|
|
#41
07-27-2006, 03:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: What has party done to 2/4?!
[ QUOTE ]
They want more $$$$$, and they think they are going to get it by increasing the rake + some lame promo. [/ QUOTE ] Wrong! The entire $0.50 rake is going to the Monster/Jackpot promotion. Also, no rake comes out of the pot until it hits $20.00. At that point, $1 normal rake and $0.50 Jackpot/Monster rake is taken. Since about 47% of all 2/4 hands are less than $20, 47% of all hands HAVE NO RAKE (according to my PTDB). I love the Jackpot games and the Monster promotion is turning out to be a GREAT thing for TAG's. 
|
|
#42
07-27-2006, 04:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What has party done to 2/4?!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] They want more $$$$$, and they think they are going to get it by increasing the rake + some lame promo. [/ QUOTE ] Wrong! The entire $0.50 rake is going to the Monster/Jackpot promotion. Also, no rake comes out of the pot until it hits $20.00. At that point, $1 normal rake and $0.50 Jackpot/Monster rake is taken. Since about 47% of all 2/4 hands are less than $20, 47% of all hands HAVE NO RAKE (according to my PTDB). I love the Jackpot games and the Monster promotion is turning out to be a GREAT thing for TAG's. [/ QUOTE ] What percentage of the pots that you win are under $20?
|
|
#43
07-27-2006, 04:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What has party done to 2/4?!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] They want more $$$$$, and they think they are going to get it by increasing the rake + some lame promo. [/ QUOTE ] Wrong! The entire $0.50 rake is going to the Monster/Jackpot promotion. Also, no rake comes out of the pot until it hits $20.00. At that point, $1 normal rake and $0.50 Jackpot/Monster rake is taken. Since about 47% of all 2/4 hands are less than $20, 47% of all hands HAVE NO RAKE (according to my PTDB). I love the Jackpot games and the Monster promotion is turning out to be a GREAT thing for TAG's. [/ QUOTE ] What percentage of the pots that you win are under $20? [/ QUOTE ] Darn good question and I can't seem to answer it. I do know that I make about 5% more than the rake if that helps.
|
|
#44
07-27-2006, 04:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What has party done to 2/4?!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] They want more $$$$$, and they think they are going to get it by increasing the rake + some lame promo. [/ QUOTE ] Wrong! The entire $0.50 rake is going to the Monster/Jackpot promotion. Also, no rake comes out of the pot until it hits $20.00. At that point, $1 normal rake and $0.50 Jackpot/Monster rake is taken. Since about 47% of all 2/4 hands are less than $20, 47% of all hands HAVE NO RAKE (according to my PTDB). I love the Jackpot games and the Monster promotion is turning out to be a GREAT thing for TAG's. [/ QUOTE ] What percentage of the pots that you win are under $20? [/ QUOTE ] Darn good question and I can't seem to answer it. I do know that I make about 5% more than the rake if that helps. [/ QUOTE ] I ran through a (very small) subset of my 2/4 hand histories and came up with 23.5/67 hands I won where the pot ended up over $20 and would have been raked under the Monster promotion. (The .5 represents a chopped pot.) I did this just by opening up the hand history text files, Ctrl-F'ing for "(my username) wins" and counting them up. If I knew Perl or SQL, I could do this a lot faster. Oh well. FWIW, I did think that I was stealing blinds/pots from these tables a lot more often than I usually am able to do. At 8 wins/100 hands, 3 Monster-raked hands/8 wins and $.50/Monster hand, that's $1.50/100 hands I would have lost, or 0.375 BB/100. This is probably on the low end; maybe somewhere between 0.5-0.6 BB/100 might be more common for a typical 2+2er playing 2/4.
|
|
#45
07-27-2006, 05:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What has party done to 2/4?!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] They want more $$$$$, and they think they are going to get it by increasing the rake + some lame promo. [/ QUOTE ] Wrong! The entire $0.50 rake is going to the Monster/Jackpot promotion. Also, no rake comes out of the pot until it hits $20.00. At that point, $1 normal rake and $0.50 Jackpot/Monster rake is taken. Since about 47% of all 2/4 hands are less than $20, 47% of all hands HAVE NO RAKE (according to my PTDB). I love the Jackpot games and the Monster promotion is turning out to be a GREAT thing for TAG's. [/ QUOTE ] What percentage of the pots that you win are under $20? [/ QUOTE ] Darn good question and I can't seem to answer it. I do know that I make about 5% more than the rake if that helps. [/ QUOTE ] I ran through a (very small) subset of my 2/4 hand histories and came up with 23.5/67 hands I won where the pot ended up over $20 and would have been raked under the Monster promotion. (The .5 represents a chopped pot.) I did this just by opening up the hand history text files, Ctrl-F'ing for "(my username) wins" and counting them up. If I knew Perl or SQL, I could do this a lot faster. Oh well. FWIW, I did think that I was stealing blinds/pots from these tables a lot more often than I usually am able to do. At 8 wins/100 hands, 3 Monster-raked hands/8 wins and $.50/Monster hand, that's $1.50/100 hands I would have lost, or 0.375 BB/100. This is probably on the low end; maybe somewhere between 0.5-0.6 BB/100 might be more common for a typical 2+2er playing 2/4. [/ QUOTE ] I'll leave it to someone else to get more detail, for me, this verifies that a significent number of 2/4 hands go unraked and that the impact of the $0.50 isn't as much as all the whiners implied.
