|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Do you tan? | |||
| Yes |
   
|
7 | 16.28% |
| No |
  
|
14 | 32.56% |
| No, but my significant other does |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| No, but I'd consider it |
  
|
4 | 9.30% |
| Tanning is gay, dude |
  
|
18 | 41.86% |
| Voters: 43. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#2
11-27-2007, 07:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
6.50 turbo 10 handed and 6 max please, and lower rake obviously
|
|
#3
11-27-2007, 08:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
150-300 25 ante would be awesome.
|
|
#5
11-27-2007, 10:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
1. lower the rake plz. The rake is way too high for us regulars to make profit in the long run. The rake is the major issue why I stopped playing at stars. If you want another long-term, regular customer (me) back, lower the rake.
2. make it 10 handed. 3. keep the antes, but have 150/300/25 between 100/200 and 200/400 4. give us rake back deal, like FTP does. 5. turn off the doom switch, I hate calling all in with big ace and always get sucked out by small Ace.
|
|
#6
11-29-2007, 11:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
Lower Rake
Everything above $27 will be effectively dead in a year if you don't There is a Laffer Curve for rake and you guys are obviously on the backside of it. BTW I'm one of the highest volume $55+5 turbo players on your site. They just happen to be 45-mans. But I'll gladly pay it because you are good at bringing fish there. Not the case at the 9-mans. Its simple 52+3s = more money for Pokerstars longterm
|
|
#7
11-28-2007, 10:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
Rake is a huge factor.
Also I would introduce a buy in in between 27 and 60 because 35 really doesn't work, how about 45 (41+4)? Also get rid of 100/200 and move directly to 100/200/25 and then 150/300/50
|
|
#8
11-28-2007, 10:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
[ QUOTE ]
Rake is a huge factor. Also I would introduce a buy in in between 27 and 60 because 35 really doesn't work, how about 45 (41+4)? Also get rid of 100/200 and move directly to 100/200/25 and then 150/300/50 [/ QUOTE ] we hated 32+3 because it had the highest rake of any turbo, the games never ever run more than a few at a time 41+4, are your retarded? (srsly)
|
|
#10
11-28-2007, 10:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 1-table S&Gs - your feedback requested
[ QUOTE ]
would be 41+3 luisgallo, 41+4 for a turbo is really bad [/ QUOTE ] correct, I just meant to have a buy in in that range, not really bothered in working out the exact rake. Unfortunately I am pretty busy unlike Daleroxxu who is fighting a crusade against me...what a loser!
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
