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.

Discussion - Weighted Contribution Poker Points

123457»

Comments

  • TommyDTommyD Member Posts: 4,389
    edited March 2012
    Not meaning to be pithy and this is a serious point, but if you want a supersoft site with no rakeback I suggest you play a lot more live.
  • simuksimuk Member Posts: 315
    edited March 2012
    In Response to Re: Discussion - Weighted Contribution Poker Points:
    Not meaning to be pithy and this is a serious point, but if you want a supersoft site with no rakeback I suggest you play a lot more live.
    Posted by TommyD
    Super soft indeed but the rake live is so high I doubt many would even find it possible to turn a profit!
  • huuuuumehuuuuume Member Posts: 569
    edited March 2012
    In Response to Re: Discussion - Weighted Contribution Poker Points:
    theres 2 types on players, Type 'A' the 'Reg' and Type 'B' the recreational player/fish, and each have different needs, and for good 'liquidity' - a poker site business that is profitable/growing u need plenty of regs and a steady supply of recreational players Type 'A' is the reg, and his needs are fairly basic *steady supply of Type 'B' players *motivational bonuses (to drive rake generation) - such as C4P, the greater the incentive the more u are likely to play Type 'B' is the fish, and they need *Value for money *An enjoyable poker experiencePosted by sikas
    The idea that there are only two types of player on this site is ridiculous and far too simplistic. 

    while its yet to be seen whether the change to weighted distribution has a negative effect on the rakeback for high volume players i think you are vastly overestimating how many high volume players there are on the site. 

    the vast vast majority of this site is recreational players and although regs will most likely complain loudest and understand the changes the greatest it doesnt mean that it is in sky's best interests to leave things as they are.

    to remove the worries about rake disappearing with recreational players who don't reach the 500 point minimum sky should give cash for points regardless of how few points and how little cash.  i know people who would still be encouraged by even the smallest amount of money going back into their accounts to keep playing and we all seem to agree that we want these people playing as often as possible
  • TommyDTommyD Member Posts: 4,389
    edited March 2012
    In Response to Re: Discussion - Weighted Contribution Poker Points:
    In Response to Re: Discussion - Weighted Contribution Poker Points : Super soft indeed but the rake live is so high I doubt many would even find it possible to turn a profit!
    Posted by simuk
    There are still a few places with high but doable rake (5% with a lowish cap).  Also there are still a few places that have sessions instead of rake (avoid anywhere that has sessions and a rake, which IIRC is France).  Plus if you find the right place they are extremely soft.  And if all that fails, learn mixed games.  I really have to get a live roll together and actually play more live instead of just use it as a fun night out every now and again.


    Anyway I digress.  Which regard to the earlier comments that Recs don't know what rakeback is, here's my retort.  It's all about psychology.  If someone joins this site they will at least watch one live show at some point early on.  C4P is spammed there for the new player/rec player.  If somehow this fails we get an email every time C4P is shipped.  I don't know about you but when I get free money I'm not expecting, this makes me happy.  And I look where it's come from, and normally want more.

    Plus we've got the widget now.  I very much doubt any users will be unaware of rakeback/C4P for longer than a month.

    For a rec or depositing player:

    Free money = happy = less likely to change sites = keep depositing.

    Personally I'd be giving any regular depositor a big birthday bonus as well.  And maybe a golf day.
  • sikassikas Member Posts: 857
    edited March 2012
    In Response to Re: Discussion - Weighted Contribution Poker Points:
    Not meaning to be pithy and this is a serious point, but if you want a supersoft site with no rakeback I suggest you play a lot more live.
    Posted by TommyD
    fwiw....
    i done a stint of 'live grinding' in January for like 2 weeks, went 5-6 nights a week, was pretty easy money, made a fair bit but live can be ever so more painful tho, 1 hand = 5 mins no joke, its even worse on a fri/sat when drunks are playing taking 10 mins to muck their hand, online i can easily fold 25-30 hands in a row, thats sitting folding for 2+hours, hate to think what a 5-10k hand breakeven stretch mite be like, that'd b 6 months!
  • pilgrim07pilgrim07 Member Posts: 232
    edited March 2012
    In Response to Re: Discussion - Weighted Contribution Poker Points:
    In Response to Re: Discussion - Weighted Contribution Poker Points : The idea that there are only two types of player on this site is ridiculous and far too simplistic.  while its yet to be seen whether the change to weighted distribution has a negative effect on the rakeback for high volume players i think you are vastly overestimating how many high volume players there are on the site.  the vast vast majority of this site is recreational players and although regs will most likely complain loudest and understand the changes the greatest it doesnt mean that it is in sky's best interests to leave things as they are. to remove the worries about rake disappearing with recreational players who don't reach the 500 point minimum sky should give cash for points regardless of how few points and how little cash.  i know people who would still be encouraged by even the smallest amount of money going back into their accounts to keep playing and we all seem to agree that we want these people playing as often as possible
    Posted by huuuuume
    +1    The recent halving of points for NL4 players was a retrograde step IMO. If there has to be a threshold, it should be considerably lower.
  • sikassikas Member Posts: 857
    edited March 2012
    In Response to Re: Discussion - Weighted Contribution Poker Points:
    In Response to Re: Discussion - Weighted Contribution Poker Points : The idea that there are only two types of player on this site is ridiculous and far too simplistic.  while its yet to be seen whether the change to weighted distribution has a negative effect on the rakeback for high volume players i think you are vastly overestimating how many high volume players there are on the site.  the vast vast majority of this site is recreational players and although regs will most likely complain loudest and understand the changes the greatest it doesnt mean that it is in sky's best interests to leave things as they are. to remove the worries about rake disappearing with recreational players who don't reach the 500 point minimum sky should give cash for points regardless of how few points and how little cash.  i know people who would still be encouraged by even the smallest amount of money going back into their accounts to keep playing and we all seem to agree that we want these people playing as often as possible
    Posted by huuuuume

    +1

  • GreekWayGreekWay Member Posts: 462
    edited September 2012
    Any update on the above matter?

    Any more thoughts from the big boys?
Sign In or Register to comment.