|
|
#46
07-27-2006, 08:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What has party done to 2/4?!
I certainly don't have a statistically significant sample to back up my anecdotal observations, but I certainly feel like the game at the Monster tables is a LOT softer than the other 2/4 tables.
I'm only playing Monster tables now, and my short-term net winrate is up.
|
|
#47
07-27-2006, 09:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What has party done to 2/4?!
I've been going back after each session and checking PT to see how many raked hands I had. Obviously a small sample size but I'm paying about $1-2/100 hands or .25-.5bb/100 hands. It obviously depends on how many hands you are winning. Some of the tables do seem looser, but that is not always the case. Many of the monster tables seem as tight as ever, I think as time wears on play will be tighter and tighter as people giveup on crazy play trying to win a jackpot. So, to sum up my thoughts, yes monster tables do have a fairly significant impact on my winrates at 2/4 and no the play has not loosend up enough to justify my extra cost. However, I'm still going to stick to party as I play full ring 2/4 and no one else offers enough tables of a high enough quality to make the lower cost worthwhile IMO.
|
|
#48
07-28-2006, 03:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What has party done to 2/4?!
[ QUOTE ]
I'll leave it to someone else to get more detail, for me, this verifies that a significent number of 2/4 hands go unraked and that the impact of the $0.50 isn't as much as all the whiners implied. [/ QUOTE ] Even if only 47% of pots won are raked, someone who wins 10% of his pots will lose .47bb/100 at 2/4, which is 25% of a 2bb/100 player's earning. Assuming you have a non-poker job, I wonder if you'd 'whine' if your boss gave you a 25% pay cut. And as for all of the money going to the Monster Pot [I don't know if this is true or not], it's largely immaterial for the limit players. It's paramount to telling an NFL kicker that the NFL is taking 25% of his salary and giving him a chance to earn it back playing Major League Soccer. Your average kicker isn't going to find this proposition very attractive.
|
|
#49
07-28-2006, 03:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What has party done to 2/4?!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I'll leave it to someone else to get more detail, for me, this verifies that a significent number of 2/4 hands go unraked and that the impact of the $0.50 isn't as much as all the whiners implied. [/ QUOTE ] Even if only 47% of pots won are raked, someone who wins 10% of his pots will lose .47bb/100 at 2/4, which is 25% of a 2bb/100 player's earning. Assuming you have a non-poker job, I wonder if you'd 'whine' if your boss gave you a 25% pay cut. And as for all of the money going to the Monster Pot [I don't know if this is true or not], it's largely immaterial for the limit players. It's paramount to telling an NFL kicker that the NFL is taking 25% of his salary and giving him a chance to earn it back playing Major League Soccer. Your average kicker isn't going to find this proposition very attractive. [/ QUOTE ] All of what you say is true, except that you have left out one very important item. The action of the bad players is much jucier in the BBJ games than the regular games. This more than makes up for the extra drop.
|
|
#50
07-28-2006, 05:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What has party done to 2/4?!
[ QUOTE ]
action of the bad players is much jucier in the BBJ games than the regular games. This more than makes up for the extra drop. [/ QUOTE ] Of course this is mere conjecture on your part. Historically, most of the good posters in this forum have chosen to play in the 'tighter' non-BBJ games, although there have been a few good posters who have championed the extra looseness of the BBJ tables. At this point, 3 days worth of data isn't enough to tell if the Monster tables will be loose enough to justify an additional ~.5BB per 100 hands or not. At any rate, forcing players to pay an extra .5bb/100 is a low-class move by Party. It may be that they have enough of a monopoly that serious players will simply have to suck it up because there's not a better place to play (I know I have), but this type of heavy-handedness by Party keeps many players, myself included, continually looking at other sites for a better place to play.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
