Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

US Player -- I play on Stars and I'm thinking about switching to a site with rakeback, and have ruled out the following:
-Bodog (already have account)
-Ultimate Bet (don't like interface)
-WSEX (won't accept my credit card / not enough players)

So it looks like either FTP or Absolute. Any recommendations? At the low buyin levels ($10-50), how does the "soft competition" factor at these sites compare with Stars?

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

I have to say that I have been playing on FT since Party went down. I recently switch to UB for the points promo as was REALLY surprise at the action. I used to play on UB a couple years ago and it was really tight...but now, maybe it's just me, but the place has a bunch of maniacs.

Having said that..if I was chosing between FT and AP for rakeback...it would be a no brainerr...FT all the way.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

As I've said before, AP customer service are a bunch of morons (when they eventually do reply to your email). Take that into consideration.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

[ QUOTE ]

Having said that..if I was chosing between FT and AP for rakeback...it would be a no brainerr...FT all the way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks... I am definitely leaning towards FT if I can deposit with a credit card (which, according to another post, you can).

Maybe I should give UB another shot -- but seriously, how can people stand the graphics? I guess I haven't looked for a while, but do you still have to mouse over the chips to see the bet amounts displayed?

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I should give UB another shot -- but seriously, how can people stand the graphics? I guess I haven't looked for a while, but do you still have to mouse over the chips to see the bet amounts displayed?

[/ QUOTE ]

No...you just have to go to options and change the settings.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

At the low limits I think they are all pretty much the same. If not, you have some serious leaks in your game.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

the low limits are not the same at all. Obviously they should all be beatable if your a decent player, but they are definitley different. Full Tilt is definitley the hardest site. Hands down. AP, UB, and Bodog are the softest IMO

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

[ QUOTE ]
the low limits are not the same at all. Obviously they should all be beatable if your a decent player, but they are definitley different. Full Tilt is definitley the hardest site. Hands down. AP, UB, and Bodog are the softest IMO

[/ QUOTE ]Mehhh,why is FT tougher than UB?? What evidence would lead you to make such a statement? The numbers and reality would suggest otherwise.Tilt is the hardest cause thats the site your on??? Silly

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Mehhh,why is FT tougher than UB?? What evidence would lead you to make such a statement? The numbers and reality would suggest otherwise.Tilt is the hardest cause thats the site your on??? Silly

[/ QUOTE ]

Having just moved over to UB after being on FT for a year...I have to say I have found A LOT more action at UB. I am not saying that because I running hot....just seems like there are more maniacs on UB. On UB seems like the only two bets are potsized or all in. Plays alot like Party used to. This didn't used to be the case the last time I was on UB. Just my opinion though....

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Mehhh,why is FT tougher than UB?? What evidence would lead you to make such a statement? The numbers and reality would suggest otherwise.Tilt is the hardest cause thats the site your on??? Silly

[/ QUOTE ]

Having just moved over to UB after being on FT for a year...I have to say I have found A LOT more action at UB. I am not saying that because I running hot....just seems like there are more maniacs on UB. On UB seems like the only two bets are potsized or all in. Plays alot like Party used to. This didn't used to be the case the last time I was on UB. Just my opinion though....

[/ QUOTE ]Fair enough,everyone will have a different first impression for sure.But the reality is that there are just more casual players on Tilt,larger table selection and fewer bonus whoring tags than on UB,by % that is of course.I do not believe this is debatable,although individual experience obviously is so your point is well taken.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Having said that..if I was chosing between FT and AP for rakeback...it would be a no brainerr...FT all the way.

[/ QUOTE ]




Thanks... I am definitely leaning towards FT if I can deposit with a credit card (which, according to another post, you can).

Maybe I should give UB another shot -- but seriously, how can people stand the graphics? I guess I haven't looked for a while, but do you still have to mouse over the chips to see the bet amounts displayed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny, because when I first started playing UB I hated the graphics too. But I stuck with it and now I find the graphics/interface at other sites boring and slow. Like anything in life, it's a mattter of getting used to it.

But really, what's more important, that you like the graphics or having a good rewards system and a good player pool. If you're a US player the combination of bonus and the weekly cash for points program (plus rakeback if you can get it) is just about unbeatable. As for the players, it's a very mixed pool. At the levels I play the average player is aggresive, but that doesn't mean their good. Actually, you often see laggy players donking their chips away. I don't play FT, but using BW's game quality grid UB comes out way ahead.

And, it's been said over and over, but let me say it once more, UB's interface is the fastest around. I can get more hands in per hour here than anywhere else. Also, the donks like the fast/non-thinking game.

