Heads Up tables removed from lobby?

The_Fishhh

£5/10 & £10/20 heads up tables for both holdem and omaha have been completely removed from the lobby with no warning today. There are regular players who like to play these games as well as a decent amoutn of battling between pros for these tables , is there any sort of explanation from sky for the motive of this decision?
thanks

Tikay10

Hi Stranger, how you keeping?

It's a business decision, for a trial period. The results of the trial will be evaluated in due course & then a permanent decision will be made.

The_Fishhh

im excellent thank you, how long is the trial period? there are several recreational players who play exclusively heads up poker who now wont be able to play

Tikay10

Good to hear you are OK.

How long is the trial? No idea, sorry.

The_Fishhh

i was previously worried when i heard stars were buying out sky as they have a reputation for 0 care towards regs and just grabbing as much money as possible and sky have historically been very good towards its players.
Although in truth nowadays its hard to see how we will notice a difference sky or stars.
Im unsure whether this latest move has been put into place by stars or sky.
Ive heard unofficial comments from sky reps saying something along the lines of f**k unlv, the fishhh, jh . This seems to me to be a spiteful knee jerk reaction to jh winning money lately but ive come to expect nothing more from sky these days , sadly.

BarrattG1

Interesting development, I obviously never played those tables anyway, but I feel like the problem has been tackled from the wrong side. If there are worries about the sustainability of games, surely deposit limits in line with means tested income would of been more sensible?

GagginKs

Tikay10 said:

It's a business decision, for a trial period. The results of the trial will be evaluated in due course & then a permanent decision will be made.

Sky was full of action a couple of years ago. Its these decision makers you've got with their genius ideas why the site is a complete ghost town most days now.

Management honestly don't seem to have a clue. If the reason is to 'protect recreational players' then the first thing you want to do is get rid of spin ups. You're basically selling them a more -EV version of roulette and packaging it as poker.

EVs might run closer in spin ups hand to hand, but couple that with frequency of hands compared to standard 6 max or heads up makes spin ups far worse for losing players over time.

Any poker pro (or even person who knows about the game) would make better decisions for Sky Poker than the current management team.

chicknMelt

GagginKs said:

Tikay10 said:

It's a business decision, for a trial period. The results of the trial will be evaluated in due course & then a permanent decision will be made.

Sky was full of action a couple of years ago. Its these decision makers you've got with their genius ideas why the site is a complete ghost town most days now.

Management honestly don't seem to have a clue. If the reason is to 'protect recreational players' then the first thing you want to do is get rid of spin ups. You're basically selling them a more -EV version of roulette and packaging it as poker.

EVs might run closer in spin ups hand to hand, but couple that with frequency of hands compared to standard 6 max or heads up makes spin ups far worse for losing players over time.

Any poker pro (or even person who knows about the game) would make better decisions for Sky Poker than the current management team.

This doesn't make any sense.

There is less skill in 10bb poker than 100bb poker, so less opportunity for fun players to get crushed. Heads up will clearly play more hands per hour than 6max too.

Spins are probably the best (cash) game to play as a fun player, not the worst. Even if the rake is too high in my opinion.

The management team have access to data that you don't. Clearly they are seeing fun players turn up, dump a tonne of money to one person, then never come back. They will lose much quicker at heads up than 6 max because you play much more hands HU.

I don't agree with a quite a few decisions the management team make but I can see the reasoning behind this one. It will be interesting to see how it works. Will the players that only really play heads up just play lower, go elsewhere, or play a different game? If its anything other than go elsewhere, their plan will work.

Also, I'm sure one of the team is an ex pro from the stars supernova days, so you are probably underestimating the level of knowledge they have.

It would of been nice to have warning the tables will go to be fair. Not that I play them.

jimbo66

The bottom line should be that players are allowed to play where they like. Bars don't remove the highest strength drinks because patrons get drunk faster, restaurants don't remove high calorie meals as patrons get fuller quicker.

However I am rational, a business is trying to make as much money as possible, that said as pointed out above just removing the games without any warning is unprofessional.

