Coaches and Coaching Sites: Getting a Free Ride?

[BluffTHIS!]

Phil,

The issue I raised doesn't have to do with whether individuals or companies are competing directly with 2+2 or not per se, but rather whether they are getting a free ride instead of being required to pay for advertising on the site, either directly or via sponsoring forums. Rakeback affiliates don't compete directly with 2+2 either, but they are not allowed to discuss their business directly or have posters do it for them, except in a paid context. Is there a reason why those coaches and coaching sites should be treated differently? It's not money out of my pocket, but it is for 2+2.

Also note your statement, "these sites whilst being miles better than 99% of books on the market". While that is your opinion, and possibly a correct one, its validity can't really be judged easily when the strategy advice in question isn't more readily (i.e. cheaply) available so that it can be more fully reviewed and critiqued. Look at all the books that have correctly been trashed on 2+2 over the past years for their inaccurate strategy advice. And then imagine that one of those authors instead of selling print material in a single book or article form, instead provided same via a subscription format only at much more than the cost of a book. And then that posters here touted that service. That erroneous would be getting both free advertising here, and a free ride for the most part from serious review and criticism. I don't mean to imply that the sites you mention are providing erroneous advice, but simply that in addition to getting free advertising here on 2+2 that affiliates are required to pay for, they also are providing their services in a way, calculated or not, to be mostly free from critical review, and on a site dedicated to touting only correct strategy advice.

[Wires]

Bluff,

Then where does it stop. As Phil mentioned there are plenty of services discussed in these forums that, while they aren't spamming, are certainly receiving significant promotion. Software such as HUDs and Poker Tracker, magazines and other publications, radio programs, etc... The list goes on and on.

If you start to regulate this content then the site suffers. The only reason the affiliates have been relegated to their own forum is because they were willing to pay to do so. In fact I would bet dollars to donuts that is was not 2+2 who actively solicited the affiliates but the affiliates who approached 2+2 about sponsoring a forum.

The reason a rakeback forum works is because there are tons of affiliates willing to pay to participate. If you started a coaching forum you would have Taylor Caby and 4 other guys participating. It would shortly go the way of the automotive forum. Most questions that would be answered in a coaching forum would receive many more responses in their respective strategy forums.

[[Phill]]

Wires,

I suspect 90% of responses in said coaching forum would consist of "Come to the forums on Cardrunners/PXF/StoxPoker etc" with the other 10% being "Come speak to me on AIM, see your PM inbox for details".

The point is you have to weigh up the pros and cons - affiliates were well known to peddle their business pretty unscrupiously back in the days we 3 joined 2+2 - it needed to be specifically banned in the Zoo because it became a problem.

The same cannot be said of such businesses - ive never ever seen Taylor promote his company here - but when a thread about the site comes up in the various forums he will often show up to answer a question if an answer is required (see Brian/Aba/SBRugby sorting out a problem Nath brought up in the BBV forum).

To simply say because they are poker orientated that they are a competitor is silly, and its clear 2+2 doesnt plan on competing with such sites.

Further, the people who do coach around here dont go around saying so - the most they do is mention it in their location - and these deals are likely net benefits for 2+2 due to the redistribution and dispensing of knowledge.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Bluff,

Then where does it stop. As Phil mentioned there are plenty of services discussed in these forums that, while they aren't spamming, are certainly receiving significant promotion. Software such as HUDs and Poker Tracker, magazines and other publications, radio programs, etc... The list goes on and on.

If you start to regulate this content then the site suffers. The only reason the affiliates have been relegated to their own forum is because they were willing to pay to do so. In fact I would bet dollars to donuts that is was not 2+2 who actively solicited the affiliates but the affiliates who approached 2+2 about sponsoring a forum.

The reason a rakeback forum works is because there are tons of affiliates willing to pay to participate. If you started a coaching forum you would have Taylor Caby and 4 other guys participating. It would shortly go the way of the automotive forum. Most questions that would be answered in a coaching forum would receive many more responses in their respective strategy forums.

[/ QUOTE ]


Wires,

You make some valid points, and I certainly agree that rakeback affiliates are somewhat different. However it still remains that individual coaches or mega-sites are counting on the 2+2 forums for most of their marketing to cultivate customers, while not paying 2+2 for same. And somthing moreover that contributes to such coaches probably not posting nearly as much *substantive* content in strategy forums here, since they seek to sell what they have to say.

