Every suggestion seems to be greeted with, yes we tried that for 10 mins, when Winstone Churchill was playing on here in 1947, and it didn't work then. Maybe none of the suggestions are any good, but surely somebody could come up with some that are.
The reality is that most of the time people tend to come up with really bad suggestions which are generally based on what that individual wants. Wanting massive guarantees or a suggestion that was tried and failed relatively recently.
Some suggestions are good and have been implemented into the schedule. From the top of my head there was £5r bh, megastack, various plo8 MTTs.
Is lots of recreational players that just 1 table, just play a couple of games a night, have a set amount they deposit each month, play MTTs that Rob doesn't track. Other factors rather than the schedule effects the amount of games they play. If these players play tournaments then play on other parts of skypoker or SB&G then why would sky care that they are not playing more tournaments?
Is lots of recreational players that just 1 table, just play a couple of games a night, have a set amount they deposit each month, play MTTs that Rob doesn't track. Other factors rather than the schedule effects the amount of games they play. If these players play tournaments then play on other parts of skypoker or SB&G then why would sky care that they are not playing more tournaments?
I really like playing on Sky. I like the people that run Sky. They have always treated me more than fairly. I look forward to playing on Sky in the future. However I don't feel I have to defend them at every opportunity. They are more than capable of doing that themselves. On your above comment. The recreational players that play tournaments that Aussie doesn't track, obviously aren't included in his figures, and are in addition to the 40,000 unique players So that is therefore not a factor. However the players that play on Sky, and elsewhere is a factor. The average is obviously made up of people that play loads, and those that play very little. I am surprised that you don't think that the annual average of those players that Aussie tracks is astoundingly low. The average is around 25 games, over 14 days per year. If you took a recreational player that played 2 games per night, 5 nights per week, his contribution to the average would be 500 games over 250 days per year. This would represent almost 20 times what the average is. The reason why Sky would care is that if these players played more often, they would increase their profits, tournament runners, and the prize pools.
I don't defend sky at every opportunity, when I think they are in the wrong I say so and have done numerous times. If I have suggestions for improvements I say so. Your logic just doesn't make sense when you say about recreational players playing 5 nights a week. Obviously some will but most wont. They will have other things to do with their time rather than be playing poker and specifically MTTs, 5 nights a week.
The point about the MTTs that Rob doesn't track was that some people may play more games a night on sky but Rob may only track one of them so I believe they are a factor.
What I said was "If these players play tournaments then play on other parts of skypoker or SB&G then why would sky care that they are not playing more tournaments?" You said "The reason why Sky would care is that if these players played more often, they would increase their profits, tournament runners, and the prize pools." You are looking purely from an MTT perspective which sky wouldn't do as they wont mind if they get their income from any part of SB&G.
Some people are passionate about poker and specifically about MTT poker and want to play loads. Often these will be the ones on the forum discussing things but that isn't the normal skypoker customer.
Matt, I am sorry, but you are completely missing the point. The point is that the 40,000 unique players played a total of 25 mtts each, on average over the whole year. They played on average around 14 different days out of 365. When you consider the number of tourneys, and days that the prolific players play, then the rest are really playing very few to reach that sort of average. The average number of daily players is around 1600. I was not making any claims regarding recreational players, the number of tourneys they play, or the number of days per week that they play. I was merely trying to illustrate that if you played two tourneys per night, 5 nights per week, you would be playing almost 20 times as much as our current average player. I am not sure about what you are trying to say about the player that might play only one of Robs tourneys. If a player plays one of Robs tourneys today, he will figure as a unique player today. If he plays one tomorrow, he will figure again tomorrow. However the average is still the average. The 40,000 play on average 25 tourneys each over the whole year. What about the players that play on Sky, and also elsewhere they must care about them? What is the normal Skypoker customer?
The exact same one that Matt was trying to explain to you....
I thought that one was not the normal player.
Some people are passionate about poker and specifically about MTT poker and want to play loads. Often these will be the ones on the forum discussing things but that isn't the normal skypoker customer.
The point clearly is that if someone was clever enough to tempt some of the 40,000 unique players to play more than two games, on one day, per month on average over the year, then the site could benefit dramatically. This seems a very low figure, and I am sure Sky will be concerned, even if you aren't. If you cant see that an average of 1600 players per day, which represents around 4% of the 40,000, could be improved upon, then I give up. 4% play 96% don't. No point in repeating myself. You can either see it or you cant.
Comments
Do you think this could be spread in a better way over the 7 nights than it is currently.
I was thinking in terms of a £50 rebuy.
If you had a cheap main in the week, like £11, wouldn't the players enter a 6k bounty hunter like the 7.30 on Sunday, in addition?
