Party Responds - Hilarity Ensues

[Nietzsche]

[ QUOTE ]
I got the same reply. Mine is also pretty impossible for me to hit so I too was a little disappointed they are not reworking the deal. It makes financial sense, however, for them to not change anything about their bonus program so I would have been shocked if they did.


[/ QUOTE ]
No, it doesn't. I give all of my monthly $10,000 rake to other sites for the next two months because of these unreachable targets. I think lots of players will do the same.

[MrMon]

[ QUOTE ]
After staring at the chart for 3 minutes, I think I've finally figured out that your point is that if your rakeback percentage remains constant, then you will always pay more rake in a higher rake structure than a lower rake structure. However, if you are paying no rake at all, then you will pay the same amount of rake either way.

I really hope I'm missing something.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope, you've pretty much got it. There is no escaping rake structure. Once you establish rake structure and rakeback (and bonus), no amount of style play will alter what has already been established. <font color="black">It is a fallacy to believe that playing tigher can make up for a bad rake structure. </font> If you play tight, fine, play tight. If you play loose, that's fine too. But do not alter your play structure thinking that it will make up for the rake, it won't.

I believe rake structure has received insufficient attention in our pursuit of rakeback and bonus. They need to be evaluated as a package, not in isolation. Paying high rake just to achieve a high bonus may be a worse deal than just paying low rake.

[MicroBob]

"It is a fallacy to believe that playing tigher can make up for a bad rake structure."



Rake structure can most certainly be considered. You may want to consider playing differently based on the rake-structure.


marginal heads-up battles on AP 6-max (for example) would be less advantageous because they are taking already raking at $10.
Sometimes you have only a very slight advantage with certain blind-stealing or blind-defending hands...and if it gets raked sooner then that can erase the advantage pretty quickly.

Although there is still meta-game stuff to be thrown in there too.


Otherwise, I still am not quite sure I know what you are trying to say or if this somehow relates to what I was saying before.

[Dazarath]

[ QUOTE ]
I an just nitting against those who say, "that site's rake is 10% less....and that's just as good as 10% rake-back" because it isn't.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is true for sites like Party, where they calculate MGR as rake/#players, but at a site where they calculate rake based on the amount contributed to the pot, I don't think it should matter.

What if you had the option to take x% rakeback, or a y% reduction in rake, where both would amount to a z increase in BB/100. In this case, I would take the rake deduction, because it helps the fish lose money slower, and keeps them around longer.

[Q_and_A]

Back to the Party player specific bonus offers.

1. The Party points awarded for the different limits (ie 12 pp for 20 hands @ 3/6, 18 pp for 20 hands @ 10/20) tries to take into account the total Party rake, first, by the total hands raked v. total hands played at each limit and, second, by the average amount of rake per hand raked at the different limits (or no-limit as the case may be).

2. Players that have established a history of high volume play are rewarded with an accelerated point accumulation, Silver/Gold.

3. The result is that the players that generate the highest volume rake (most income to Party) receive the most party points.

After a point is earned, a point is a point as a point. There should be no further need to adjust or vary point quotas for player specific bonuses.

Bonus incentives are desinged to reward players for past play and, most importantly for the site, to offer incentive for increased and CONTINUED play. The Party point accumulation formula as it applies to EVERYONE is designed to do this by merely EARNING the points. There need be no subsequent individual player adjustment after the points are earned like we're seeing in the player specific offers, currently the Acceler-8-tor offer.

Offers should be evenhanded across the board. If a player wants to attain Gold status, play more, he/she will be rewared within 3 months. Plenty of incentive, exactly what the site would like to see. It was incentive enough for me.

The players that have been loyal, played and maintianed high volume at Party, are now feeling betrayed. Their bonus point targets/quotas are being quadrupled or worse. Their corresponding bonus money is proportionately and significantly reduced compared to the low volume/limit/ LOW RAKE player.

This all seems backwards.

[Nietzsche]

[ QUOTE ]
The players that have been loyal, played and maintianed high volume at Party, are now feeling betrayed. Their bonus point targets/quotas are being quadrupled or worse. Their corresponding bonus money is proportionately and significantly reduced compared to the low volume/limit/ LOW RAKE player.

This all seems backwards.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is the exact situation. I hope enough high volume players will boycott Party (and let them know about it too) for this 8 week period that they will reconsider their approach in the future. I for one will. They took it too far this time.

[Dazarath]

I don't understand why'd you want to boycott Party. If it's a matter of principle, then go ahead. I won't stop you. But too many players make their money on this board because of Party's fish, and I highly doubt they're all going to boycott Party because they got $200 less of a weekly bonus than they wanted. FWIW, I feel my bonus wasn't too great either, 33XX points for $145, but the EV it would cost me to play on other sites is just too great. I play mid-stakes limit, and I haven't yet seen any other sites where I can find 4 juicy tables running at almost all times of the day.

[Nietzsche]

Your hourly rate is hurt by this bonus. The ratio of good players vs. bad has just turned a lot worse. I think Party is the only winner short term. Long term is another matter.

I doubt it will be long before we hear lots of "run bad" stories.

[Q_and_A]

Any updated emails to/from Party?

[leehrat]

[ QUOTE ]
Your hourly rate is hurt by this bonus. The ratio of good players vs. bad has just turned a lot worse. I think Party is the only winner short term. Long term is another matter.

I doubt it will be long before we hear lots of "run bad" stories.

[/ QUOTE ]

i agree. 3/6 sh has already tightened up considerably. i don't think nl games will be affected, but the limit games in the 2/4-5/10 range are becoming demonstrably tighter and will continue to do so. if it continues much longer, i think i'm done with it and i'll sign up somewhere else with rakeback. [censored], prima's sh games look as good as party's now. and with 40% rb!