[Bobo Fett]

[ QUOTE ]
u r hard.

name a dealt room where its harder to clear bonuses than ongame.



or llook k at it this way why is it that rooms go from dealt to contribution, not the other way aound.

it wouldnt surprise me to see all rooms go to contribution method. if full tilt did i bet cake would too.

[/ QUOTE ]
At my game/limits? All but Crypto.

Now, let me explain...I don't think I was doing a good job last time.

I conceded that if the bonuses at two different sites were identical in every way except that one was dealt and one was contributed, then of course the dealt bonus would be better for any decent player.

The next point I tried to make was the following. If, for a momemt, one were to remove the dealt/contributed factor, OnGame is easily the best clearing bonus at my game/stakes. Since I play SH FL, and OnGame has 5-handed SH tables, contributed vs dealt hurts me less. Even taking into account that it is contributed, for me the OnGame bonus is only surpassed by Crypto. For others, for example FR or NL players, contributed is a much bigger factor, and then maybe OnGame isn't as good.

What I was trying to do was simply disprove your assertion that dealt bonuses are better than contributed, no matter what. In general they are, but that depends on the terms. Let me use a ridiculous example - what if one site were to give back the equivalent of $0.10 for every $1 rake for any hands you were dealt in, and another were to give $100 for every $1 rake for any hands you contributed to...which site would you play at? Extreme example, of course...but I think it illustrates my point, which is this:

Contributed vs dealt is an important component of a bonus, but not the only one. Also, it's importance will vary from player to player, depending on what they play.