Not too bad if you ask me. It at least starts to give an idea of what people think, after they have read both sides of the debate.
I really don't get why you are so against this, it doesn't make sense to me. Can you explain?
Because I genuinely believe that if you lower the rake to a certain level then it opens up the "colosseum" to the pros and the recs lose their money quicker and don't come back . That said , If you really want to find out what the masses of sky poker really think , then it would be more beneficial to ask sky to survey them . A forum survey of a tiny sample of the total player pool means nothing to them and it won't change their business plan. . Also , no one has put forward the other side of the argument apart from me , and obviously for reasons outside this discussion nobody is ever going to agree with me ( quite happy with that )., yet still there will be players on this site who never use the forum that could argue the other side a lot better than me .
What pros are going to damage the recs playing 20nl and below? this is not pokerstars.... this is not a place where people play low stakes to make a living... in the UK you cant make a living from these stakes.
On pokerstars they have pro grinders at micros because the cost of living is so cheap in these countries... sky does not have this. You are not going to see any "pros" migrating to low-stakes because the rake has been dropped. Why would they drop to lower stakes if they already beat higher stakes?
For someone who tries to come across super intellectual you provide no facts for half your statements and you berate other people and call them stupid, Hardly the way many of the great thinkers like Stephen Hawkins would put across a theory. This is the theory of everything if you don't follow me your thick.
Im sorry but melt is trying to do something good for people that has no benefit to him. In this topic specifically you have been a poison and opposing the view of at least 99% of the poker community. your not superior don't try to cover up your deficiencies by acting like you are
People like you would have a forum , full of threads and posts where everyone agreed. Anyone who doesn't agree , will be hounded and trolled mercilessly . It's like an episode of one man and his dog .
Not too bad if you ask me. It at least starts to give an idea of what people think, after they have read both sides of the debate.
I really don't get why you are so against this, it doesn't make sense to me. Can you explain?
Because I genuinely believe that if you lower the rake to a certain level then it opens up the "colosseum" to the pros and the recs lose their money quicker and don't come back . That said , If you really want to find out what the masses of sky poker really think , then it would be more beneficial to ask sky to survey them . A forum survey of a tiny sample of the total player pool means nothing to them and it won't change their business plan. . Also , no one has put forward the other side of the argument apart from me , and obviously for reasons outside this discussion nobody is ever going to agree with me ( quite happy with that )., yet still there will be players on this site who never use the forum that could argue the other side a lot better than me .
What pros are going to damage the recs playing 20nl and below? this is not pokerstars.... this is not a place where people play low stakes to make a living... in the UK you cant make a living from these stakes.
On pokerstars they have pro grinders at micros because the cost of living is so cheap in these countries... sky does not have this. You are not going to see any "pros" migrating to low-stakes because the rake has been dropped. Why would they drop to lower stakes if they already beat higher stakes?
For someone who tries to come across super intellectual you provide no facts for half your statements and you berate other people and call them stupid, Hardly the way many of the great thinkers like Stephen Hawkins would put across a theory. This is the theory of everything if you don't follow me your thick.
Im sorry but melt is trying to do something good for people that has no benefit to him. In this topic specifically you have been a poison and opposing the view of at least 99% of the poker community. your not superior don't try to cover up your deficiencies by acting like you are
People like you would have a forum , full of threads and posts where everyone agreed. Anyone who doesn't agree , will be hounded and trolled mercilessly . It's like an episode of one man and his dog .
Again completely disregard the facts and post some novel troll shi te. I honestly believe you're a poison to the forum.
I have many threads where people have mercilessly told me I am in the wrong... what happened in thats situation... I re-looked at the situation and realised I was probably in the wrong.
It may sounds immature... but honestly... you're just boring
A debate, not an argument...should be a healthy debate where mutual respect for people's views is in place.
And yes, on occasions I have over stepped the mark, mainly in an attempt to magnify/amplify the way and the tone of this discussion is being taken and on some occasions to extract urine....
Though, I haven't publicly called you thick, unintelligent-the opposite I feel, which worries me more- and as originally stated from the outset, some of the posts you have started whilst some are inane, I have read and contributed to; occasionally
Even some one who says they know and like you has posted and suggested you 'reign back' the way you choose to contribute, that seems to have been ignored?
A period of reflection is called for- so I'm off to sample tapas and copa tinte in Madrid for a few days and I hope those other protagonists don't so readily jump on the hook you choose to dangle; when I said you were like Adrian Durham on Talksport, you could if you were so inclined take it as a compliment... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Durham
I've voted and now I've had a day to think about it, the polls wrong.