1. “Be careful what you wish for”. The main reason I like playing on Sky and particularly the MTT schedule is that the field sizes and the structures really suit me as a recreational player. Yes I can play on other sites with huge guarantees and fields that mean I may get a Top 10 finish once in a blue moon and require me to stay up till the early hours to bust in 13th for the equivalent of double my buy in. Sky really has the closest experience to playing live with great camaraderie and a close knit feel to it meaning you get to play the same opponents on a regular basis. What I do not want is for SkyPoker to become another one of those faceless sites where the fun side disappears and all anyone worries about is BB/100 or ROI. At the moment SkyPoker definitely has a uniqueness within the market and long may that survive.
2. As others have said I do think there is a gap in the MTT schedule in the early evening. I think the 6:30pm £1k is a nice little tourney but do wonder if there is room for a £15 tourney somewhere in the following hour. I do find it a bit strange how we have £5, £7, £10, £20 and £30 buy ins but not £15. I also wonder if the Mini should start before the Main rather than after it, as the Mini is more aimed at the true recreational player would it not make more sense for it to have an earlier start and therefore an earlier finish. My only other suggestion would be for Satellites to give you a ticket to spend when you choose rather than registering into a specific tournament.
It used to be a £1k Gtee, Normal Structure Bounty Hunter
As with all feedback, I will pass this up to the office.
Please understand that if they don't implement it, it does not mean it has been ignored.
I am all for trying things and forum is a great way of engaging and seeing if there is any ideas that seem popular. There are often the same ideas that appear on the forum every now and again and these have been tried (and if it is an MTT related one I most likely played it to try and help it work). Lots of these ideas don't work on sky though, they have been suggested and tried and failed. To make a new MTT work you need a decent amount of rec players to play it.
There are a core number of players who will play pretty much any tournament sky put on over a certain buy in (this buy in level will vary from player to player). If you dont have enough recs in that game then you have regs playing regs and the worse regs will drop out of the game as they will be playing a hard game and most likely to losing in that game and then you suffer overlay and before long the game dies. This is what has happened in some games sky has tried over the years.
So when people come up with suggestions that have been tried and failed of course the people that have seen these ideas not work will say so.
I don't know the % of people that post on the forum compared to those that play on sky is but it is relatively low so an idea can seem popular on here but it doesn't mean it will work.
Also, suggestions have to work within the poker ecology on here.
This is an MTT thread so people are obviously seeing things from an MTT perspective but we don't know if the people not playing many MTTs are then playing other poker related games on sky or using other products on sky. While the MTT players will want them to play as many MTTs as possible I doubt sky overly care whether they play another MTT or play a DYM and they would prefer them to play a spin up table.
Also, some ideas just aren't possible with the software, like tournament tokens.
Some players want massive guarantee games, some want smaller field games. Neither is right or wrong just different horses for courses. With guarantees and player numbers it is a tricky balancing act. Some players are attracted to bigger guarantees and some wont play a game if the guarantee is too low
There is a balancing act between high guarantees and overlay. Sky have the data so it is easy for people to say tournaments always met the guarantee but I doubt sky would randomly reduce guarantees, it is going to have been done with logic behind it and probably because it wasn't meeting the guarantee. Also just because you want a certain structure/game type even if lots of people on the forum agree doesn't mean that the majority of players agree as those that frequent the forum represents a small amount of the overall player base.
In terms of the slot which all can agree is light, I don't know whether some other games may have to be moved/adjusted to ensure you have varying buy in levels as you go along.
What a wonderful post. One of those rare posts that are worth reading twice, just to emphasise it's completeness.
It's really pretty sad that folks suggest Sky Poker don't listen to their players & ignore feedback. No site engages with it's players better, & that's partly why we have a Forum.
And yes, a lot of folks do have a chunter, but that does not necessarily mean the majority are dissatisfied, as was stated yesterday. Pleasing poker players, whilst keeping the Business healthy & viable is an amazingly difficult trick.
The more feedback, the better, imo, but the players need to give a little credit to The Business, it is not run by fools, in the same way as The Business respects & listens to its players. It's a 2 way street.
Every single piece of feedback finds its way to the Office, & is considered. And if something is not implemented, there's a reason. Always.
The thread is about MTT's, but we all need to remember that over 80% of site revenues comes from other formats - Cash & SNG's. All three formats need to be viewed in one big picture, & MTT's are not viewed in isolation by The Business.
Whilst the Big Boys deserve looking after, we must never forget the Little Guys who are the backbone of this & every other site. They want to log on & play their £3 or £5 MTT, a bit of 2p-4p cash, a £2 or £3 SNG. These are guys playing for some R & R in the evenings, & to them, the Community, the good craic between players, the ability to play some affordable fun poker is what keeps them here.
