can tell who ever runs it not really botherd about it
Or as you have been told, sky have tried lots of non bh games and the numbers have proved they are not as popular. I do appreciate its what you would like but that isn't a compelling argument for sky to change. If your ideas were really good then I would of thought you would of got a lot of people agreeing with you.
+1 this is a really great and innovative idea, well done Fender36. This idea has my full support. I have a feeling it is already compitable with sky software too, how convenient!
played few site ppl got to see value or they wont enter it
You could put a £500 bounty hunter and £1000 non bounty hunter side by side with the same entry fee, the bounty hunter is still gonna get more entries, to win cash in a non bounty hunter they have to try and pass bubble but in a bounty hunter they can win cash with just 1 hand by winning a bounty prize. These people who build the GTD are playing for fun so they play what ever tournament is fastest at getting cash.
Hi coolhanal...I thought I'd see what other people have to say before I replied but basically I would like to say that the idea that the people who run Sky Poker don't care is just quite mean and rude. The implication that they are deliberately putting on events that people don't like, (bounty hunters), rather than things that would be way more popular, (freezeouts), because they are not good at running a poker site is just a bit silly. Do you really believe that Sky Poker employ people who are deliberately attempting to sabotage the site by running events that they don't think will be popular? Isn't it more likely that having tried all different types of event they have seen that the bounty hunters are easily the most popular and decided to have more of those?
Personally, I prefer deep stacks and freezeouts to bounty hunters but accept I'm in the minority. However I still find games that I enjoy and make the most of what is available on the site. If you're not happy with the type of tourneys on offer, then it might be better to play your poker elsewhere. At the end of the day, Sky have to cater for the needs of their customers and the majority of users like the bounty hunters more than other formats, hence why they dominate the schedule.
With all that said, I would like to see a couple more non-bounty hunters added to the daily schedule (e.g a £5/£11 Deep Stack). Also, does anyone know if there is a reason why the £5.50 Mega Stack only runs on Fridays and Saturdays?
never said don't run bounty games but put few more games in run more games at decent pay out tho out the night just make buy ins bout 5 quid or 10 pounds just seem have good game at 8 none before or many after it
Reading your posts and making sense of them is quite hard. Sky have tried different game formats and what the players want are B/H's. They always fill up quickest for the reasons explained by a variety of people
I still don't really understand this thread coolhanal. It seems that in an ideal world you would like the buy ins to be £5 or £10 and think that £50 is way too much and I totally agree that it would be crazy to have all tournaments at even £20 and above when the average buy-in per customer is less than that. Looking at the schedule though most buy-ins are less than £20. You would also like that the guarantees and pay-outs be higher. Again I can understand that whenever we are lucky enough to win a tournament we would like the first prize to be more and I'm sure Sky Poker would be delighted if all tournaments got twice as many players and had twice the first prize. If they did reduce the buy-in of the few tournaments that are currently a £50 buy-in to £5 then they would need ten times as many players to get the same prize pool and twenty times to double it so I don't think that will really work...surely it's better for the people that prefer £50 tournaments tro play them and those that want £5 tournaments to play them? I can't really see why having one would mean you can't have the other.
I do understand the point that freezeouts have a bigger first prize than bounty hunters as you obviously don't give out half the money in bounties but it wouldn't immediately mean you would get double the prize as we can easily see that bounty hunters are much more popular.
It's definitely tricky to get the balance right and to keep everyone totally happy at all times when making the schedule for a poker site. I guess if you don't believe that to be true then the other coinclusion is that nobody cares and the people running it are secretly hoping it fails. They haven't managed it yet.
In large part, Sky Poker is driven by its customers. Lots of people (me included) have said previously that we wish there were less Bounty Hunters. There was a time when Sky was the only site that had anything like this many (although other sites now have far more than they used to).
Sky Poker exists for lots of reasons. But the number 1 reason has to be to make money. Sky Poker's customers, rightly or wrongly, flock to Bounty Hunters. So Sky follows the money. Simples.