Also, as far the software aids you mention, excpet for poker tracker and HUD (and I could be wrong since I use none of them), they are mostly programs developed by posters here as shareware to help other posters. And AFAIK, reps of pokertracker don't post in the forums.

I only wanted to bring up this issue since I saw the debate over the rakeback forums, and am not interested in debating this ad nauseum since it's not my site or money out of my pocket. If the site owners of 2+2 don't care, that's fine.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
whether they are getting a free ride instead of being required to pay for advertising on the site,

[/ QUOTE ]
Even if they are why is that a problem?

[GrannyMae]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
whether they are getting a free ride instead of being required to pay for advertising on the site,

[/ QUOTE ]
Even if they are why is that a problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

this is a joke question, right? you are playing mongoloid's advocate?

[[Phill]]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
whether they are getting a free ride instead of being required to pay for advertising on the site,

[/ QUOTE ]
Even if they are why is that a problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

this is a joke question, right? you are playing mongoloid's advocate?

[/ QUOTE ]

Racism?

Plus his comment is 100% valid.

[GrannyMae]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
whether they are getting a free ride instead of being required to pay for advertising on the site,

[/ QUOTE ]
Even if they are why is that a problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

this is a joke question, right? you are playing mongoloid's advocate?

[/ QUOTE ]

Racism?

Plus his comment is 100% valid.

[/ QUOTE ]

do i really have to explain all the reasons why we can't give it away for free? please don't make me.

i'll give you a taste as to why it is bad in this case (other situations have completely different reasons usually).

1. it will open a floodgate for all coaches. you are not going to allow some and not the others, right? when this floodgate is open, we are left with nothing but a spam farm and 2p2 has lost value.

2. it is a "self policing" rule. scamsters and fraudsters are less likely to show their faces under a system where they are in contact with and paying a webmaster (chuck)

3. finally, those that are awful coaches are less likely to try and charge for services, thus keeping most out of the forum.

we had a funny post in the mod forum about this. some joker just started playing in 2006 and wanted to be allowed to mention his services for free. his credentials were PT stats indicating a good RUN, not good play. if this guy were allowed to advertise for free, he might have cost many members a ton of money in the long run. there is a perception that if we allow it at 2P2, then it is legit. did i mention HE STARTED PLAYING IN 2006?????? not legit.

[[Phill]]

But the point is, if people are allowed to ask about coaches, the entire community will regulate that part of it because everyone drives to put down others achievements when it comes to poker.

But if you can just pay $25/month to be able to call yourself a 2+2 approved coach this is obviously leading to a situation where people wont check out coaches because they assume the site will have done so (and could potentially lead to a liability on 2+2's part).

Currently we have a situation where people can play on reputation but no one can find out exactly how good they are either as a player or coach. Id be a pretty bad one imo, but ive 4k+ posts and im relatively well known round here - it wouldnt be hard to play that off with some fake PT stats.

As it happens, the exact opposite of what you said is likely true - and ultimately the best system from a user perspective were to allow people to openly market themselves based on their abilities and not that they paid 2+2 a fee - like any free market the best will succeed and the worst will drop by the wayside.

Basically, if that guy had posted stats that showed he had a good run, he would be utterly crushed by the mods/users.

Maybe the ideal solution is a Coaching Forum, like the Rakeback/Affiliate Forum where paying a fee isnt required, i dunno - but simply banning all discussion of coaches and training sites WONT make them disappear but it will drive them off the radar, thus removing natual safeguards.

[BluffTHIS!]

Phil,

I am just going to make one more reply to you. Firstly, you are ignoring (because it doesn't hurt you financially just as it doesn't hurt the rest of us posters), the fact that those coaches and coaching sites are using the biggest poker forum on the net to get customers, and paying nothing for that customer acquisition, unlike what other persons and companies are required to do.

And secondly, your assertion that there is somehow some safeguards currently mostly isn't true for the reasons I gave earlier, which is that it costs too much for a greater number of posters to read/watch/get taught, that strategy advice, unlike a $20 book, which just results in non-substantive glowing praise mostly, from n00bish posters who don't know good from bad advice.

But the main point is the first one, about getting customers for free off 2+2, especially as other concerns are being charged advertising or sponsorship fees.