Hey chicken...I’m glad you said Unibet as I have been asking peeps I respect in skypoker world and when I asked which is the platform most like sky-should it get subsumed by the earth Vader of poker platforms-that’s the platform people recommended
Also don’t you think you’re banging your head against a brick wall? Isn’t your head hurting yet?
I know he does videos mostly to drive sales for his training site and I know he doesn't have an interest in playing poker full time anymore.
That doesn't mean his points aren't valid though, the videos are popular because people agree with them
The videos are popular because he's controversial ...much like the most popular threads on here are the most controversial not necessarily because people generally agree with the views on them .
The Unibet diatribe , makes me laugh .....I was a SJ customer for yonks , and when they swallowed them up and integrated the platforms, the whole procedure was a farce and the unibet cs prob the worst I and many others had experienced . God knows how many long term SJ customers they lost as a result , I was def one of them
The Unibet diatribe , makes me laugh .....I was a SJ customer for yonks , and when they swallowed them up and integrated the platforms, the whole procedure was a farce and the unibet cs prob the worst I and many others had experienced . God knows how many long term SJ customers they lost as a result , I was def one of them
Unibet is certainly the closest to Sky in many ways. It is a stand-alone. It has a Community (although the navigation on it is poor). I would recommend it in a heartbeat.
Will I remain a Sky customer? That depends on a lot of things. I like the Staff. I like the Community. I think I will play some on Sky even without those 2 things. But I would play less. The more it becomes like Stars, the less I would play. The biggest strength of Sky Poker is how different it is.
The Unibet diatribe , makes me laugh .....I was a SJ customer for yonks , and when they swallowed them up and integrated the platforms, the whole procedure was a farce and the unibet cs prob the worst I and many others had experienced . God knows how many long term SJ customers they lost as a result , I was def one of them
Unibet is certainly the closest to Sky in many ways. It is a stand-alone. It has a Community (although the navigation on it is poor). I would recommend it in a heartbeat.
Will I remain a Sky customer? That depends on a lot of things. I like the Staff. I like the Community. I think I will play some on Sky even without those 2 things. But I would play less. The more it becomes like Stars, the less I would play. The biggest strength of Sky Poker is how different it is.
"He DID actually say that. Its on video. There is a link to a doug polk youtube video where he analyses everything that was said. DNEGs is blatantly lying here. That should should set alarms bells going for pretty much everything else that is said"
For a number of years, Daniel Negreanu has been berated by the poker community for defending PokerStars´ changes to its rake structure and rewards program. Now Negreanu has published a blog giving a fuller explanation of why more rake could be better for the long-term future of the game.
Daniel Negreanu never said the words “more rake is better”. The alleged quote was taken from a YouTube interview Negreanu gave in 2016, in which he explained why PokerStars reversed a rake reduction at lower stakes in order to prevent pros dropping down several levels of buy-in and destroying the ecosystem. Unfortunately, poor PR won the day and the alleged quote has stuck ever since.
What Negreanu actually said was that high levels of rake keeps pros away from low stakes games because the games become unbeatable. He went on to explain that, although a high level of rake is not a good thing for recreational players, recreational players´ funds last longer when pros keep away. Consequently, recreational players have a better experience than if they had lost their bankrolls (to pro players) in one session and are more likely to redeposit and keep the poker ecosystem growing.
Have you watched the doug polk video someone posted? It would be helpful if you did because I'm sure you would at least change your opinion on dnegs a little.
All he does is try and spin pokerstars changes in a positive light, even if pretty much everyone else in the poker world disagrees with him.
But guess who the new players listen to? Obviously the most famous poker player in the world instead of a bunch of nobodies on a forum they have never seen.
I read the article you linked, and my these are my thoughts:
I don't know a huge amount about the spins introduction. I know the community was against it and poker stars went ahead with it. It is a game with much less skill than standard sngs so was seen as a way for stars to collect more rake since skilled players will still find it hard to win and recreational players are attracted by the change of a big win (even if they will lose in the long run). Daniel defended them, which I don't have a big problem with - Stars obviously saw a market and went for it. It seems to have worked out for them too.
The next part is where it gets dicey. Daniel said there would be changes to the rewards system. Again, that's fine and up to stars even if it is also against what the poker community would like to see. The big problem though is the way they went about it. After publicising a promo that is worth hundreds of thousands to players that rake a certain amount in a year for 10/11 months of the year, the removed it without warning. Resulting in hundreds of players working their butts off for nothing. They could of easily waited until the end of the year, but they didn't. They intentionally ripped off poker players for hundreds of thousands each.
