Monster tables

[Spellmen]

[ QUOTE ]
Do Full Tilt and other sites have the screen resizing / tiling that Party does?

[/ QUOTE ]

Full Tilt doesn't, not sure about all other sites

[Khaos4k]

[ QUOTE ]
Do Full Tilt and other sites have the screen resizing / tiling that Party does?

[/ QUOTE ]

i know that stars does

[Jamougha]

This should be interesting. The last thing I want to see is half of MSNL migrating to FT.

[grouchie]

Ugh.


Curious to see how far the average number of players on party drops over the course of the next week or two.
especially since it looks like the majority of their tables will be monster tables.

The ones that aren't probably won't be worth playing as it's going to be mostly the smarter/better players playing on them.

The only thing party did right in my mind is finally adding NL to the BB tables, but this massive implimentation is horrible.

Guess i'll just stay on poker room and skins longer

[ajmargarine]

From the midstakes thread on the same subject by Mistermuni:

OK so if a tag wins about 16% of the pots at a 6max tables, that means he wins 16 hands per 100 hands. 16 hands times 50cents per hand is 8 dollars lost for every 100 hands.

at 100nl, 8 dollars is 8bb or 4ptbb.
at 200nl, 8 dollars is 4bb or 2ptbb.
at 400nl, 8 dollars is 2bb or 1ptbb.

Does this sound about right? In effect, discounting any money we win from these freerolls/jackpots, our winrates just dropped anywhere from 1 to 4ptbb/100 (maybe a little less than 1ptbb/100 for those playing 600nl+)? If I'm playing 700 hands per hour at 200nl, thats like $56 lost per hour?

In conclusion, a 2ptbb/100 winner at 200nl is now breakeven. Can someone please confirm this, for this is essentially the end of the world for me and many other players.

This rings true to me. NL100 players are going to be the most effected, with NL50 players right behind them as many of their contested pots reach $5, which is the cutoff for the $0.50 Monster rake.

[Fly]

[ QUOTE ]
From the midstakes thread on the same subject by Mistermuni:

OK so if a tag wins about 16% of the pots at a 6max tables, that means he wins 16 hands per 100 hands. 16 hands times 50cents per hand is 8 dollars lost for every 100 hands.

at 100nl, 8 dollars is 8bb or 4ptbb.
at 200nl, 8 dollars is 4bb or 2ptbb.
at 400nl, 8 dollars is 2bb or 1ptbb.

Does this sound about right? In effect, discounting any money we win from these freerolls/jackpots, our winrates just dropped anywhere from 1 to 4ptbb/100 (maybe a little less than 1ptbb/100 for those playing 600nl+)? If I'm playing 700 hands per hour at 200nl, thats like $56 lost per hour?

In conclusion, a 2ptbb/100 winner at 200nl is now breakeven. Can someone please confirm this, for this is essentially the end of the world for me and many other players.

This rings true to me. NL100 players are going to be the most effected, with NL50 players right behind them as many of their contested pots reach $5, which is the cutoff for the $0.50 Monster rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

OMFG, that is so [censored] sick.

[Isura]

AJ,

The answer is simple. Play NL400+ against the donks [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[kitaristi0]

Full Tilt has resizable tables???

[derosnec]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do Full Tilt and other sites have the screen resizing / tiling that Party does?

[/ QUOTE ]

i know that stars does

[/ QUOTE ]

Stars does not allow resizable tables. And the max you can play is two tables at once.

Seriously, please don't migrate to Stars. I like it there. I left Party to get away from the 2+2 crowd. Go to Full Tilt or something. Stars customer service sucks anyway.

[aces_dad]

But not all of those 16 hands are raked ... we really need someone with 100NL PT stats available to do the calculation Josh posted in MSNL for us.

We do win some preflop steal / unraked pots though just guessing impact won't add a lot of clarity to this conversation.