There are very few poker sites now offering heads up games, the fact sky does is in an asset to all it's patrons.

This is something I will follow closely in the next few weeks and months.

UNLV

Unfortunately Sky is going down the same route as Stars and shifting the higher edge skill games towards the high variance/low edge/higher rake spin ups. Heads up tables not only provide action between competitive regulars but also recreationals trying to expand their game - practice for HU situations in ring games or tournaments etc. I remember starting my poker journey 12 years ago and seeing top cash game regs playing the highest stakes for big money and being excited. Watching a spin up with 6 guys flipping for £20 is extremely dull to watch and gives no one that hope of achieving the 'poker dream'.

Of course I'm biased because I like to play these games, but I do think the decision to just remove them completely very rash from Sky. Why not cut down 1 table at a time to see if it generates more action? Or something along those lines.

I completely understand that Sky doesn't really want winning players, but if you run a proper poker site there will always be players with an edge over their competition and therefore making money. The more these games shift to spin ups the less money anyone can make at the game other than Sky.

If someone from Sky wants to get in touch with me to discuss this change or anything to do with the poker ecology, drop me a message.

UNLV

kapowblamz

It seems to be an industry wide movement. The reasoning must be just to move some $ down the food chain a bit. They obviously see numbers that show HU being too harsh on recs longevity.

mumsie

I looked at the HU lobby last night, it was filled to the brim of 1 person sitting at every table and 1 other person sitting at every other table.

Wasting all that electricity.
Could this have something to do with it?

IrishRose

GagginKs said:

Tikay10 said:

It's a business decision, for a trial period. The results of the trial will be evaluated in due course & then a permanent decision will be made.

Sky was full of action a couple of years ago. Its these decision makers you've got with their genius ideas why the site is a complete ghost town most days now.

Management honestly don't seem to have a clue. If the reason is to 'protect recreational players' then the first thing you want to do is get rid of spin ups. You're basically selling them a more -EV version of roulette and packaging it as poker.

EVs might run closer in spin ups hand to hand, but couple that with frequency of hands compared to standard 6 max or heads up makes spin ups far worse for losing players over time.

Any poker pro (or even person who knows about the game) would make better decisions for Sky Poker than the current management team.

Wow - you really don't like the Sky team in the slightest do you? If I felt that strongly about a poker site and felt it was being run so badly I'd just move sites and give my custom elsewhere.

GagginKs

chicknMelt said:

GagginKs said:

Tikay10 said:

It's a business decision, for a trial period. The results of the trial will be evaluated in due course & then a permanent decision will be made.

Sky was full of action a couple of years ago. Its these decision makers you've got with their genius ideas why the site is a complete ghost town most days now.

Management honestly don't seem to have a clue. If the reason is to 'protect recreational players' then the first thing you want to do is get rid of spin ups. You're basically selling them a more -EV version of roulette and packaging it as poker.

EVs might run closer in spin ups hand to hand, but couple that with frequency of hands compared to standard 6 max or heads up makes spin ups far worse for losing players over time.

Any poker pro (or even person who knows about the game) would make better decisions for Sky Poker than the current management team.

This doesn't make any sense.

There is less skill in 10bb poker than 100bb poker, so less opportunity for fun players to get crushed. Heads up will clearly play more hands per hour than 6max too.

Spins are probably the best (cash) game to play as a fun player, not the worst. Even if the rake is too high in my opinion.

The management team have access to data that you don't. Clearly they are seeing fun players turn up, dump a tonne of money to one person, then never come back. They will lose much quicker at heads up than 6 max because you play much more hands HU.

I don't agree with a quite a few decisions the management team make but I can see the reasoning behind this one. It will be interesting to see how it works. Will the players that only really play heads up just play lower, go elsewhere, or play a different game? If its anything other than go elsewhere, their plan will work.

Also, I'm sure one of the team is an ex pro from the stars supernova days, so you are probably underestimating the level of knowledge they have.

It would of been nice to have warning the tables will go to be fair. Not that I play them.

