|
|
#201
07-12-2007, 03:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: so is WPEX down?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] A WSEX parable: Businessman owns a premium wine store. He wants to increase sales, so he acquires the building next door with the intention to create a happening night spot. The theory being that some of the people frequenting the swinging night spot will come to the wine store and buy some premium wine. However, he wants to create a unique night spot, a place free from the usual unsavoriness of bars/clubs. So he bars alcoholics, drug users, smokers, gamblers, rowdy characters, and other low-lives from entering his night club. He now has a wholesome, friendly, and safe night club. Unfortunately, there are only a handful of folks interested in night spots who pass muster to frequent his bar, so soon he has to institute a cover charge. Now even less people come. In the end, his bar is shut down. Also, he did not increase sales at his wine shop. GG. [/ QUOTE ] Except that WSEX caters to poker players and sports bettors, so the parable regarding the exclusion of degenerates seems quite out of place. [/ QUOTE ] Not sure you understand what a parable is. Do you really think it is my position to keep degenerates out of Wsex? In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite. All players must be let in, the good the bad and the ugly. Limiting the site to the 'folks looking for a friendly game' was pure stupidity, and is THE reason the site traffic is so weak. |
|
#202
07-12-2007, 03:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: so is WPEX down?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] WSEX does not allow HUDs and 8 tables for the same reason it is switching to contributed rakeback: they aim to provide a fun service to their sportsbettors at a small cost. Most sportsbettors would prefer to play a loose, freewheeling type of game, and banning Huds, contributed rakeback, and limiting the number of tables one can play all promote this style of play. And, they don't want to give any extra advantage to solid players. How is this difficult to understand? [/ QUOTE ] Yes, that was the theory, and it is very easy to understand. Unfortunately, it is fundamentally flawed. [/ QUOTE ] YOU ARE THE ONE WHO IS FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED |
|
#203
07-12-2007, 03:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: so is WPEX down?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] WSEX does not allow HUDs and 8 tables for the same reason it is switching to contributed rakeback: they aim to provide a fun service to their sportsbettors at a small cost. Most sportsbettors would prefer to play a loose, freewheeling type of game, and banning Huds, contributed rakeback, and limiting the number of tables one can play all promote this style of play. And, they don't want to give any extra advantage to solid players. How is this difficult to understand? [/ QUOTE ] Yes, that was the theory, and it is very easy to understand. Unfortunately, it is fundamentally flawed. [/ QUOTE ] YOU ARE THE ONE WHO IS FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED [/ QUOTE ] You sound like a tool. You're not exactly giving your money away at the tables. Kind of funny how strongly you feel about this when you are the type of player you say they don't want. Perhaps, they should just shitcan the whole thing and have the poker room available ONLY to their sportsbettors. Problem solved. I'm sure Party never made a dime off their blackjack with all those hudbots like Kurosh. |
|
#204
07-12-2007, 03:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: so is WPEX down?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] WSEX does not allow HUDs and 8 tables for the same reason it is switching to contributed rakeback: they aim to provide a fun service to their sportsbettors at a small cost. Most sportsbettors would prefer to play a loose, freewheeling type of game, and banning Huds, contributed rakeback, and limiting the number of tables one can play all promote this style of play. And, they don't want to give any extra advantage to solid players. How is this difficult to understand? [/ QUOTE ] Yes, that was the theory, and it is very easy to understand. Unfortunately, it is fundamentally flawed. [/ QUOTE ] YOU ARE THE ONE WHO IS FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED [/ QUOTE ] Nice response. Very intelligent. 
|
|
#205
07-12-2007, 03:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: so is WPEX down?
I don't want 75 contributed rake, obviously. I want 100 percent rakeback calculated the current way. Wait, no 1000%. OH HOLD ON I'VE SOLVED WSEX'S PROBLEM: TRILLION PERCENT RAKEBACK! OMG THEY WOULD BE THE BIGGEST SITE ON THE INTERNETS!