It was a huge scandal. Daniel did his best to defend Pokerstars. THIS is where most of the hate comes from towards him and was probably the real turning point for a lot of players deciding not to trust him.
Fast forward to today, and he is doing the same thing with rake. Whether he actually said "more rake is better" is besides the point, he is still defending that view and making recreational players actually think high rake could be a good idea.
Please do watch it, its quite entertaining and informative.
Of course I've watched it , still hasn't changed my mind ! I find Polk an odious troll and that's being polite , but quite understand why a lot of people on here would side with him .
Massive backtrack with the bolded bit , and it is important and on point .
Wonder how everyone taking the moral high ground on here against Negreanu and Stars in general will adopt their stance , when the inevitable happens and sky gets swallowed up /integrated into the machine that is stars ? Will they still play or take the moral high ground , my moneys on the former.
Why is it inevitable sky will get swallowed up by the stars machine? their main interest in sky was buying the betting and gaming. The poker side of things really has little impact on them.
Hopefully things are left how they are BUT if they migrate accounts those who played on stars also will continue to do so and those that dont will probably go to one of the many other smaller sites that run similar to sky. There is a certain site that is literally doing everything the opposite to stars and guess what.... it is getting bigger and bigger and bigger.... it was industry leader at one point and my first ever poker site I played on.
Not sure why you think people would play on stars that don't now - I think you fail to see how many options there actually are for players
That's not what I said , I was referring to the people who are making moral judgements about the stars ethos , and whether people on here would still take the moral high ground about them if sky gets totally integrated . Different issue totally . Well aware of all the options available , been playing online on a lot of different sites since about 2003 .
Strangely enough , no need to have to ask what a set is unlike some
"He DID actually say that. Its on video. There is a link to a doug polk youtube video where he analyses everything that was said. DNEGs is blatantly lying here. That should should set alarms bells going for pretty much everything else that is said"
For a number of years, Daniel Negreanu has been berated by the poker community for defending PokerStars´ changes to its rake structure and rewards program. Now Negreanu has published a blog giving a fuller explanation of why more rake could be better for the long-term future of the game.
Daniel Negreanu never said the words “more rake is better”. The alleged quote was taken from a YouTube interview Negreanu gave in 2016, in which he explained why PokerStars reversed a rake reduction at lower stakes in order to prevent pros dropping down several levels of buy-in and destroying the ecosystem. Unfortunately, poor PR won the day and the alleged quote has stuck ever since.
What Negreanu actually said was that high levels of rake keeps pros away from low stakes games because the games become unbeatable. He went on to explain that, although a high level of rake is not a good thing for recreational players, recreational players´ funds last longer when pros keep away. Consequently, recreational players have a better experience than if they had lost their bankrolls (to pro players) in one session and are more likely to redeposit and keep the poker ecosystem growing.
Have you watched the doug polk video someone posted? It would be helpful if you did because I'm sure you would at least change your opinion on dnegs a little.
All he does is try and spin pokerstars changes in a positive light, even if pretty much everyone else in the poker world disagrees with him.
But guess who the new players listen to? Obviously the most famous poker player in the world instead of a bunch of nobodies on a forum they have never seen.
I read the article you linked, and my these are my thoughts:
I don't know a huge amount about the spins introduction. I know the community was against it and poker stars went ahead with it. It is a game with much less skill than standard sngs so was seen as a way for stars to collect more rake since skilled players will still find it hard to win and recreational players are attracted by the change of a big win (even if they will lose in the long run). Daniel defended them, which I don't have a big problem with - Stars obviously saw a market and went for it. It seems to have worked out for them too.
The next part is where it gets dicey. Daniel said there would be changes to the rewards system. Again, that's fine and up to stars even if it is also against what the poker community would like to see. The big problem though is the way they went about it. After publicising a promo that is worth hundreds of thousands to players that rake a certain amount in a year for 10/11 months of the year, the removed it without warning. Resulting in hundreds of players working their butts off for nothing. They could of easily waited until the end of the year, but they didn't. They intentionally ripped off poker players for hundreds of thousands each.
It was a huge scandal. Daniel did his best to defend Pokerstars. THIS is where most of the hate comes from towards him and was probably the real turning point for a lot of players deciding not to trust him.
