#31
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Biggest beat in the history of Party Poker
[ QUOTE ]
Is there a BBJ drop when there isn't enough players to qualify for the the Jackpot? [/ QUOTE ] This is a really [censored] good question. EDIT: And I believe the answer is no, because I don't see any BBJ rake in the original screenshot. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Biggest beat in the history of Party Poker
wow PP is so scummy. 4 players in the hand? seriously doesn't make any sense, it's just another way for them to steal our money.
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Biggest beat in the history of Party Poker
[ QUOTE ]
wow PP is so scummy. 4 players in the hand? seriously doesn't make any sense, it's just another way for them to steal our money. [/ QUOTE ] If there is no rake taken out, then it is fair, but still dumb. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Biggest beat in the history of Party Poker
woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow...
reading that actually made me feel ill. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Biggest beat in the history of Party Poker
My nuts hurt just from reading this
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Biggest beat in the history of Party Poker
Confirmed that there is no BBJ drop with 3 or less players:
The jackpot contribution will only be collected if the hand is dealt on a jackpot table to four or more players and a rake is collected from the hand http://www.partypoker.com/news/event...bad_beat2.html |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Biggest beat in the history of Party Poker
wow...ouch
bring more russians on |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Biggest beat in the history of Party Poker
Also to everyone saying that its ridiculous that it doesn't pay for three players, think of it like this:
If they were to pay out on 3 players, they would have to drop for BBJ for 3 players. If they did that, that would be close to a full 1 ptbb/100 coming from each player in 3 handed games at 400nl. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Biggest beat in the history of Party Poker
So gross. disgusting.
At least you have sick story to tell. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Biggest beat in the history of Party Poker
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] wow PP is so scummy. 4 players in the hand? seriously doesn't make any sense, it's just another way for them to steal our money. [/ QUOTE ] If there is no rake taken out, then it is fair, but still dumb. [/ QUOTE ] Meh. I'm sure it's in the terms and conditions, so therefore the players play BBJ tables at their own risk. But, if the game is actually being played 3 handed, then they shouldn't call it a BBJ table while the jackpot isn't live. There should be like a sign that says "BBJ active" that goes off on a table when all the conditions aren't met so players can stop playing at that table if they want. |
|
|