where do you get this 12pc figure from? Posted by scotty77
I asked the 'Head of Poker' to work it out for me a couple of months ago, he said that's what it worked out at approx. Plus I've seen someone else post elsewhere that theirs worked out about the same.
I remember you saying not long ago on CH865 that the C4P system is one of the best over all the sites. Presuming the 12% figure given to me by the 'Head of Poker' and what that other guy said is correct then it's hardly the greatest - without doubt the worst.
I'm also presuming you're going to tell me otherwise now lol and that it's a lot more than 12%ish (I hope so ), however, from my own personal experience of playing other sites at 25%, 30% and up to 60% I think that 12% isn't far wrong from the C4P money I've received back compared to them.
(Edit: not that I want anyone to play anywhere else obviously)
Tbh though I've not exactly worked anything out from my own amount of playing, more an educated guess. Maybe I'm miles out as I used to play more tables and higher limits, just that I would presume the guy I spoke to on here would be able to get it right lol.
ah ok I did some calculations a while ago and worked the rakeback at my level to be around 40pc then again I think my volume is a tad higher than yours so I'm in a different tier.
In cash, if you limp the sb, bb checks and it goes check/bet/fold on the flop, you get the same amount of C4P as you get if you get stacks in with AA vs KK pre-flop and Sky rakes 5% up to £1.80 (7.5% up to £1.40 @ Micro stakes). Never worked out what this averages out at over a long period and how much % rakeback you get, though.
In STT's and MTT's (with the exception of the main events and Survivor), you get 1 C4P for every 10p raked, and can get up to 6.5p back per point if you get a ridiculous amount of points every month, which is 65% rakeback.
I think it'd actually be possible to get more than 100% rakeback if you got a full 10-handed table, everyone folded every hand, sb limped, bb checks and the sb open folds on the flop, lol. If this happened @ the 10-handed 50NL table, every person would end up losing 5p per 10 hands and gaining 5 (7.5 in Happy Hour) C4P per 10 hands I'm sure you'd be banned if you did that though, lol.
ah ok I did some calculations a while ago and worked the rakeback at my level to be around 40pc then again I think my volume is a tad higher than yours so I'm in a different tier. Posted by scotty77
This is one of the problems with Sky IMO, the high C4P levels are very generous, up to 65% if you got 50k from DYMs + MTTs
However a casual player getting say 500 points a month gets a mere 8% back if they played DYMs and MTTs, and probably only 4 or 5% if they got those points from very low stakes games (With the extortiionate rake).
IMO they really need to even it out a bit, it's too exponential
Tbh my play can vary dramatically each month depending on how much/what shifts I'm working. I'm totally guessing at averaging about 4k/5k points p.m. (Last 8 months or so my missus has been in and out of work due to redundancies so I've played more when she wasn't getting paid).
I made 'Priority Club' once when I got about 11,500k points and got either £175/£200 back, can't remember which. I played loads and loads that month. If that had been at £2/5, £1/2 or even £.50/£1 that I used to play I would've been looking at over £2k back.
I played £.50/£1 for 3 years before Sky and probably AVERAGED about (edit after checking old spreadsheet) £200 per WEEK, although I did play a lot more then (wench tied me down now haha). The days of hammering it and getting £500+ cakeback p.w. are long gone now though lol.
(Hope I'm allowed to say this here? No probs if it's removed)
For the sake of clarity & balance, & although I try to avoid threads like this, I must comment here.
"....I asked the 'Head of Poker' to work it out for me a couple of months ago, he said that's what it worked out at approx...."
"....just that I would presume the guy I spoke to on here would be able to get it right lol....."
"Lol" indeed!
I think there may be a misunderstanding on your part here, though I hasten to add, I'm sure it is wholly unintentional.
"Rakeback" is not an expression anyone in the business at Sky Poker ever use, or have ever used, we approach it very differently, & quite deliberately.
Nor can the C4P at Sky Poker be compared with rakeback on other sites, as the system does not work like that, again, by design, there is no "accurate figure", as it "depends".
As the comments attributed to our Head of Poker seemed so unlikely, I spoke with him this morning, & he assures me that a conversation along the suggested lines did not take place, & could not have taken place for the reasons I have suggested. I'm quite sure you had a convo with him, if you say so, but he would never have replied along the lines you suggest.
You can, of course, get all sorts of rakeback at other Online Poker Sites, but Sky Poker do things their own way, just as, say, Pokerstars (another site that does not offer "rakeback") do. Both sites report much-increased traffic, whilst almost every other site is seeing rapidly declining traffic & market share.
I was wondering if anybody uses these rakeback sites? Sounds almost too good to be true Posted by slocke
When it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.....
