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.
Heads up tables
ajs4385
Member Posts: 455
If you want to attract people who 8 table 30 hours a week, you have to feed them. There are many names for this food but a lot are quite disrespectful, I will refer to this food as a net depositor (ND).
Some pros sit at heads up tables waiting for a ND all to their selves rather than having to share one between 5 other regs on a 6 max table.
Surly Sky it is more profitable for you to keep 5 regs who spend thousands a month on rake happy by having the ND on a 6 max table as the pros all create rake by playing each other; as well as creating rake playing the ND. Rather than keeping 1 hu player happy who hardly spends any money on rake.
My suggestion is get rid of hu tables this will create a lot more 6 max tables running at 100nl and above. I also believe we would be able to get 2/5 and 5/10 running every night of the week. Rather than a large ND just playing one pro at high stakes on a hu table. This would then increase liquidity on the site. The site will grow, all the 6 max pros who spend silly amount of money on rake will spend an even larger number on rake. It will also attract new 6 max players to the site. The only people who lose out are the hu players who hardly spend anything on rake.
It would affect me as from time to time I do like to sit at hu tables. However, I believe it is best for the site if a ND is shared between the people who spend the most on rake. Also before anyone says "Heads up is the purist form of the game". That is absolute garbage they are sat their waiting for a ND all to their selves. I have no problem with this they are just trying to earn a crust just like everyone else in the country. I just believe the site will be much better off without heads up tables.
Also it looks completely stupid the lobby at the minute with around 80 tables at 100nl+ but only 6 tables actually playing.
Comments
Other suggestion could be annonymous tables, I hate them hope they never come to Sky, If Sky introduced them I think I would leave.
Ultimatly it is better for nearly everyone if a ND is shared between 5 rather than 1.
As for bh lol. Got no problem bum hunting as lets be honest we only play on sky for the ratio of Pros to ND. Although these days cant imagine its much better than other sites. Bring back 2009 10+ tables of 200nl every night 4 fish per table on sky. That **** download has cost me tens of thousands! (not exaggerating)
Another thing Sky, Why cant people play though TV anymore?
Paul
it would benefit sky as more rake, it will benefit skys most valuable customers which are more than just a handful
I dont think its proper poker (no dynamic can be created), increased chance of collusion/cheating, less skill involved, less fun as cant chat and get to know other players,
you think sky's so special that a decent pro who makes their money doing what you described would just change their profitable game plan and start playing 6max, sharing his profit with others?
he'd just leave and play elsewhere
If u still not sure what I am saying pm me. Only really applies to 100nl and above cash probably reason why you dont get it.
I do agree the biggest problem with getting rid of hu tables is obviously not having option to play them anymore.
However, it is definitly much better for ND to be shared between 5 regs than just kept to 1.
The biggest reason I started this thread is there is less and less people spending money therefore less tables going at 100nl plus. I just thought this would help the majority of people including skys income out.
+