personaly i dont think the standard is any worse or any better why would it be you have bad players good players and improving players that try and learn about the game. The majority of times its bad players which is what i want generaly but unfortunately they do get very lucky and are sometimes hard to play as they do not know the value of betting amounts so are hard to read when you put a decent bet down to thin the field and are the ones that anoy you the most when they win through sheer luck. That said i still want these kind of players as in the long run they make me money and i play to trap them and make a lot of notes against them and win more often. So i have voted what standards. Cos in this game it aint gonna change and i dont think it ever will. If everyone got better then surley it wouldnt go in my favour!
one thing i will add that i do see a lot of and that is forum players getting better that is because we are the ones that love this game and love talking about it, We improve because we learn from each other and give each other advise which in my opinion is priceless.
If all the yes votes to standards improving are referring to all the rag ace shoves or worse the calls that keep hitting then yes standards are going through the roof. And it would appear if you are chipleader and have rag ace you are god!
I think there are a lot of good regs on sky but in general I think the standard of play is pretty poor compared to other sites. I think it is the fact that both sky bet and sky vegas get more custom than sky poker and will therfore attract a lot of 'spin it up' rec players.
i think some players are improving their game and others are just plodding along as they were.. playing the rag A or even rag K. and there are alot of (be polite) players who need to learn that 10-2 is not a good hand unless u r doyle..
Hypothetically, it would be a good thing - a wonderful thing - if the standards here were low, yes?
We, as players, could all win loads of money & retire in 12 months.
As that is not working, & most of us still have to go to work to pay for the weekly shop, we can safely assume the standard is not as bad as many seem to wish it were. Or we are not as good as we think we are, Heaven forbid.
What the thread is really about, is do we wish to pit our skills, & money, against lesser players than ourselves, or better players than ourselves?
Rhetorical, really, as there can only ever be one answer to that!
Hypothetically, it would be a good thing - a wonderful thing - if the standards here were low, yes? We, as players, could all win loads of money & retire in 12 months. As that is not working, & most of us still have to go to work to pay for the weekly shop, we can safely assume the standard is not as bad as many seem to wish it were. Or we are not as good as we think we are, Heaven forbid. What the thread is really about, is do we wish to pit our skills, & money, against lesser players than ourselves, or better players than ourselves? Rhetorical, really, as there can only ever be one answer to that! Posted by Tikay10
I'd argue there are 2 answers to that. 1. Lesser players for money 2. Better players for matchsticks.
In my opinion the standard of play has risen in my regular games over the last couple of years (low stakes daytime MTTs).
I also play on 2 other well known international sites. I consider the standard at one (similar buy-ins obv) to be roughly equal to Sky, I consider the standard on the other to be noticeably lower than here on Sky.
I'd prefer to play against others who think they're better than me, and who are fundimentally unlucky people (and are prepared to believe with lots and lots of money) . . . .
In Response to Re: standards : Well yes, but prepare yourself for a massive shock. Do you realise there are players who think that playing against bad players is a bad thing? And they COMPLAIN about bad play? That kite ain't ever gonna fly. Move up a few levels, get crushed by the really good players, & the answer will soon become pretty obvious. Assuming we don't go skinto first. There are no shades of grey to this, none whatsoever, this parrot it definitely nailed to it's perch, never to move. Like the kite, it will never fly. It utterly defies logic ever to suggest otherwise. Posted by Tikay10
its taken me a while but im getting there tk and like your way of thinking, maybe the penny has finaly dropped in my vast open void of a brain
I'd prefer to play against others who think they're better than me, and who are fundimentally unlucky people (and are prepared to believe with lots and lots of money) . . . . Posted by Goethe
. . . . whenever I have though, the variance fairy has put in an appearance and spoiled things rotten.
Comments
i think some players are improving their game and others are just plodding along as they were.. playing the rag A or even rag K. and there are alot of (be polite) players who need to learn that 10-2 is not a good hand unless u r doyle..
Hypothetically, it would be a good thing - a wonderful thing - if the standards here were low, yes?
We, as players, could all win loads of money & retire in 12 months.
As that is not working, & most of us still have to go to work to pay for the weekly shop, we can safely assume the standard is not as bad as many seem to wish it were. Or we are not as good as we think we are, Heaven forbid.
What the thread is really about, is do we wish to pit our skills, & money, against lesser players than ourselves, or better players than ourselves?
Rhetorical, really, as there can only ever be one answer to that!
1. Lesser players for money
2. Better players for matchsticks.
Do you realise there are players who think that playing against bad players is a bad thing? And they COMPLAIN about bad play?
That kite ain't ever gonna fly.
Move up a few levels, get crushed by the really good players, & the answer will soon become pretty obvious. Assuming we don't go skinto first.
There are no shades of grey to this, none whatsoever, this parrot it definitely nailed to it's perch, never to move. Like the kite, it will never fly.
It utterly defies logic ever to suggest otherwise.
I also play on 2 other well known international sites. I consider the standard at one (similar buy-ins obv) to be roughly equal to Sky, I consider the standard on the other to be noticeably lower than here on Sky.