Fast forward to today, and he is doing the same thing with rake. Whether he actually said "more rake is better" is besides the point, he is still defending that view and making recreational players actually think high rake could be a good idea.
Please do watch it, its quite entertaining and informative.
Of course I've watched it , still hasn't changed my mind ! I find Polk an odious troll and that's being polite , but quite understand why a lot of people on here would side with him .
Massive backtrack with the bolded bit , and it is important and on point .
Wonder how everyone taking the moral high ground on here against Negreanu and Stars in general will adopt their stance , when the inevitable happens and sky gets swallowed up /integrated into the machine that is stars ? Will they still play or take the moral high ground , my moneys on the former.
Why is it inevitable sky will get swallowed up by the stars machine? their main interest in sky was buying the betting and gaming. The poker side of things really has little impact on them.
Hopefully things are left how they are BUT if they migrate accounts those who played on stars also will continue to do so and those that dont will probably go to one of the many other smaller sites that run similar to sky. There is a certain site that is literally doing everything the opposite to stars and guess what.... it is getting bigger and bigger and bigger.... it was industry leader at one point and my first ever poker site I played on.
Not sure why you think people would play on stars that don't now - I think you fail to see how many options there actually are for players
That's not what I said , I was referring to the people who are making moral judgements about the stars ethos , and whether people on here would still take the moral high ground about them if sky gets totally integrated . Different issue totally . Well aware of all the options available , been playing online on a lot of different sites since about 2003 .
Strangely enough , no need to have to ask what a set is unlike some
"He DID actually say that. Its on video. There is a link to a doug polk youtube video where he analyses everything that was said. DNEGs is blatantly lying here. That should should set alarms bells going for pretty much everything else that is said"
For a number of years, Daniel Negreanu has been berated by the poker community for defending PokerStars´ changes to its rake structure and rewards program. Now Negreanu has published a blog giving a fuller explanation of why more rake could be better for the long-term future of the game.
Daniel Negreanu never said the words “more rake is better”. The alleged quote was taken from a YouTube interview Negreanu gave in 2016, in which he explained why PokerStars reversed a rake reduction at lower stakes in order to prevent pros dropping down several levels of buy-in and destroying the ecosystem. Unfortunately, poor PR won the day and the alleged quote has stuck ever since.
What Negreanu actually said was that high levels of rake keeps pros away from low stakes games because the games become unbeatable. He went on to explain that, although a high level of rake is not a good thing for recreational players, recreational players´ funds last longer when pros keep away. Consequently, recreational players have a better experience than if they had lost their bankrolls (to pro players) in one session and are more likely to redeposit and keep the poker ecosystem growing.
Have you watched the doug polk video someone posted? It would be helpful if you did because I'm sure you would at least change your opinion on dnegs a little.
All he does is try and spin pokerstars changes in a positive light, even if pretty much everyone else in the poker world disagrees with him.
But guess who the new players listen to? Obviously the most famous poker player in the world instead of a bunch of nobodies on a forum they have never seen.
I read the article you linked, and my these are my thoughts:
I don't know a huge amount about the spins introduction. I know the community was against it and poker stars went ahead with it. It is a game with much less skill than standard sngs so was seen as a way for stars to collect more rake since skilled players will still find it hard to win and recreational players are attracted by the change of a big win (even if they will lose in the long run). Daniel defended them, which I don't have a big problem with - Stars obviously saw a market and went for it. It seems to have worked out for them too.
The next part is where it gets dicey. Daniel said there would be changes to the rewards system. Again, that's fine and up to stars even if it is also against what the poker community would like to see. The big problem though is the way they went about it. After publicising a promo that is worth hundreds of thousands to players that rake a certain amount in a year for 10/11 months of the year, the removed it without warning. Resulting in hundreds of players working their butts off for nothing. They could of easily waited until the end of the year, but they didn't. They intentionally ripped off poker players for hundreds of thousands each.
It was a huge scandal. Daniel did his best to defend Pokerstars. THIS is where most of the hate comes from towards him and was probably the real turning point for a lot of players deciding not to trust him.
Fast forward to today, and he is doing the same thing with rake. Whether he actually said "more rake is better" is besides the point, he is still defending that view and making recreational players actually think high rake could be a good idea.
Please do watch it, its quite entertaining and informative.
Of course I've watched it , still hasn't changed my mind ! I find Polk an odious troll and that's being polite , but quite understand why a lot of people on here would side with him .
Massive backtrack with the bolded bit , and it is important and on point .