It makes perfect sense. ‘EVs run closer’ means that that there is less skill. But just because pros have less of an edge doesn’t mean they won’t net more profit. Based on stack depths (and amount of play in them) coupled with number of playable streets in 100bb 6m we can make the very rough assumption that spin ups generate between 3-5x more hands than 100bb 6max tabs do. This means fish have to lose significant less EV in spin ups per hand to make them better for them than 100bb poker. Due to accessibility of correct push/fold ranges we can assume pros are playing very close to perfectly - fish arent. It’s significantly harder for pros to play close to perfectly at 100bb because the amount of variables.... EVs probably don’t even run that much closer tbh.

This isn’t about protecting players at all, about generating more rake in the short term which is damaging the longevity of the site. Ever heard the phrase about sheering sheep?

GagginKs

GagginKs said:

chicknMelt said:

GagginKs said:

Tikay10 said:

It's a business decision, for a trial period. The results of the trial will be evaluated in due course & then a permanent decision will be made.

Sky was full of action a couple of years ago. Its these decision makers you've got with their genius ideas why the site is a complete ghost town most days now.

Management honestly don't seem to have a clue. If the reason is to 'protect recreational players' then the first thing you want to do is get rid of spin ups. You're basically selling them a more -EV version of roulette and packaging it as poker.

EVs might run closer in spin ups hand to hand, but couple that with frequency of hands compared to standard 6 max or heads up makes spin ups far worse for losing players over time.

Any poker pro (or even person who knows about the game) would make better decisions for Sky Poker than the current management team.

This doesn't make any sense.

There is less skill in 10bb poker than 100bb poker, so less opportunity for fun players to get crushed. Heads up will clearly play more hands per hour than 6max too.

Spins are probably the best (cash) game to play as a fun player, not the worst. Even if the rake is too high in my opinion.

The management team have access to data that you don't. Clearly they are seeing fun players turn up, dump a tonne of money to one person, then never come back. They will lose much quicker at heads up than 6 max because you play much more hands HU.

I don't agree with a quite a few decisions the management team make but I can see the reasoning behind this one. It will be interesting to see how it works. Will the players that only really play heads up just play lower, go elsewhere, or play a different game? If its anything other than go elsewhere, their plan will work.

Also, I'm sure one of the team is an ex pro from the stars supernova days, so you are probably underestimating the level of knowledge they have.

It would of been nice to have warning the tables will go to be fair. Not that I play them.

It makes perfect sense. ‘EVs run closer’ means that that there is less skill. But just because pros have less of an edge doesn’t mean they won’t net more profit. Based on stack depths (and amount of play in them) coupled with number of playable streets in 100bb 6m we can make the very rough assumption that spin ups generate between 3-5x more hands than 100bb 6max tabs do. This means fish have to lose significant less EV in spin ups per hand to make them better for them than 100bb poker. Due to accessibility of correct push/fold ranges we can assume pros are playing very close to perfectly - fish arent. It’s significantly harder for pros to play close to perfectly at 100bb because the amount of variables.... EVs probably don’t even run that much closer tbh.

This isn’t about protecting players at all, about generating more rake in the short term which is damaging the longevity of the site. Ever heard the phrase about sheering sheep?

Also, them having access to information I don’t is true to an extent but we can make vey educated assumptions so this isn’t completely true. It’s also very convenient that it’s the case.

It’s fact that since spin ups were introduced the site has slowly died.

GagginKs

IrishRose said:

GagginKs said:

Tikay10 said:

It's a business decision, for a trial period. The results of the trial will be evaluated in due course & then a permanent decision will be made.

Sky was full of action a couple of years ago. Its these decision makers you've got with their genius ideas why the site is a complete ghost town most days now.

Management honestly don't seem to have a clue. If the reason is to 'protect recreational players' then the first thing you want to do is get rid of spin ups. You're basically selling them a more -EV version of roulette and packaging it as poker.

EVs might run closer in spin ups hand to hand, but couple that with frequency of hands compared to standard 6 max or heads up makes spin ups far worse for losing players over time.

