Congratulations WPEX on dumbest improvement ever

[realjaydub]

[ QUOTE ]
We can debate HHs and HUDs forever, but splitting the already meager player base like this is so far beyond stupid that it stretches the imagination as to how otherwise rational business people could possibly come up with it.



[/ QUOTE ]

So you won't play on the non hud tables?

If you play were the action is, there is no seperation of players.

But if you need hud to play, then you're alienating yourself.

[mo42nyy]

[ QUOTE ]
lol at tuff fish , he used a HUD and got crushed by EM2 multiple times ON VIDEO!!!! ...a hud doesnt automatically make u a winning player , and there are ton of players with HUDS who are big losers in a ton of games...

[/ QUOTE ]


true but take away software and there would be even more

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

As a side affect i would bet that the avg pot in your non hhs rooms will be larger then in your hhs rooms

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an interesting hypothesis. I would be interested to see evidence to back it.
(not doubting it's possibility, just looking for confirmation of it)

[/ QUOTE ]

All you need to do is compare the poker rooms that allow huds vs the rooms that don't.The avg players per flop are higher and the avg pots are always higher in the non hud sites.

I think the same thing would would happen in the hh rooms vs the non hh rooms.It might not show up at wpex because of the limited number of tables.But if this were done at a larger site i believe it would be more evident.

[/ QUOTE ]

we could perhaps analyse hand histories to compare the different environments?


oh, wait....

[Guthrie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We can debate HHs and HUDs forever, but splitting the already meager player base like this is so far beyond stupid that it stretches the imagination as to how otherwise rational business people could possibly come up with it.



[/ QUOTE ]

So you won't play on the non hud tables?

If you play were the action is, there is no seperation of players.

But if you need hud to play, then you're alienating yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]
I can play either way, but I'd like to play more than one table at a time. Now apparently I'd have to play one table with PT and player names, and one table completely without HHs at all. That makes it fairly difficult to track my own results, some will show up in PT and some won't, so now I'll have to write down results from every table every time I sit down, every time I rebuy, and every time I leave, rendering PT useless unless I use a HUD. We're going the wrong way.

I was getting along fine with the previous system, PT, but no player names, and no HUDs. At least I could use PT to track results and play two tables under the same conditions.

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
Mr GM,

I believe you are on the right track. Your clientele is the recreational player. They will appreciate not being fed to the sharks. These guys are the pro and semi pro grinder nits. Ignore them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just withdrew 3k from the site and ceased playing 15,000 hands per month thanks to the multiple "improvements." Yep, they're on the right track!

[ QUOTE ]

In due course you will have a thriving poker room.


[/ QUOTE ]

I wish you were right. But, lol.

[ QUOTE ]

Fix the following.

Funds movement on and off the site. (I know you are a bit hamstrung here for the time being, do the best you can).

[/ QUOTE ]

One of your few valid points. And one I'm sure wsex would address if they could.

[ QUOTE ]

There is still squawking about the look, feel, and operational fitness of your software.

[/ QUOTE ]

The software is fine and much improved from when the poker room first opened.

[ QUOTE ]

Allow (untrackable) screen name changes, and/or allow the choice of two or more screen names, one of which can be selected at the beginning of each session.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, whatever. I really don't see this as a selling point for new players though. It will just make them paranoid.

[ QUOTE ]

I will be along shortly. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Tuff

[/ QUOTE ]

WHAT. THE. [censored]. You don't even play at wsex, and yet you feel like your opinion should count for something?

The site's numbers have been getting worse and worse. A good part of that is no doubt due to the legislation and the difficulty in getting funds online. But the last few moves wsex has made or is about to make (splitting the tables, going to contributed rakeback) are not going to help.

75% rakeback is still a huge selling point. As are the "aces never lose" promotion and, to a lesser degree, the value added tourneys. Wsex SHOULD be increasing traffic on a weekly basis.

These are strong selling points and real benefits. Contributed rakeback is tough to sell as a benefit because, as I have noted before, MOST PLAYERS DON'T KNOW THAT THEY ARE BAD!

And splitting the tables merely alienates existing customers and waters down the already-thin games.

Wsex GM, please stop listening to tuff fish... he doesn't even play on your site!

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]

.
.
I just withdrew 3k from the site and ceased playing .........
.
.


[/ QUOTE ]

Things are looking up. Please, all 2+2ers leaving WSEX, log out here.

BTW, That 3K should belong to the regular sports betting clientelle at WSEX.

Tuff

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
BTW, That 3K should belong to the regular sports betting clientelle at WSEX.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't even know what you're trying to say here.

FWIW, I originally deposited on the site to make sports bets and get a deposit bonus.

I never cleared the bonus, but I did wager about $800-$1,000 in sports bets.

I won about $100 sports betting, the rest of the profit was off poker regs and rakeback.

[BuddyQ]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't even know what you're trying to say here.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT. The guy is a [censored] crank, did you see his videos for [censored] sake! Rational discussion w/ Tuff only leads to head banging frustration, save yourself the trouble.

Weirdly, this is the guy who seems to have the ear of the GM.

[icheckcallu]

my theory is that guys like ed balfour is using wpex to test run his losing bots.

[RIIT]

[ QUOTE ]
Hello,

We responded to the wishes at this site and other customer requests by offering a full hand history, do what you want with it, hook up IBM Super Blue with a HUD if you like tables. At the same time we continue to offer tables to our players that are not HUD and datamining friendly.

If the prevailing sentiment is full hand histories is good and only a few people want the non-HH tables then the HH should fill up accordingly. Why do people who want full HH and HUDS care if there are also alternative tables at the same time?

You want tables with full HH's and unconditional 75% rakeback. That's what we are offering. So come on back and play.

We eventually want to offer HH's to the anonymous tables, but it will take a bit more work. Once that's installed there will be no names at the seats or in the chat and the HH will just show your name at your seat.

The platform is very stable. All of the disconnect nonsense is behind us. I am still waiting for a report on disconnect protect abuse and will probably be modifying that feature very soon.

Thanks to all who left the supportive comments.

Fred

[/ QUOTE ]

Fred,

I applaud you for having the balls to experiment here. The opinions for/against in this thread are only opinions and have much less value than the actual hard stats you will obtain over the next year about who really wants what based on which type of tables get populated and not-populated.

The bottom line is that you are increasing the overall total amount of freedom available to your players and this is good.

The players whining in this thread want to force you to accept the role they want you to play which is to congregate a large mass of players who are willing to play they way they do - this is understandable from their point of view and they'd be right if theirs was the only single universal viewpoint about how online poker should be defined.

Now for some suggestions:

If you truly intend to provide dark tables then you need to be willing to have a total blackout on all hh info of any kind whatsoever. This means no hh records with or without player names. It also means all chairs should always have normalized player names: Player1, Player2, ... PlayerN, etc. These conditions would be about as serious as you can be about zero tracking. The potential downside is that entertainment/personality value is lowered considerably for dark tables but the average anti-tracker doesn't fully get this. There are players out there who "say" they want tracking eliminated but when you show them what a real dark table would be like they tend to pause and rethink the issues (i.e. they didn't realize how important entertainment/personality is to their experience)

On the flip side, for the HH tables, you need to consider raising your bar even more and perform a guaranteed delivery of all server side HH info at the end of each hand to each player. Server side HH info includes all card information seen and not seen during the hand - including mucked hands and undealt common cards (which makes rabbit hunting possible).

RIIT