There is a great deal more to Online Poker sites than rakeback!
Every site offers different things to players, & Sky Poker will continue to offer many USP's, some of which no other poker site on earth offer. We are happy with the balance, &, it seems, so are our players, judging by their ever increasing numbers, which must be the ultimate litmus test.
In Response to Poker Rakeback : When it sounds too good to be true, it usually is..... There is a great deal more to Online Poker sites than rakeback! Every site offers different things to players, & Sky Poker will continue to offer many USP's, some of which no other poker site on earth offer. We are happy with the balance, &, it seems, so are our players, judging by their ever increasing numbers, which must be the ultimate litmus test. Posted by Tikay10
There are many sites out there that offer 60 percent rakeback plus to players, regardless of how much they play. Ive received this. Usually they are small sites, which are part of a large network.
But sky is better then these sites in other ways, even if it doesnt give as much rakeback. What I dont like about sky is that it doesnt show what rakeback Im getting and I dont know how to figure it out.
In Response to Re: Poker Rakeback : There are many sites out there that offer 60 percent rakeback plus to players, regardless of how much they play. Ive received this. Usually they are small sites, which are part of a large network. But sky is better then these sites in other ways, even if it doesnt give as much rakeback. What I dont like about sky is that it doesnt show what rakeback Im getting and I dont know how to figure it out. Posted by Spad3s
Nail & head. Sites on networks all offer, essentially, the identical product, which is why they try to incentivise via rakeback. And why the networks, without exception, are all losing traffic rapidly. Official traffic stats confirm that.
The Sky Poker Cash 4 Points details are clearly outlined HERE
I would, however, save you time by suggesting that there is no point trying to come up with a precise & comparable %, because the system does not work that way - there is no valid comparision. I've been asked the question so many times, & my reply is always the same - its like trying to compare apples & pears.
Is PokerScout accurate, which shows poker networks like ipoker and 888 having a cash player traffic peak as 7000. As apposed to sky which peaks at 700.
Fair enough that sky is growing, but seems unfair to put out facts about other networks without backing them up with some info.
In Response to Re: Poker Rakeback: [QUOTE]Is there an official place you can lookup stats? Is PokerScout accurate, which shows poker networks like ipoker and 888 having a cash player traffic peak as 7000. As apposed to sky which peaks at 700. Posted by Spad3s
Depends which stats, & if you chose to believe them.
Whilst I can confirm that both the 888 & i-Poker networks are bigger than Sky Poker, I can also confirm - officially - that those numbers are wrong. You only have to see how many players are on Sky Poker at peak times to verify that.
In Response to Re: Poker Rakeback : Nail & head. Sites on networks all offer, essentially, the identical product, which is why they try to incentivise via rakeback. And why the networks, without exception , are all losing traffic rapidly. Official traffic stats confirm that. Posted by Tikay10
Hey Tikay,
Would be interested in seeing theofficial traffic stats that back this up. Any stats I can find show big networks like ipoker and 888 with steady traffic for last 6 months.
In Response to Re: Poker Rakeback : Hey Tikay, Would be interested in seeing the official traffic stats that back this up. Any stats I can find show big networks like ipoker and 888 with steady traffic for last 6 months. Posted by Spad3s
google is your friend, or 2+2, it's not a secret.
I believe i-poker is down around 30% y-o-y, give or take a bit. 888, since getting in bed with WSOP, have fared better. i-Poker, of course, is a network, comprising scores of little sites.
It matters not, big or small. Players have the choice where they play, that's the beauty of the business.
In Response to Re: Poker Rakeback : google is your friend, or 2+2, it's not a secret. I believe i-poker is down around 30% y-o-y, give or take a bit. 888, since getting in bed with WSOP, have fared better. i-Poker, of course, is a network, comprising scores of little sites. It matters not, big or small. Players have the choice where they play, that's the beauty of the business. Posted by Tikay10
I wouldnt believe everything you read on 2plus2 Tikay. Unless its about poker strategy, they are always right there.
Comments
I remember you saying not long ago on CH865 that the C4P system is one of the best over all the sites. Presuming the 12% figure given to me by the 'Head of Poker' and what that other guy said is correct then it's hardly the greatest - without doubt the worst.
I'm also presuming you're going to tell me otherwise now lol and that it's a lot more than 12%ish (I hope so
(Edit: not that I want anyone to play anywhere else obviously)
Tbh though I've not exactly worked anything out from my own amount of playing, more an educated guess. Maybe I'm miles out as I used to play more tables and higher limits, just that I would presume the guy I spoke to on here would be able to get it right lol.
