ipoker bonuses vs. the rest

[bkkdude]

u r hard.

name a dealt room where its harder to clear bonuses than ongame.



or llook k at it this way why is it that rooms go from dealt to contribution, not the other way aound.

it wouldnt surprise me to see all rooms go to contribution method. if full tilt did i bet cake would too.

[Bobo Fett]

[ QUOTE ]
u r hard.

name a dealt room where its harder to clear bonuses than ongame.



or llook k at it this way why is it that rooms go from dealt to contribution, not the other way aound.

it wouldnt surprise me to see all rooms go to contribution method. if full tilt did i bet cake would too.

[/ QUOTE ]
At my game/limits? All but Crypto.

Now, let me explain...I don't think I was doing a good job last time.

I conceded that if the bonuses at two different sites were identical in every way except that one was dealt and one was contributed, then of course the dealt bonus would be better for any decent player.

The next point I tried to make was the following. If, for a momemt, one were to remove the dealt/contributed factor, OnGame is easily the best clearing bonus at my game/stakes. Since I play SH FL, and OnGame has 5-handed SH tables, contributed vs dealt hurts me less. Even taking into account that it is contributed, for me the OnGame bonus is only surpassed by Crypto. For others, for example FR or NL players, contributed is a much bigger factor, and then maybe OnGame isn't as good.

What I was trying to do was simply disprove your assertion that dealt bonuses are better than contributed, no matter what. In general they are, but that depends on the terms. Let me use a ridiculous example - what if one site were to give back the equivalent of $0.10 for every $1 rake for any hands you were dealt in, and another were to give $100 for every $1 rake for any hands you contributed to...which site would you play at? Extreme example, of course...but I think it illustrates my point, which is this:

Contributed vs dealt is an important component of a bonus, but not the only one. Also, it's importance will vary from player to player, depending on what they play.

[bkkdude]

i know a guy like you who tries to give non real world examples to prove yr point.

full tilt and cake have dealt, ongame has contribution. please use their rates to convince me or others that they would be better off at ongame re bonus and rkbck.

[Bobo Fett]

[ QUOTE ]
i know a guy like you who tries to give non real world examples to prove yr point.

full tilt and cake have dealt, ongame has contribution. please use their rates to convince me or others that they would be better off at ongame re bonus and rkbck.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sigh. I don't know much about your game/stakes (IE not just what they are, but how they play - pot sizes, etc), nor how you play, so I wouldn't be qualified to do so. I already posted my own numbers for Cake vs OnGame...OnGame clears almost twice as fast for me. FT is worse. For me, OnGame is best. Maybe it isn't for you. All I have been trying to get from you all this time is a concession that even if OnGame isn't the best bonus for you, it might be for other people.

[bkkdude]

hey mr this.

if you really want to clear [censored] fast learn plo high and low 8 or better.

i just checked bw clear rates. hmmm nl .25 .50 ongme 5x bonus clears at 1.34 hr full ring. cake clears at 1.27 hour.

so to clear 100$ at each should take similiar amount of hours.

yet it takes me 4 times as long at ongame than at cake. somethin just doesnt add up.

cleareance rates at bw just like 2+2 =7.

bw good for informing players of reloads.red star got one now.