Just my 2c.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

Look at average VP$IP percentages and average pot sizes. I'm pretty sure you'll find much looser games and presumably bigger pots at UB and Absolute than at FTP/Pokerstars. I personally have no doubt that microstakes at AP are softer than at Pokerstars based on my experience at those two sites.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

Well stated Dost,you make a good point about the software.To complain about software thats faster than most any room out there because of the graphics or whatever is not a very good line.I agree the interface can take some getting used to if your new to the site,but its all about the deal speed bottom line in software and UB is fast.Of course,i played AP in Nov,Dec so any software was like jumping in a race car after busting out some hands there.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

Full Tilt is by FAAAAAR the toughest for lower limits. UB is a joke, wtf?

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Look at average VP$IP percentages and average pot sizes. I'm pretty sure you'll find much looser games and presumably bigger pots at UB and Absolute than at FTP/Pokerstars. I personally have no doubt that microstakes at AP are softer than at Pokerstars based on my experience at those two sites.

[/ QUOTE ]I disagree with every statement you just made completely without exception.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Full Tilt is by FAAAAAR the toughest for lower limits. UB is a joke, wtf?

[/ QUOTE ]Your high.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Full Tilt is by FAAAAAR the toughest for lower limits. UB is a joke, wtf?

[/ QUOTE ]Your high.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have huge databases on over a dozen multi-tabling regular TAGs or rocks at 10 and 25 NL on FT. [censored] is annoyyyyyyyyyyying.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

BTW,why do some very good players play FT over UB or AP then??? Cmon think about it lol Its called table selection my man,twice the player base gives you that.Not to mention Full Tult has done the best job of marketing to the casual player after party left the market specifically.You find this incorrect?

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

I play FT cuz I already have my money in it.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Full Tilt is by FAAAAAR the toughest for lower limits. UB is a joke, wtf?

[/ QUOTE ]Your high.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have huge databases on over a dozen multi-tabling regular TAGs or rocks at 10 and 25 NL on FT. [censored] is annoyyyyyyyyyyying.

[/ QUOTE ]I hear ya bro,eithor way whats the difference you know lol We can agree to disagree,i respect your opinion though.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I play FT cuz I already have my money in it.

[/ QUOTE ]Thats as good a reason as any,i dont blame ya [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

Its such a variable thing as well,just as you stated VYSE about your experience at the games you were playing with different game types,different money levels,ect.,its always going to be debatable subject as everyone will have different experiences and or image of the overall situation

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

Full Tilt has the softest nl games fa sho

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

When I was rebuilding my bankroll several months ago, I found FTP $25NL to full of nits who wouldn't pay you off, but $50NL was buttery soft for an aggressive player. This was before the Neteller debacle, but I can't imagine it's changed that much.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

UB has horrible games, full of tough multitabling rocks. No action to be seen here. Nope, none at all. 2+2ers may move on now.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

FT's $10 game will be much harder to beat than other sites because it has 10% rake at that level.

Ridiculous, I know.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

I came from Party and played mostly SNG and limit. Since the beginning of the year I started playing 25NL & 50NL on Stars. Played mostly 2/4 3/6 limit & 25NL at AP. About a week ago signed up at FTP for bonus/rakeback. Here's what I've noticed.

Stars has so many more players that it is easier to find a loose passive game. FTP games seemed tougher at first and a great deal of the players seemed to be hyper aggressive. There is definitely more preflop 3 betting going on at FTP. AP has the fewest players and you see the same names over and over on the few tables they have running.

So at Stars it may be easier to find a good table, but with some adjustments the FTP tables are very beatable. I will continue to play at FTP for the rakeback. I would stay away from AP, just not as many tables running.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Full Tilt is by FAAAAAR the toughest for lower limits. UB is a joke, wtf?

[/ QUOTE ]Your high.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have huge databases on over a dozen multi-tabling regular TAGs or rocks at 10 and 25 NL on FT. [censored] is annoyyyyyyyyyyying.

[/ QUOTE ]

oh a dozen out of the hundreds/thousands of players playing these stakes? WOW WE ALL SHOULD AVOID THIS PLACE. tz

and btw if ur scared of a few microlimit nits you should spend more time improving your game.

i dont play much at ft just randomly playing nl25-100 since im a allout stars lover but imo the games are pretty weak there.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

[ QUOTE ]
UB has horrible games, full of tough multitabling rocks. No action to be seen here. Nope, none at all. 2+2ers may move on now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nothing to see here....move along.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Full Tilt is by FAAAAAR the toughest for lower limits. UB is a joke, wtf?

[/ QUOTE ]Your high.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have huge databases on over a dozen multi-tabling regular TAGs or rocks at 10 and 25 NL on FT. [censored] is annoyyyyyyyyyyying.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to agree with this guy. I was kicked off Doyle's Room to FT and its nothing but a bunch of TAGs 4 tabling the ring games.

I saw lines at .5/1 that you won't see till 3/6 elsewhere.


Maybe I just picked a bad time of day...
FT is damn tough.

Re: Soft competition: Stars vs. FTP vs. Absolute?
 

there are fishes at FTP... its not that the nits there don't make mistakes, they only make very aggressive mistakes.