Wonder how everyone taking the moral high ground on here against Negreanu and Stars in general will adopt their stance , when the inevitable happens and sky gets swallowed up /integrated into the machine that is stars ? Will they still play or take the moral high ground , my moneys on the former.
Why is it inevitable sky will get swallowed up by the stars machine? their main interest in sky was buying the betting and gaming. The poker side of things really has little impact on them.
Hopefully things are left how they are BUT if they migrate accounts those who played on stars also will continue to do so and those that dont will probably go to one of the many other smaller sites that run similar to sky. There is a certain site that is literally doing everything the opposite to stars and guess what.... it is getting bigger and bigger and bigger.... it was industry leader at one point and my first ever poker site I played on.
Not sure why you think people would play on stars that don't now - I think you fail to see how many options there actually are for players
That's not what I said , I was referring to the people who are making moral judgements about the stars ethos , and whether people on here would still take the moral high ground about them if sky gets totally integrated . Different issue totally . Well aware of all the options available , been playing online on a lot of different sites since about 2003 .
Strangely enough , no need to have to ask what a set is unlike some
Take the fact that Negreanu is paid a lot of money from stars out of the equation , I'm genuinely baffled how people don't agree with the logic in the article I posted .
Again im amazed that someone can believe this story, Why would a guy who is a rec a.) play in a $10/20 game b.) keep track of his hourly
There is no way all or at least part of this story can be true. They are have put together a very convincing sales pitch that will work with RECS - The reason it works with recs is because they play the game for fun.... will it keep them playing longer no? will the crapshoot slot games keep them playing.... no.
Honestly I like Daniel, but what he is doing is selling a coporations idea even when he does not believe in it.
it is close to insane that you are buying into that story
Well have you any evidence to prove the story isn't true ? Plus , story aside , I agree with what he's saying generally . It's all very well good coming out with these outlandish statements about peoples integrity , but put some proof to it . As far as the last line is concerned that you edited ...just!
You're not very consistent are you?
Not wanting to derail too much but I'm sure you'll remember the post on the Tommy Robinson thread (RIP), whereby someone who worked in a bar posted about his very negative first hand encounter with Mr Robinson and his EDL ilk.
You were very quick then to question the authenticity of such a story and anyone who believed it, so why are you so quick to believe Dneg's pretty farfetched tale of the guy playing $10/$20?
Take the fact that Negreanu is paid a lot of money from stars out of the equation , I'm genuinely baffled how people don't agree with the logic in the article I posted .
Again im amazed that someone can believe this story, Why would a guy who is a rec a.) play in a $10/20 game b.) keep track of his hourly
There is no way all or at least part of this story can be true. They are have put together a very convincing sales pitch that will work with RECS - The reason it works with recs is because they play the game for fun.... will it keep them playing longer no? will the crapshoot slot games keep them playing.... no.
Honestly I like Daniel, but what he is doing is selling a coporations idea even when he does not believe in it.
it is close to insane that you are buying into that story
Well have you any evidence to prove the story isn't true ? Plus , story aside , I agree with what he's saying generally . It's all very well good coming out with these outlandish statements about peoples integrity , but put some proof to it . As far as the last line is concerned that you edited ...just!
You're not very consistent are you?
Not wanting to derail too much but I'm sure you'll remember the post on the Tommy Robinson thread (RIP), whereby someone who worked in a bar posted about his very negative first hand encounter with Mr Robinson and his EDL ilk.
You were very quick then to question the authenticity of such a story and anyone who believed it, so why are you so quick to believe Dneg's pretty farfetched tale of the guy playing $10/$20?
Bit early for the Friday night troll isn't it ? Stop trying to derail an interesting topic with nonsense.
Take the fact that Negreanu is paid a lot of money from stars out of the equation , I'm genuinely baffled how people don't agree with the logic in the article I posted .
Again im amazed that someone can believe this story, Why would a guy who is a rec a.) play in a $10/20 game b.) keep track of his hourly
There is no way all or at least part of this story can be true. They are have put together a very convincing sales pitch that will work with RECS - The reason it works with recs is because they play the game for fun.... will it keep them playing longer no? will the crapshoot slot games keep them playing.... no.
Honestly I like Daniel, but what he is doing is selling a coporations idea even when he does not believe in it.
it is close to insane that you are buying into that story
Well have you any evidence to prove the story isn't true ? Plus , story aside , I agree with what he's saying generally . It's all very well good coming out with these outlandish statements about peoples integrity , but put some proof to it . As far as the last line is concerned that you edited ...just!