WSEX's business model doesn't conform to my interests in any way, nor should it. The current model wasn't working well for them, and they are making changes that might fix that. Hopefully they will, we will see. |
|
#208
07-12-2007, 04:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: so is WPEX down?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I think that the real issue is that you will be forced to change your style of play, and you're worried that you won't be able to adapt to playing with a double-digit VPIP. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, that's nice. There's maybe only one person full ring that has a single digit vpip. But, let's take your example at face value. What you're saying is, people won't be able to adjust and thus won't profit from the games. Okay. So, some regulars (nits/weak-tights, whatever) have been dropping a little bit off the site. More will drop in the coming weeks. Then, contributed rakeback, you say won't make any regulars leave, but in the same breath you say "you're worried that you won't be able to adapt" Since there's a lot of people that don't want the rake structure to change, there must be a lot of people that "won't be able to adapt" therefore, the numbers will drop even more. [/ QUOTE ] Have to agree with Mitch on this one, as a tighter solid "grinder" I think another kick to my rakeback would send me back to the busier sights. The reason I came over to WPEX was that despite the low traffic the 100% rakeback allowed me to put in less hours of play to make my "goals" on a weekly basis. It's often been a frustrating struggle with the lack of game selection and quality of players. If they switch to contributed and it doesn't cause some sort of traffic increase (which I dont see why it will, in fact I expect the "grinders", or a better term might be the "seat fillers" to return to their old sites) then i'll head back to other sites. The difference between 75% contributed and the rakeback/bonuses you can get on bigger networks is no longer enough to make me want to deal with the hassles of WPEX's growing pains. As a primarily NL player, sitting at a 6-max table now its very easy to quickly recognize the 3 or 4 other grinders at the table that aren't going to surrender their money to me because they're of similar quality and recognize the same in myself. Between $100NL and $400NL its not uncommon to see maybe 40 active seats running at a busy time. Of these 40 seats about 25+ of them are being filled by a small handful of grinding multitablers. Any decision (change to rake) that risks losing these players is one that negatively effects WPEX most pressing problem: game selection. The change isnt going to make me alter the profitable game I already play, that would be a bad $$ decision for me and I really can't see many successful grinders changing their games. I dont see any reason why the switch from dealt to contributed rake would bring in any new players as if they were cognizant enough to recognize the value in that, they would already be smart enough to have been playing for the 100% rake. Crap this post is too long for what i wanted to say. In closing, as great as it is to see all of the posts here suggesting good and bad ways to improve the site, none of this matters unless WSEX steps up and makes a decision that they want the poker room itself to be a profitable measure. As long as they continue to view it as merely a gateway to the sportsbook then they will never put in the time and resources required to compete with the giants of the market. I mean lets be honest, as great as WSEX_GM has been in monitoring this thread it is painfully clear that him and the entire skeleton staff that WPEX is running are stretched far too thin to compete with the sites that dominate the market. They either need to put the money behind it to succeed or just walk away, after this much time its become clear that the one-foot-in-the-door approach is not succeeding. Cheers, and GL to anyone in tonight's VIP tourney....unless you're the dick that knocked me out on Tuesday with A5o vs my AK, i wish you nothing but coolers tonight. |
|
#209
07-12-2007, 04:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: so is WPEX down?
[ QUOTE ]
The first 5k added tourney had over 400 players... [/ QUOTE ] Please, if you're going to state things as fact, please make sure they are true. If you mean the VERY FIRST $5K added tourney (the one on a Friday night before they announced they would be regular games) then this tourney had less than 400 runners in it. If you mean the first $5K added Tourney of the "Now Three Times A Week!!!" tourneys, then this tourney had just a few over 200 in it. The following 2 last week (Thu and Fri) were the only two that had 400+ in them. [ QUOTE ] ...the following week, (since the 25% cut), there were only 100 players. Expect to see maybe 80 tonight. This is a direct result of people making less in rakeback since there's a $75 minimum rakeback to play. [/ QUOTE ] Again, you are completely off here. The reason there are so few players the second week compared to the first week is because the $5K added Tourneys the first week WERE OPEN TO ALL PLAYERS. Only starting with Tuesday's Tourney did they start the $75 Rakeback required rule, and then the 100 players (who are allowed to play this as a type of VIP.) |
|
#210
07-12-2007, 06:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: so is WPEX down?
Okay, thanks for the clarification. In that case, I will be interested in seeing how many are registered next Tuesday. The whole point is, the numbers are down. If you play everday you can see this. That's not to say they can't turn things around, but just that in the interim things are going to slow down quite a bit.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