"Guarantees" are not relevant, other than in the purely short term. It is the number of players ponying up the money that matters. If that is consistently less than any guarantee, the guarantee gets reduced.
Poker players tend to be fairly self-absorbed. In no other industry would so many people, having never run a poker site, be so sure that they could run it better than the people who actually do.
maybe just me I like to play a good few mtt at a time not just 1 I don't want entry games that pay next to noting out for winning it wouldn't even mind few more decent bounty hunter games cos u go out 1 at half 8 not a great amount to play after it
I don't think sky is the right site if you want to be playing bigger field freezeout MTTs. That isn't what the player pool wants on sky. You seem to think its as simple as sky putting on a massive guarantee then players will flock.
I think you might be referring to UKOPS which was a series that sky ran. These series will always attract more numbers for a short period of time but those levels are never sustainable long term.
Sky do occasionally run different games. A couple of years ago they ran a 10K gtd, once a week for four weeks on a Sunday. If memory serves it was £11 entry and a freezeout ( happy to be corrected if not) , think they covered as well.
Over the many years i have played on sky since 2008 they have tried to accommodate all players at all levels and all types of games and even the bigger guarantees like the 2 years they ran the UKPC at Nottingham twice a year with a 1 million guaranteed prize pool ... like any business they have to adapt to what there customer base are buying into and over the years they are supplying the games that keep the players interested in ... i will say most players on sky are recreational players and for me i do not want to be playing a mtt for 15hrs plus like another site ( poker S ) even thou i did come 4th in it out of 4500 only reason i came 4th was because i had to go to work with no sleep ... the simple answer i would give you is if sky is not giving you the games you want to play then look else where to play where they do but remember the grass is not always greener on the other side .. i was once told out of 100% of players in the world only 1% make a living out of poker and even they have big down turns
Comments
Personally, I prefer deep stacks and freezeouts to bounty hunters but accept I'm in the minority. However I still find games that I enjoy and make the most of what is available on the site. If you're not happy with the type of tourneys on offer, then it might be better to play your poker elsewhere. At the end of the day, Sky have to cater for the needs of their customers and the majority of users like the bounty hunters more than other formats, hence why they dominate the schedule.
With all that said, I would like to see a couple more non-bounty hunters added to the daily schedule (e.g a £5/£11 Deep Stack). Also, does anyone know if there is a reason why the £5.50 Mega Stack only runs on Fridays and Saturdays?
Sky have tried different game formats and what the players want are B/H's.
They always fill up quickest for the reasons explained by a variety of people
I do understand the point that freezeouts have a bigger first prize than bounty hunters as you obviously don't give out half the money in bounties but it wouldn't immediately mean you would get double the prize as we can easily see that bounty hunters are much more popular.
It's definitely tricky to get the balance right and to keep everyone totally happy at all times when making the schedule for a poker site. I guess if you don't believe that to be true then the other coinclusion is that nobody cares and the people running it are secretly hoping it fails. They haven't managed it yet.
In large part, Sky Poker is driven by its customers. Lots of people (me included) have said previously that we wish there were less Bounty Hunters. There was a time when Sky was the only site that had anything like this many (although other sites now have far more than they used to).
Sky Poker exists for lots of reasons. But the number 1 reason has to be to make money. Sky Poker's customers, rightly or wrongly, flock to Bounty Hunters. So Sky follows the money. Simples.
"Guarantees" are not relevant, other than in the purely short term. It is the number of players ponying up the money that matters. If that is consistently less than any guarantee, the guarantee gets reduced.
Poker players tend to be fairly self-absorbed. In no other industry would so many people, having never run a poker site, be so sure that they could run it better than the people who actually do.
You seem to think its as simple as sky putting on a massive guarantee then players will flock.
I think you might be referring to UKOPS which was a series that sky ran. These series will always attract more numbers for a short period of time but those levels are never sustainable long term.
However, getting the large end of the payouts isnt easy, you could play for 5 hours to win $3/4 out of a $3k pool.