You're not very consistent are you?
Not wanting to derail too much but I'm sure you'll remember the post on the Tommy Robinson thread (RIP), whereby someone who worked in a bar posted about his very negative first hand encounter with Mr Robinson and his EDL ilk.
You were very quick then to question the authenticity of such a story and anyone who believed it, so why are you so quick to believe Dneg's pretty farfetched tale of the guy playing $10/$20?
Bit early for the Friday night troll isn't it ? Stop trying to derail an interesting topic with nonsense.
So why do you believe the Dneg's story?
It could be true, who knows, but curious to see you believe something that supports your agenda but disbelieve something that goes against your agenda, when neither story has any 'proof' whatsoever.
Take the fact that Negreanu is paid a lot of money from stars out of the equation , I'm genuinely baffled how people don't agree with the logic in the article I posted .
Again im amazed that someone can believe this story, Why would a guy who is a rec a.) play in a $10/20 game b.) keep track of his hourly
There is no way all or at least part of this story can be true. They are have put together a very convincing sales pitch that will work with RECS - The reason it works with recs is because they play the game for fun.... will it keep them playing longer no? will the crapshoot slot games keep them playing.... no.
Honestly I like Daniel, but what he is doing is selling a coporations idea even when he does not believe in it.
it is close to insane that you are buying into that story
Well have you any evidence to prove the story isn't true ? Plus , story aside , I agree with what he's saying generally . It's all very well good coming out with these outlandish statements about peoples integrity , but put some proof to it . As far as the last line is concerned that you edited ...just!
You're not very consistent are you?
Not wanting to derail too much but I'm sure you'll remember the post on the Tommy Robinson thread (RIP), whereby someone who worked in a bar posted about his very negative first hand encounter with Mr Robinson and his EDL ilk.
You were very quick then to question the authenticity of such a story and anyone who believed it, so why are you so quick to believe Dneg's pretty farfetched tale of the guy playing $10/$20?
OMG... finally got thru 9 pages of this thread and what can I say that.. no one really gives a sht what I think .. I'm not trying to cause any offence to any one, I've played on stars and other sites and no what the rake is on the games I play and except what I pay as a losing player I really do not give a sht all I no is I only lose what I'm happy to lose not sure after 9 pages what the ? was im so confused but I do respect chicknmelt as a winning player as I do other players that are far better and understand the game far better than me .. if dobie dip sht is such a great player why not just go play on poker stars and leave us sky players rather than pss me off with your I'm right your wrong attitude again I have after 9 pages forgotten what this thread was about but hay ho … im on team chick on this .. I no, lets have a referendum and take 2 yrs to get a agreement to disagree and then back out only to disagree …time for more vodka ...LETS PARTY ..make love not war …
OMG... finally got thru 9 pages of this thread and what can I say that.. no one really gives a sht what I think .. I'm not trying to cause any offence to any one, I've played on stars and other sites and no what the rake is on the games I play and except what I pay as a losing player I really do not give a sht all I no is I only lose what I'm happy to lose not sure after 9 pages what the ? was im so confused but I do respect chicknmelt as a winning player as I do other players that are far better and understand the game far better than me .. if dobie dip sht is such a great player why not just go play on poker stars and leave us sky players rather than pss me off with your I'm right your wrong attitude again I have after 9 pages forgotten what this thread was about but hay ho … im on team chick on this .. I no, lets have a referendum and take 2 yrs to get a agreement to disagree and then back out only to disagree …time for more vodka ...LETS PARTY ..make love not war …
Firstly can your insults , it's unnecessary. Secondly , don't type on an internet forum while you're drunk , it just makes you look more stupid . Thirdly, I've never claimed to be a good player and I don't need to be to have an opinion on rake . Finally it's not about me being right and other being people wrong , it's a debate and debates normally have opposing views .
