Zero Rake Poker Business plan

[freecard4all]

[ QUOTE ]
are you now doing this to programmers too?

[/ QUOTE ]
LOL. He's happy there's someone like you who works for free (or good feeling). If you mean that's exploitation then yes, he's exploiting you [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

as of that multitabling) he's one-tabler and he doesn't like multitablers. It's like a fisherman who has his stick and chair and don't like that big fishing vessels.

I don't think anybody takes seriously that multitablers slow down games (although I sometimes does when happens something outside of the poker itself).

The real problem is multitablers drain the pond faster. If you do also you don't have to care. But if you don't then it's an advantage of others.

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you seriously contending that people whom on average *take less than one second* to act actually "slow" the games????

I am saying they take a hell of a lot longer than 1 sec

or as you say "it is fun to tweak them a bit" - are you now doing this to programmers too?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I am tweaking the nit grinders who hate the idea that something other than Party 2004 will show up on the legalized scene.

Tuff << currently 4th from bottom in chips in the trout tournament

[kemystery]

tuff your ranting in this thread is epic, I can only imagine with an open minded protagonist like yourself running this horse and pony show, this site will the one of the biggest success stories since PartyBackGammon

[skoal2k4]

ffs, quit talking about this idea and do it already. The sooner you get this done, the sooner you fail and fall flat on your face. If you seriously think a lot of people will stop playing at trusted sites to play at some unknown "home game site", you are truly moronic. Just face it. You are not a good poker player. You can limit play to one table, or many. You can allow huds or not. No matter what measures you take, you will never beat the game. A lot of people will never beat the game. Quit making excuses for your lack of talent, man up, and get over it because very few people really care. Your 15 minutes are up

[CAMEL1111]

[ QUOTE ]
ffs, quit talking about this idea and do it already. The sooner you get this done, the sooner you fail and fall flat on your face. If you seriously think a lot of people will stop playing at trusted sites to play at some unknown "home game site", you are truly moronic. Just face it. You are not a good poker player. You can limit play to one table, or many. You can allow huds or not. No matter what measures you take, you will never beat the game. A lot of people will never beat the game. Quit making excuses for your lack of talent, man up, and get over it because very few people really care. Your 15 minutes are up

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya it's failed before and will fail again.

It's like a hotel offering rooms at 15.00 a night but it's roach infested and there is no staff.

A rakefree site can't work because there is no revenue nor players. People would rather pay the premium to play at a decent site with good service.

[El_Hombre_Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ffs, quit talking about this idea and do it already. The sooner you get this done, the sooner you fail and fall flat on your face. If you seriously think a lot of people will stop playing at trusted sites to play at some unknown "home game site", you are truly moronic. Just face it. You are not a good poker player. You can limit play to one table, or many. You can allow huds or not. No matter what measures you take, you will never beat the game. A lot of people will never beat the game. Quit making excuses for your lack of talent, man up, and get over it because very few people really care. Your 15 minutes are up

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya it's failed before and will fail again.

It's like a hotel offering rooms at 15.00 a night but it's roach infested and there is no staff.

A rakefree site can't work because there is no revenue nor players. People would rather pay the premium to play at a decent site with good service.

[/ QUOTE ]

Naah. The idea at its core isn't bad. I don't know whether the technical, security, logistical, and payment issues could be overcome, but I do know that all the rake we pay ought to be solid incentive for it to be thoroughly explored by enthusiasts with more programming and network saavy than me. I just don't think Tuff is up to the job.

And he's not even really serious. In the end, if someone created a platform to accomplish free poker rooms, but they allowed multi-tabling, he would still be howling at the wind.

But give credit where credit is due. Free internet poker is a beautiful dream, and his "performance" in the "Bad Day" recording is so funny. In fact, I'm going to put it on my favorites, and play it after every bad beat to keep the right frame of mind.

[chesspain]

Does one get a tax break for investing in a business operated by a retard?

[br.bm]

lol @ single tabling

[Tuff_Fish]

What is your worst nightmare?

Not an inability to multitable, but the absence of fish on your current "24 tables allowed" sites. (actually you are mostly playing against each other now anyway)

Where have all the fishies gone?

They will all be gone in due course.

XPOSTED FROM THE SOFTWARE FORUM

I think you are thinking quite correctly on this. The purchasers of the server software could subscribe to an independant 3rd party security service which would receive every hand and use algorythms to check for bad patterns. Also, they could look at any hand history which was brought to their attention.


Since, by definition, the site is honest, it is YOUR site, the only threat to overall honesty is strangers coming in and colluding. It is my belief that colluders leave pretty fair sized footprints. I am not an expert though.

If I have missed something, let em know.

So far I believe this is where we stand.

The software program itself. Being looked at. (by a number of people I assume) It is unclear if a solid poker site program can come from the open source. We will know in due course. There is no doubt that such software can be obtained, but at what cost?

Site software security. This is 99.9% solved, believe it.

Security against outside colluders and cheats. I think the 3rd party security group is a good approach. One company could serve many "homegame" sites.

Payment processing. Right now, I can only see some sort of situation where a trusted 3rd party does the banking. This can be as simple as the homesite operators wife.

"Hello Molly? This is Ralph. Have Mike put $100 bucks into my play money account. The check is on it's way. Thanks"

"Hello Molly? My play money account is up to $290. You can check it with Mike to be sure. Can you have him take $200 out of my play money account. My son will stop over a bit later around 3 or so and pick up $200 cash. Yep, it is the wife's birthday. You know how that goes. Thanks"

That model works for the small homegame network. Correct me if I am wrong, but I am thinking this is similar to how the underground home games operate.



You all might think of upping your table limit to 36. Time is growing short.

Tuff

You guys can disparage my poker ability all you want. It is not going to change the fact that the online poker environment is going to change radically, and relatively soon. Whether that change is to the good or bad will depend on your point of view. If the FoF bunch prevails, we will have no problems. There will be no online poker except for the most hardcore willing to jump through incredible hoops.

TF

[kemystery]

"There will be no online poker except for the most hardcore willing to jump through incredible hoops."

lol how can any1 support this guy? ^^^^