Why do you take shots at others all the time what is the point? like If I said I failed my exam (not saying I did) you would love to rub it in my face and be like see he doesnt know math and shouldnt be trusted etc it just makes you come over as a nasty person.
Im disappointed that you would think that is something i would do. I find EssexPhil one of the best contributors to my posts, he says what he thinks, i say what i think, but its often constructive... and its always about poker (a shock on here i know).
There is a load whos comments are purely put downs and simply have nothing else to offer. I do remember wishing u luck on your exam and despite u trying to set me up in my personal message inbox, i still had a completely normal conversation with u...
Sometimes EssexPhil will put a lil' old dig in there and i give him one back! Its 50/50 on that one.
I will give you smaller mtt fields means shorter touneys, more opportunity. Players may well have got better on Sky, but i can assure you if they felt games were softer elsewhere, they would be there!
no as both me and arrogant have pointed out the fields on stars are much bigger there are definitely some tourneys which forever reason attract more recs on stars. My sample size is not enough for this to comment for any definitive but the impression I get is there are some tourneys on stars where the standard is worse then here. But if I have a limited bankroll and do not intend on re depositing and cant justify constant deposits until the big win comes in etc, I may choose to play on a site which may be less profitable but have a lot less standard deviation (what people call variance but they are wrong variance is actually the standard deviation squared and what people call variance they actually mean standard deviation) In truth I take occasional shots on stars but play other games then MTTS most of the time.
There is one site where I am 99% sure the standard would be way worse then on sky and that is GG. The reason I wont play on GG never deposited there do not have an account there, is that their have been multiple accusations from various people that they target and ban winning players sometimes accusing them of cheating or implying this and sometimes under the false guise of affordability checks.
Now I want to be absolutely clear here I do not know the real truth this could be nonsense or speculation and I do not know the specific details of any of these stories but there have been numerous people alleging this. If the stories are true it does not matter if I have an income of £50000+ and £200,000 in savings they are failing me on affordability grounds, with plans for sites to share lists of alleged problem gamblers mentioned in the white paper and the potential rules that may come into affect there I could literally be risking my entire future income from online poker by playing there.
I wont take that chance that is why I do not have an account on GG. its not all about profit you also have to factor in risk, risk is a big relevant thing in gambling, or investing.
There was a time when I only played on Party. But since 2008 I have played on more than 1 site.
I usually concentrate my play on 3 sites at a time. The main reason I started playing on Sky (in about 2013) was that I wanted to change 1 of my sites (forget why, I think 1 site had gone busto), and I worked at the same place as @ACEGOONER who recommended it.
That and the fact that I turned £20 into £8,000+ in 2 weeks through some outrageous early luck. The first 2 times I played the Sunday Major, I came 2nd and then 1st
If there was a new soft site, would I play there? Of course. Although, as has been pointed out, sites do not tend to be soft-it is individual MTTs within those sites.
Would I still play on Sky? Yes. I enjoy playing on Sky. I'd probably play less on Party or Stars or some of the i-poker skins. I stopped playing on GG a while ago, simply because they were demanding ridiculous amounts of information. They seem to have a very warped idea of UK regulation.
Doubleme said; There is one site where I am 99% sure the standard would be way worse then on sky and that is GG. The reason I wont play on GG never deposited there do not have an account there, is that their have been multiple accusations
EssexPhil said; If there was a new soft site, would I play there? Of course.
Couldnt the answer to me saying one of the main reasons you play on a site is the standard... be just 'yes' then....
I play almost exclusively on Sky now for a number of reasons:
1. The standard of play is awful up to and including £11 tournaments and 30nl cash. Is the standard lower than other sites linked to bookmakers and casinos? It's close, but Sky doesn't have any decent Eastern European pros making a relatively decent living at the micro stakes. 2. I like that people use the chat box, which rarely happens on other sites. 3. The community and forum helps to keep me loyal, which Tikay and others work hard to maintain. 4. The mtts (when I play them) suit me much better than other sites. The start and finish times are much better than others and the smaller fields massively reduce the variance.
You can beat the freerolls and up to £5.50 on here with a low ROI just by knowing the rules and having some patience. Clearly you can never have negative ROI on freerolls.
Again, the first sentence on point number 1 is the first thing that came to you! If you are here to make money, its the first thing you consider, everything else is just enhancing that choice.
Anyway, it can be safely said that the first rule of ICM, is dont talk about ICM.....
Comments
In truth I take occasional shots on stars but play other games then MTTS most of the time.
There is one site where I am 99% sure the standard would be way worse then on sky and that is GG. The reason I wont play on GG never deposited there do not have an account there, is that their have been multiple accusations from various people that they target and ban winning players sometimes accusing them of cheating or implying this and sometimes under the false guise of affordability checks.
Now I want to be absolutely clear here I do not know the real truth this could be nonsense or speculation and I do not know the specific details of any of these stories but there have been numerous people alleging this. If the stories are true it does not matter if I have an income of £50000+ and £200,000 in savings they are failing me on affordability grounds, with plans for sites to share lists of alleged problem gamblers mentioned in the white paper and the potential rules that may come into affect there I could literally be risking my entire future income from online poker by playing there.
I wont take that chance that is why I do not have an account on GG. its not all about profit you also have to factor in risk, risk is a big relevant thing in gambling, or investing.
I usually concentrate my play on 3 sites at a time. The main reason I started playing on Sky (in about 2013) was that I wanted to change 1 of my sites (forget why, I think 1 site had gone busto), and I worked at the same place as @ACEGOONER who recommended it.
That and the fact that I turned £20 into £8,000+ in 2 weeks through some outrageous early luck. The first 2 times I played the Sunday Major, I came 2nd and then 1st
If there was a new soft site, would I play there? Of course. Although, as has been pointed out, sites do not tend to be soft-it is individual MTTs within those sites.
Would I still play on Sky? Yes. I enjoy playing on Sky. I'd probably play less on Party or Stars or some of the i-poker skins. I stopped playing on GG a while ago, simply because they were demanding ridiculous amounts of information. They seem to have a very warped idea of UK regulation.
There is one site where I am 99% sure the standard would be way worse then on sky and that is GG. The reason I wont play on GG never deposited there do not have an account there, is that their have been multiple accusations
EssexPhil said;
If there was a new soft site, would I play there? Of course.
Couldnt the answer to me saying one of the main reasons you play on a site is the standard... be just 'yes' then....
1. The standard of play is awful up to and including £11 tournaments and 30nl cash. Is the standard lower than other sites linked to bookmakers and casinos? It's close, but Sky doesn't have any decent Eastern European pros making a relatively decent living at the micro stakes.
2. I like that people use the chat box, which rarely happens on other sites.
3. The community and forum helps to keep me loyal, which Tikay and others work hard to maintain.
4. The mtts (when I play them) suit me much better than other sites. The start and finish times are much better than others and the smaller fields massively reduce the variance.
You can beat the freerolls and up to £5.50 on here with a low ROI just by knowing the rules and having some patience. Clearly you can never have negative ROI on freerolls.
Anyway, it can be safely said that the first rule of ICM, is dont talk about ICM.....