"Community", in all its forms, is hugely important to Sky Poker, & always will be. Look across the Forum & you'll see any number of Freebies donated each week to Community Comps, Leagues & the like. No other site does this.
On we go, keep the feedback coming, but please, let's keep it real. The Site does get things wrong sometimes, no doubt about it. Whisper it quietly, but so do the players, & not all feedback makes sense.
Are you sure, I used one yesterday.
I don't understand the software, but the rewards give out vouchers every week.
This is what I actually said.
The amount of suggestions on the forum would imply a level of dissatisfaction with the schedule.
I am not sure that the similarity between the two comments would stand up in court.
I immediately revised the comment to,
Ok maybe I should have said frustrated.
Shouldn't let the facts get in the way of a good story.
You would be thinking that the players don't like the new schedule.
Yet if you look at the actual figures on the 25 tourneys Aussie covers every day.
Over 40,000 unique players last year, who on average played 25 games in total, over 14 days throughout the year, (on average).
The fact that less than 5% of the total played, (on average) each day, means that over 95% didn't.
Yet nobody seems to think there is anything wrong with the schedule.
Every suggestion seems to be greeted with, yes we tried that for 10 mins, when Winstone Churchill was playing on here in 1947, and it didn't work then.
Maybe none of the suggestions are any good, but surely somebody could come up with some that are.
Some suggestions are good and have been implemented into the schedule. From the top of my head there was £5r bh, megastack, various plo8 MTTs.
Is lots of recreational players that just 1 table, just play a couple of games a night, have a set amount they deposit each month, play MTTs that Rob doesn't track. Other factors rather than the schedule effects the amount of games they play. If these players play tournaments then play on other parts of skypoker or SB&G then why would sky care that they are not playing more tournaments?
I really like playing on Sky. I like the people that run Sky. They have always treated me more than fairly. I look forward to playing on Sky in the future. However I don't feel I have to defend them at every opportunity. They are more than capable of doing that themselves.
On your above comment. The recreational players that play tournaments that Aussie doesn't track, obviously aren't included in his figures, and are in addition to the 40,000 unique players So that is therefore not a factor.
However the players that play on Sky, and elsewhere is a factor.
The average is obviously made up of people that play loads, and those that play very little.
I am surprised that you don't think that the annual average of those players that Aussie tracks is astoundingly low.
The average is around 25 games, over 14 days per year.
If you took a recreational player that played 2 games per night, 5 nights per week, his contribution to the average would be 500 games over 250 days per year. This would represent almost 20 times what the average is.
The reason why Sky would care is that if these players played more often, they would increase their profits, tournament runners, and the prize pools.
The point about the MTTs that Rob doesn't track was that some people may play more games a night on sky but Rob may only track one of them so I believe they are a factor.
What I said was "If these players play tournaments then play on other parts of skypoker or SB&G then why would sky care that they are not playing more tournaments?" You said "The reason why Sky would care is that if these players played more often, they would increase their profits, tournament runners, and the prize pools." You are looking purely from an MTT perspective which sky wouldn't do as they wont mind if they get their income from any part of SB&G.
Some people are passionate about poker and specifically about MTT poker and want to play loads. Often these will be the ones on the forum discussing things but that isn't the normal skypoker customer.
The point is that the 40,000 unique players played a total of 25 mtts each, on average over the whole year. They played on average around 14 different days out of 365. When you consider the number of tourneys, and days that the prolific players play, then the rest are really playing very few to reach that sort of average.
The average number of daily players is around 1600.
I was not making any claims regarding recreational players, the number of tourneys they play, or the number of days per week that they play. I was merely trying to illustrate that if you played two tourneys per night, 5 nights per week, you would be playing almost 20 times as much as our current average player.
I am not sure about what you are trying to say about the player that might play only one of Robs tourneys. If a player plays one of Robs tourneys today, he will figure as a unique player today. If he plays one tomorrow, he will figure again tomorrow. However the average is still the average. The 40,000 play on average 25 tourneys each over the whole year.
What about the players that play on Sky, and also elsewhere they must care about them?
What is the normal Skypoker customer?
I thought that one was not the normal player.
Some people are passionate about poker and specifically about MTT poker and want to play loads. Often these will be the ones on the forum discussing things but that isn't the normal skypoker customer.
This seems a very low figure, and I am sure Sky will be concerned, even if you aren't.
If you cant see that an average of 1600 players per day, which represents around 4% of the 40,000, could be improved upon, then I give up.
4% play 96% don't. No point in repeating myself. You can either see it or you cant.