However a casual player getting say 500 points a month gets a mere 8% back if they played DYMs and MTTs, and probably only 4 or 5% if they got those points from very low stakes games (With the extortiionate rake).
IMO they really need to even it out a bit, it's too exponential
I made 'Priority Club' once when I got about 11,500k points and got either £175/£200 back, can't remember which. I played loads and loads that month. If that had been at £2/5, £1/2 or even £.50/£1 that I used to play I would've been looking at over £2k back.
I played £.50/£1 for 3 years before Sky and probably AVERAGED about (edit after checking old spreadsheet) £200 per WEEK, although I did play a lot more then (wench tied me down now haha). The days of hammering it and getting £500+ cakeback p.w. are long gone now though lol.
(Hope I'm allowed to say this here? No probs if it's removed)
For the sake of clarity & balance, & although I try to avoid threads like this, I must comment here.
"....I asked the 'Head of Poker' to work it out for me a couple of months ago, he said that's what it worked out at approx...."
"....just that I would presume the guy I spoke to on here would be able to get it right lol....."
"Lol" indeed!
I think there may be a misunderstanding on your part here, though I hasten to add, I'm sure it is wholly unintentional.
"Rakeback" is not an expression anyone in the business at Sky Poker ever use, or have ever used, we approach it very differently, & quite deliberately.
Nor can the C4P at Sky Poker be compared with rakeback on other sites, as the system does not work like that, again, by design, there is no "accurate figure", as it "depends".
As the comments attributed to our Head of Poker seemed so unlikely, I spoke with him this morning, & he assures me that a conversation along the suggested lines did not take place, & could not have taken place for the reasons I have suggested. I'm quite sure you had a convo with him, if you say so, but he would never have replied along the lines you suggest.
You can, of course, get all sorts of rakeback at other Online Poker Sites, but Sky Poker do things their own way, just as, say, Pokerstars (another site that does not offer "rakeback") do. Both sites report much-increased traffic, whilst almost every other site is seeing rapidly declining traffic & market share.
There is a great deal more to Online Poker sites than rakeback!
Every site offers different things to players, & Sky Poker will continue to offer many USP's, some of which no other poker site on earth offer. We are happy with the balance, &, it seems, so are our players, judging by their ever increasing numbers, which must be the ultimate litmus test.
There are many sites out there that offer 60 percent rakeback plus to players, regardless of how much they play. Ive received this.
Usually they are small sites, which are part of a large network.
But sky is better then these sites in other ways, even if it doesnt give as much rakeback.
What I dont like about sky is that it doesnt show what rakeback Im getting and I dont know how to figure it out.
The Sky Poker Cash 4 Points details are clearly outlined HERE
I would, however, save you time by suggesting that there is no point trying to come up with a precise & comparable %, because the system does not work that way - there is no valid comparision. I've been asked the question so many times, & my reply is always the same - its like trying to compare apples & pears.
Is PokerScout accurate, which shows poker networks like ipoker and 888 having a cash player traffic peak as 7000.
As apposed to sky which peaks at 700.
Fair enough that sky is growing, but seems unfair to put out facts about other networks without backing them up with some info.
[QUOTE]Is there an official place you can lookup stats? Is PokerScout accurate, which shows poker networks like ipoker and 888 having a cash player traffic peak as 7000. As apposed to sky which peaks at 700.
Posted by Spad3s
Depends which stats, & if you chose to believe them.
Whilst I can confirm that both the 888 & i-Poker networks are bigger than Sky Poker, I can also confirm - officially - that those numbers are wrong. You only have to see how many players are on Sky Poker at peak times to verify that.
Would be interested in seeing the official traffic stats that back this up. Any stats I can find show big networks like ipoker and 888 with steady traffic for last 6 months.
I believe i-poker is down around 30% y-o-y, give or take a bit. 888, since getting in bed with WSOP, have fared better. i-Poker, of course, is a network, comprising scores of little sites.
It matters not, big or small. Players have the choice where they play, that's the beauty of the business.
(Total C4P bonuses paid / Total rake intake) x 100
How exactly is C4P supposedly so different to rakeback? You pay a certain ammount in rake, and get a reasonably certain % of that back
I wouldnt believe everything you read on 2plus2 Tikay. Unless its about poker strategy, they are always right there.
Hi Poker_Fail
I think you misunderstand what Tikay is saying. Cash for Points is like rakeback but it isn't rakeback (hence his analogy).
What it works out at just depends on what you play and the tier you reach. Every player is different so the amount is different.
We've always been totally transparent about this - all the information you need is on this Cash for Points page and this page on earning points.
These combined with the new points widget make it easier this clearer than ever.
Thanks
Sky Poker