Re: Zero Rake Poker Business plan
 

you didn't. tuff-fish did. I quoted both of you because I was agreeing with some of your points too.

I'm specifically disagreeing with this tuff quote that you bolded:
"I know you guys want a lot of hands so you can cherry pick the best hands and ignore the others. If some guy is making a play on you, and your hand is marginal, you want the freedom to toss it and move on since you are being busy at other tables anyway."

Re: Zero Rake Poker Business plan
 

OK guys, here is how it is.

I am not going to convince any of you, and you are not going to convince me.

At any site I have involvement in, or can get any hearing from the management, I am going to lobby hard for one table, maybe two at most.

My interest is to protect the poker ecology to the benefit of the rec player. The delaying of the game by multitablers is a peeve, the health of the lake is a real concern.

If I can possibly help it, you will not have the opportunity to come into any US site and play 8, 6, or even 4 tables.

If the poker ecology is properly protected, there will be casual poker for decades to come. If you guys had your way, it would be all over in 5 years. (I know, I know, most of you could care less.)

Don't get your hopes up when MGM/PartyUSA begins operation. Those operators will be looking at the long term also. Plus, there may well be regulatory conditions put in place to "protect the rec player". (Another reason you all should get off your dead butts and help on the Wexler Bill. It contains no such provisions.)

And, a completely free poker market may well favor site(s) run more my way than yours. Don't mistake the past few years for a free market. The overseas operators are trying to make as much money as possible in as short a time as possible. They know their time is limited until they get competition, and they figure they will not fare well when that happens. They are probably slack jawed in amazement that the current situation has lasted as long as it has.

They gotta luv GWB and his FoF supporters.

Tuff << Don't care if you disagree with me. In the end it will be what it is.

Re: Zero Rake Poker Business plan
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you guys had your way, it would be all over in 5 years. (I know, I know, most of you could care less.)

[/ QUOTE ]


You misinterpret disagreeing with you for not caring at all.
Of course people care. They just think your concerns are incorrect and unjustified.

Re: Zero Rake Poker Business plan
 

[ QUOTE ]
My interest is to protect the poker ecology to the benefit of the rec player. The delaying of the game by multitablers is a peeve, the health of the lake is a real concern.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you ever actually offered any evidence in support of your conclusion that multitablers slow the games down?

The last time you went on one of your ninnyhammer trips I started looking people up any time they took extra time when not disconnected. It was a small sample, less than 20 times but the overwhelming majority were playing one table. It was something like 16-1.

As far as I can tell you're wrong about the problem, wrong about the solution to the wrong problem, and completely and utterly wrong about how people make money.

Re: Zero Rake Poker Business plan
 

Tuff Fish is right that forced one-tabling would help the fish. Because if there are few one-tabling winners then there are very few multi-tabling losers.

Also if it's true what some people say about Pacific when it had one-table limitation... it would be good to try it at least.
Allowing multi-tabling is always easier switch than the other way.



After all we can play one table of this site + 20 PS tables.
Plus it will slow down the development of additional software (like PT) cause there won't be so much desire for it. (again helps the fish)

Re: Zero Rake Poker Business plan
 

Didn't pacific remain pretty darned fishy even after they started allowing multiple tables? I wasn't playing there anymore and am just going off of what I thought I recall other people saying about it.


The worst timing-out player I have run across is some guy who gets bitter when he gets sucked-out on so he stalls on each action as long as he can. If he plans on folding then he just lets his clock run out and then quickly sits back in before the next hand. It's like his weird form of revenge against the table for beating him. He purposefully slows everyone down for the next 20 or so hands.
Since I'm playing on other tables anyway I really don't care. He's just looking for attention I guess.

He usually plays 2 tables but his slowness in his decision making has nothing to do with that.


And, as I have mentioned before on this issue, in many of Tuff's videos he is taking longer than anyone else at the table when he is playing only 1 or 2 tables.

Re: Zero Rake Poker Business plan
 

6 months later and Tuff Fish is still a delusional [censored]. Some things never change.

Re: Zero Rake Poker Business plan
 

[ QUOTE ]
OK guys, here is how it is.

I am not going to convince any of you, and you are not going to convince me.

At any site I have involvement in, or can get any hearing from the management, I am going to lobby hard for one table, maybe two at most.

My interest is to protect the poker ecology to the benefit of the rec player. The delaying of the game by multitablers is a peeve, the health of the lake is a real concern.

If I can possibly help it, you will not have the opportunity to come into any US site and play 8, 6, or even 4 tables.

If the poker ecology is properly protected, there will be casual poker for decades to come. If you guys had your way, it would be all over in 5 years. (I know, I know, most of you could care less.)

Don't get your hopes up when MGM/PartyUSA begins operation. Those operators will be looking at the long term also. Plus, there may well be regulatory conditions put in place to "protect the rec player". (Another reason you all should get off your dead butts and help on the Wexler Bill. It contains no such provisions.)

And, a completely free poker market may well favor site(s) run more my way than yours. Don't mistake the past few years for a free market. The overseas operators are trying to make as much money as possible in as short a time as possible. They know their time is limited until they get competition, and they figure they will not fare well when that happens. They are probably slack jawed in amazement that the current situation has lasted as long as it has.

They gotta luv GWB and his FoF supporters.

Tuff << Don't care if you disagree with me. In the end it will be what it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. I'm sure the sites will all rail against getting paid multi-tablers rake. Whether its Harrahs or Poker Stars or party, more tables is more money is more better. I'm also sure the affiliate infested lobbying organization will not be railing against their multi-tabling customers as well. And if anyone in Congress is smart enough to understand that multi-tablers will result in grossly more tax revenue, you can bet which way they will go.

No one gives a (censored) about multitabling but you. Your agenda is idiotic. Multi-tabling has nothing to do with anything vaguely related to the issues at hand; its your own personal fetish. The sooner you get over it, the easier it will be to take you remotely seriously.

Re: Zero Rake Poker Business plan
 

[ QUOTE ]

Somebody made a video of some of his tiltiest comments set to the song "Bad Day":
http://tuffish.ytmnd.com/

[/ QUOTE ]

My thirteen year old daughter and I laughed our butts off listening to this.

Re: Zero Rake Poker Business plan
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Somebody made a video of some of his tiltiest comments set to the song "Bad Day":
http://tuffish.ytmnd.com/

[/ QUOTE ]

My thirteen year old daughter and I laughed our butts off listening to this.

[/ QUOTE ]

youz havin'... CHESS PAIN FROM LAUGHING?