OMG... finally got thru 9 pages of this thread and what can I say that.. no one really gives a sht what I think .. I'm not trying to cause any offence to any one, I've played on stars and other sites and no what the rake is on the games I play and except what I pay as a losing player I really do not give a sht all I no is I only lose what I'm happy to lose not sure after 9 pages what the ? was im so confused but I do respect chicknmelt as a winning player as I do other players that are far better and understand the game far better than me .. if dobie dip sht is such a great player why not just go play on poker stars and leave us sky players rather than pss me off with your I'm right your wrong attitude again I have after 9 pages forgotten what this thread was about but hay ho … im on team chick on this .. I no, lets have a referendum and take 2 yrs to get a agreement to disagree and then back out only to disagree …time for more vodka ...LETS PARTY ..make love not war …
Firstly can your insults , it's unnecessary. Secondly , don't type on an internet forum while you're drunk , it just makes you look more stupid . Thirdly, I've never claimed to be a good player and I don't need to be to have an opinion on rake . Finally it's not about me being right and other being people wrong , it's a debate and debates normally have opposing views .
Can I ask? Do you now classify correcting people's grammar/typos as insulting ( demeaning/patronising), therefore unnecessary?
Perhaps the most telling post is Goldon's recently- your master/mentor/partner in crime advising you to be careful you don't get banned....
OMG... finally got thru 9 pages of this thread and what can I say that.. no one really gives a sht what I think .. I'm not trying to cause any offence to any one, I've played on stars and other sites and no what the rake is on the games I play and except what I pay as a losing player I really do not give a sht all I no is I only lose what I'm happy to lose not sure after 9 pages what the ? was im so confused but I do respect chicknmelt as a winning player as I do other players that are far better and understand the game far better than me .. if dobie dip sht is such a great player why not just go play on poker stars and leave us sky players rather than pss me off with your I'm right your wrong attitude again I have after 9 pages forgotten what this thread was about but hay ho … im on team chick on this .. I no, lets have a referendum and take 2 yrs to get a agreement to disagree and then back out only to disagree …time for more vodka ...LETS PARTY ..make love not war …
Firstly can your insults , it's unnecessary. Secondly , don't type on an internet forum while you're drunk , it just makes you look more stupid . Thirdly, I've never claimed to be a good player and I don't need to be to have an opinion on rake . Finally it's not about me being right and other being people wrong , it's a debate and debates normally have opposing views .
Can I ask? Do you now classify correcting people's grammar/typos as insulting ( demeaning/patronising), therefore unnecessary?
Perhaps the most telling post is Goldon's recently- your master/mentor/partner in crime advising you to be careful you don't get banned....
Saw this in an article today which pretty much sums it all up :
At the end of the day, it’s imperative that operators protect new players from professionals.
The trick for an online poker operator is to find the right rake level to keep the majority of professionals out of the new player pool until the new players decide they want the challenge.
At the same time, a site has to insure the rake isn’t so high that it destroys any avenues aspiring players can use to climb the poker ladder.
Would anyone argue that sky hasn't gauged that right ?
Comments
That doesn't mean his points aren't valid though, the videos are popular because people agree with them
Also don’t you think you’re banging your head against a brick wall? Isn’t your head hurting yet?
Will I remain a Sky customer? That depends on a lot of things. I like the Staff. I like the Community. I think I will play some on Sky even without those 2 things. But I would play less. The more it becomes like Stars, the less I would play. The biggest strength of Sky Poker is how different it is.
Well aware of all the options available , been playing online on a lot of different sites since about 2003 .
Strangely enough , no need to have to ask what a set is
Not wanting to derail too much but I'm sure you'll remember the post on the Tommy Robinson thread (RIP), whereby someone who worked in a bar posted about his very negative first hand encounter with Mr Robinson and his EDL ilk.
You were very quick then to question the authenticity of such a story and anyone who believed it, so why are you so quick to believe Dneg's pretty farfetched tale of the guy playing $10/$20?
Stop trying to derail an interesting topic with nonsense.
It could be true, who knows, but curious to see you believe something that supports your agenda but disbelieve something that goes against your agenda, when neither story has any 'proof' whatsoever.
Secondly , don't type on an internet forum while you're drunk , it just makes you look more stupid .
Thirdly, I've never claimed to be a good player and I don't need to be to have an opinion on rake .
Finally it's not about me being right and other being people wrong , it's a debate and debates normally have opposing views .
( demeaning/patronising), therefore unnecessary?
Perhaps the most telling post is Goldon's recently- your master/mentor/partner in crime advising you to be careful you don't get banned....
At the end of the day, it’s imperative that operators protect new players from professionals.
The trick for an online poker operator is to find the right rake level to keep the majority of professionals out of the new player pool until the new players decide they want the challenge.
At the same time, a site has to insure the rake isn’t so high that it destroys any avenues aspiring players can use to climb the poker ladder.
Would anyone argue that sky hasn't gauged that right ?