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.

wots happened to the 7 at 7

2

Comments

  • MattBatesMattBates Member Posts: 4,118
    Why don't you try asking a normal question in a normal way and maybe you would get a different response.
  • DOHHHHHHHDOHHHHHHH Member Posts: 17,929
    Aren't Buddhists meant to be all chill B)B)
  • ckdckd Member Posts: 1,386
    edited October 2018
    @DOHHHHHHH have you ever seen anger management with Adam sandler ( the Buddhist part )
  • HENDRIK62HENDRIK62 Member Posts: 3,232

    Jeezuz H. ok forget Murdoch i'm sure the present boss holds children's parties ... a BALLOON CLOWN in his spare time...I'm sure he's so skint he has to rush to get more coin and in the process destroy an old favourite-i'm sure there's many who agree but they are not party to 'the usual suspects' so their opinion will remain unknown. Why do the 'usual suspects'all have to disagree with a perfectly normal question and behave like pack rats

    You've had a perfectly normal response, the 7 @ 7 always had 7 min blinds so it hasn't changed, you have an increase in Guarantee and more chips now so effectively its got slightly slower.

    But you then waffled on about money grabbing totally ignoring the facts;

    ''yeah and turbos don't half turbo that £ TURBO MONEY MACHINE. It s the oldest trick in the book =fasterfaster increase prize a smidgeon and watch that money turbo into the coffers.You guys must be deficient if you cant work out that simple equation''

    I assume this is some sort of troll/level but quite honestlly its just boring.
  • hhyftrftdrhhyftrftdr Member Posts: 8,036
    Yeah, trolling is so tired and ancient.
  • zenbudhistzenbudhist Member Posts: 144
    Well we'll see tonight ... mabe see yous at the 'new improved money sponge ' but right now i'm away back under the bridge for a kip.
  • zenbudhistzenbudhist Member Posts: 144
    should of stayed there 55th......after the reg limit was up there were 113 players active
    guarantee up 300quid .....new format and snake oil this way folks
  • chrisdonkbchrisdonkb Member Posts: 133
    Don't do drugs kids
  • zenbudhistzenbudhist Member Posts: 144
    i don't remember 113 players at the START of the old 7, and it was **** difficult field but at least you had a marginally better chance. That was one of my poker ambitions to win the SKY 7 at 7 Now it's a far more difficult prospect, more elusive with all these players in. Still rake it in, spoil the game for the punters as long as you RAKE it in! A DISGRACE!
    You 'usual suspects'; will come up with anything; from statistics, name calling and pathetic attempts at humour to defend a massive corporation against the ordinary punter. You all must be employees, arserimmers, or just plain stupid.
  • zenbudhistzenbudhist Member Posts: 144
    WHO WAS IT?
  • zenbudhistzenbudhist Member Posts: 144
    edited October 2018
    'SR23SR23 Posts: 714Member
    October 8
    Toffeeandy said:
    It's the same format as normal, except:

    1) The starting stack has increased from 2000 to 3000
    2) The late reg has been extended from 35 minutes to 42 minutes
    3) The guarantee has increased from £700 to £1000

    The 7-minute blind level is unchanged.

    All positive steps I'd have thought? :*'



    All positive steps for SKY .... how much rake did they take at last nights game 113 still in... after 42 minutes of knockouts 70 p a head guarantee increase of 300, quite a haul i would imagine. Poker is supposed to be about enjoyment as well as profit ...'STOP when the fun stops.' Well, guess wot i had FUN playing the 7 at 7 , it was a little quirky and hard and ENJOYABLE
    How much was the rake for last nights turbo compared to the rake at the last 7 at 7 played. Come on TIkAY what's the numbers they're bound to be accessible if not to you, to some other employee of this wonderful corporation.
    CAHMON FIGURES !
  • tomgooduntomgoodun Member Posts: 3,756
    Hi Zen.
    This 113 you quote, what number of players would you say is the right amount for you to play against?
    Would you agree that all poker sites have rake ( some more percentage than others) and that’s what pays the running of the sites?
    Would it be best if less players played hence lower guarantees?
    Do you think a guarantee is the final prize pool however many players ?
  • BlackpumaBlackpuma Member Posts: 203
    Just a big LOL
  • Sky__JamesSky__James Member Posts: 451

    WHO WAS IT?

    I was the one who made the "disgraceful" decision to increase the guarantee and rename the 7 at 7 during the Podium Series. You will be pleased to hear I will revert back to the old name after this promo but I can't guarantee I will reduce the guarantee. Apologies
  • zenbudhistzenbudhist Member Posts: 144
    Blackpuma said:

    Just a big LOL

    Obviously plain stupid not adverse to a good rimming as well.
  • zenbudhistzenbudhist Member Posts: 144
    tomgoodun said:

    Hi Zen.
    This 113 you quote, what number of players would you say is the right amount for you to play against?
    Would you agree that all poker sites have rake ( some more percentage than others) and that’s what pays the running of the sites?
    Would it be best if less players played hence lower guarantees?
    Do you think a guarantee is the final prize pool however many players ?

    113 was the number left at the end of the increased late reg, who knows who'd been knocked out and replaced previously the old 7 at 7 had nothing like these numbers
  • MattBatesMattBates Member Posts: 4,118
    Cant work out if you are bad trolling as you have issue in one thread with guarantee going down and in another with guarantee going up.
  • zenbudhistzenbudhist Member Posts: 144

    WHO WAS IT?

    I was the one who made the "disgraceful" decision to increase the guarantee and rename the 7 at 7 during the Podium Series. You will be pleased to hear I will revert back to the old name after this promo but I can't guarantee I will reduce the guarantee. Apologies
    SR23SR23 Posts: 714Member
    October 8
    How much was the rake for last nights turbo compared to the rake at the last 7 at 7 played. Come on SkyJAMES what's the numbers they're bound to be accessible if not to you, to some other employee of this wonderful corporation.
    CAHMON FIGURES !
  • zenbudhistzenbudhist Member Posts: 144
    You're very proud of your increased guarantee, and probably rubbing yourself with glee at the increased profit. YOU CANT CALL A GAME 7 AT 7 if the guarantee is not 700!
    And that's from an employee advocating the plain stupid.

    Where's the figures I requested?
  • SR23SR23 Member Posts: 1,228

    i don't remember 113 players at the START of the old 7, and it was **** difficult field but at least you had a marginally better chance. That was one of my poker ambitions to win the SKY 7 at 7 Now it's a far more difficult prospect, more elusive with all these players in. Still rake it in, spoil the game for the punters as long as you RAKE it in! A DISGRACE!
    You 'usual suspects'; will come up with anything; from statistics, name calling and pathetic attempts at humour to defend a massive corporation against the ordinary punter. You all must be employees, arserimmers, or just plain stupid.

    To still be this angry at 7:50am about an increase in the guarantee for a tournament is quite a feat. Good rant, would read again.
Sign In or Register to comment.