Should I stick with Party?

[StayHungry]

I withdrew my roll from Party and I'm taking a break for a month. When I get back to the grind should I return to party or consider rakeback? I'm a micro grinder, and I've payed thousands in rake, my yearly RB would be quite decent. Should I just focus on table selection and stick to party though?
I basically just had the idea Party was the place to go and immediately got to business and didn't consider other options.

[DBSpecial]

Party hasn't been the juiciest site for a while now, and I didn't think the games were soft enough to justify playing without rakeback. So I moved to FTP.

[[Phill]]

Dunno if its allowed to be talked about, but there are ways around your situation if you want to play there with RB.

Dont PM me because ive no idea who to speak to nowadays, but if someone doesnt PM you about it id be shocked.

At the end of the day its all 'bout the bottom line. If RB is a significant figure then perhaps you should shift sites. But at the same time your winrate will likely suffer so its a case of six and two threes.

[StayHungry]

Phill that's basically it, I gotta figure whether RB is significant enough to justify the move. Who are the people dictating softest of sites too? it seems like everyone just rambles about that subject.

[[Phill]]

You dont have to make a life changing decision - you could try a site then move back.

As for whether its significant, compare your winrate to the winrate of someone really good at your stakes (see the strat forum that is applicable) then add what you work out to be RB.

Plus, like i said, there is a 3rd option of a new party account with RB - expect a PM within 24 hours i guess.

[StayHungry]

just checked a poker traffic site, seems Stars is #1 and Party is #2. That's the only indication of juiciness I need.

[[Phill]]

Actually, traffic is rarely a good indicator of juiciness, but most seem to forget just how big Party is without the US market.

Kinda makes you think where they would be today if the UIGEA didnt get passed.

[StayHungry]

But isn't traffic the only usable indicator. Following anything else would seem whimsical to me, eg. people preaching the fishiness of some site. There are legitimate indicators for softness like gimmicky sites that attract droolers, but then sharks will show eventually.

[demon102]

Im in the US and play at stars now cuz I dont have many options but before all the legislation here I always found the smaller sites to be the softest, it always seemed the smaller the site the worse the competition got

[[Phill]]

The softest sites are usually the most out of the way niche unknown type sites.

For instance there is a site out there that is only open to swedish players that is meant to be an absolute goldmine.

Not saying size isnt a usable indicator, but its true to say that the big sites have already attracted the sharks if you see what i mean.