Any poker pro (or even person who knows about the game) would make better decisions for Sky Poker than the current management team.

Wow - you really don't like the Sky team in the slightest do you? If I felt that strongly about a poker site and felt it was being run so badly I'd just move sites and give my custom elsewhere.

It’s not about not liking them as people. It’s the fact that a series of their bad decisions have lead to a once thriving poker site (which I enjoy using) becoming a ghost town... this is just the reality of it.

p_blase

I think sometimes the high stakes guys believe the site is for there benefit only. If sky have made a business decision it will be for the benefit of the site i'm sure

GagginKs

No p_blase.... The sole purpose of Sky Poker is to make money for the company behind Sky Poker.

I'm arguing that they are too focused upon short term and have been for some time (since the introduction of spin ups which weirdly enough seemed to coincide with some of the previous Sky Poker team leaving).

And fwiw people who are profitable at the highest stakes are going to be affected more than others on the site. Especially when its only the highest stakes which have been targeted.

JJBinks

I liked UNLV's post purely for the fact he was open to the fact of talking about the situation with the Sky team, but what is annoying is you have high stakes players like bates, groggy, melt and more that win loads from sky but they give BACK to the community by helping players on the forum, spending time helping players trying to improve.
Other players just take chunks from recreational players as much as they can and have never bothered to give back to help the Sky comuinty on here, the only time they come in here and speak is when they have taken a hit to there own hourly rate.

All the high stakes players moaning about how Sky just cares about making money, but its exactly the same as what you guys do, by just taking and not giving anything back to the comuinty in anyway.

I might get hate for this which I'm fine with but it's true.

Itsover4u

JJBinks said:

I liked UNLV's post purely for the fact he was open to the fact of talking about the situation with the Sky team, but what is annoying is you have high stakes players like bates, groggy, melt and more that win loads from sky but they give BACK to the community by helping players on the forum, spending time helping players trying to improve.
Other players just take chunks from recreational players as much as they can and have never bothered to give back to help the Sky comuinty on here, the only time they come in here and speak is when they have taken a hit to there own hourly rate.

All the high stakes players moaning about how Sky just cares about making money, but its exactly the same as what you guys do, by just taking and not giving anything back to the comuinty in anyway.

I might get hate for this which I'm fine with but it's true.

nice post binks

GagginKs

JJBinks said:

I liked UNLV's post purely for the fact he was open to the fact of talking about the situation with the Sky team, but what is annoying is you have high stakes players like bates, groggy, melt and more that win loads from sky but they give BACK to the community by helping players on the forum, spending time helping players trying to improve.
Other players just take chunks from recreational players as much as they can and have never bothered to give back to help the Sky comuinty on here, the only time they come in here and speak is when they have taken a hit to there own hourly rate.

All the high stakes players moaning about how Sky just cares about making money, but its exactly the same as what you guys do, by just taking and not giving anything back to the comuinty in anyway.

I might get hate for this which I'm fine with but it's true.

Everybody would be open to talking with them not just UNLV.

Why would anybody help their competitors in an industry which is tough enough as is. FWIW there is so much info regarding poker strategy available and majorly FREE on the internet (simple google search) that anybody relying on the skypoker forum for it obviously doesn't have that much of a desire to get better.

Of course people are going to be upset when they've lost a significant income stream due to third party interference, but this isn't even the point I'm making because realistically this change doesn't affect me as much as it does others.

What I'm saying is that the Sky Poker are removing player options in order to heard people to the (high rake) spin up games.

I appreciate Sky wanting to maximize profits as its obviously a business but what I'm arguing (and with good reasoning) is that driving people towards these fast paced / high rake games is damaging the longevity of the site. The players (especially those who profit) care about the success of Sky Poker as much as Sky do themselves.

I really would think that people operating the site would understand this, which kinda makes me think that they're only looking to the short term anyway.... It seems to me like there is a reasonable change trying to milk the cash cow (spins) before shutting down.