For starters, calling the poll SKY HIGH RAKE then asking if we think it's high is biased.
Annoyingly, you are right. I didn't think of that at the time of making it. The question should not be leading towards an answer of course to avoid an unbiased response.
Its on the forum too where there will be a higher percentage of regular players.
I do still think you can take something from it though.
Recreational, evenings-only player here. I voted that it is too high and I would play more if it were lower. Hard to feel like I'm getting a good deal here without having time to grind out high rakeback levels. My true opinion would be remove them altogether and focus on improving the cash and MTT offerings but that wasn't an option.
The high rake is still destroying almost everyone. I bring this poll to the attention of new members or people who simply missed this last time around - so that they can cast their votes.
We're giving away 4 Vegas packages + £10k cash this month to DYM players. I think promos like this should be considered when complaining about the rake.
I missed the Poll, would have voted for 4 , way too high. I did notice the post that went up 1st, and have not played any DYM on Sky since , switched to other sites.
We're giving away 4 Vegas packages + £10k cash this month to DYM players. I think promos like this should be considered when complaining about the rake.
Who gets a chance of winning the Vegas packages, and the 10k ...any low stake/ low volume players ?
I believe sky's stance is that a reduction in rake will not increase traffic enough to make up for the decrease in rake charges. Quite a short term view in my opinion and I'm not sure what that's based on (gut feeling?).
Like James has said, they have their short term caps on at the moment anyway because they don't know whats going to happen with stars
We're giving away 4 Vegas packages + £10k cash this month to DYM players. I think promos like this should be considered when complaining about the rake.
...to high volume regs. For most people the games are even less attractive because they become reg infested.
We're giving away 4 Vegas packages + £10k cash this month to DYM players. I think promos like this should be considered when complaining about the rake.
My first reaction to reading this was to respond in anger. Its so easy for these things to become adversarial. After deliberation its the word complaining that probably triggered a negative response. Language is very important when communicating. Im as guilty as most others but at least i can blame it on "i was born in india". Were very grateful for vegas promo but on the other hand if you did not run it i would be playing a vegas promo at another site. Sky has a business to run and a customer has to look after how they spend their money. Couple of days ago i had a bad run at cash tables and wanted to play double your money s&g. I played them at pp. While there i checked out their promos and played a few extra games. It does not mean i didnt come back to sky the next day. If halving the rake means less profit with little increase in those games, then thats a commercial decision that most of us can understand.
We're giving away 4 Vegas packages + £10k cash this month to DYM players. I think promos like this should be considered when complaining about the rake.
...to high volume regs. For most people the games are even less attractive because they become reg infested.
True. Promos like these attract regs. Most tables end up being 6 regs who are all losing against each other, while competing for a bit of promotional money.
Comments
Anyone who doesn't agree , will be hounded and trolled mercilessly .
It's like an episode of one man and his dog .
https://www.skypoker.com/secure/poker/sky_lobby/community/forums#/discussion/174804/sky-high-rake/p11
Or do you just prefer to argue against me ?
I have many threads where people have mercilessly told me I am in the wrong... what happened in thats situation... I re-looked at the situation and realised I was probably in the wrong.
It may sounds immature... but honestly... you're just boring
A debate, not an argument...should be a healthy debate where mutual respect for people's views is in place.
And yes, on occasions I have over stepped the mark, mainly in an attempt to magnify/amplify the way and the tone of this discussion is being taken and on some occasions to extract urine....
Though, I haven't publicly called you thick, unintelligent-the opposite I feel, which worries me more- and as originally stated from the outset, some of the posts you have started whilst some are inane, I have read and contributed to; occasionally
Even some one who says they know and like you has posted and suggested you 'reign back' the way you choose to contribute, that seems to have been ignored?
A period of reflection is called for- so I'm off to sample tapas and copa tinte in Madrid for a few days and I hope those other protagonists don't so readily jump on the hook you choose to dangle; when I said you were like Adrian Durham on Talksport, you could if you were so inclined take it as a compliment... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Durham
Annoyingly, you are right. I didn't think of that at the time of making it. The question should not be leading towards an answer of course to avoid an unbiased response.
Its on the forum too where there will be a higher percentage of regular players.
I do still think you can take something from it though.
BUMP
The high rake is still destroying almost everyone. I bring this poll to the attention of new members or people who simply missed this last time around - so that they can cast their votes.
Like James has said, they have their short term caps on at the moment anyway because they don't know whats going to happen with stars
The debate is whether pros are entitled to ask for lower rake on what is essentially just a platform for people to have fun on.