|
|
#12
10-07-2006, 12:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Depressing, but surely value long term future.
Yes, that makes perfect sense - if the Over was at like -300.
The only thing I was pointing out was that the poster couldn't have seen the Under 6650 at +120, and then have Pinny pull the line and replace it at 7650. Must have been a big hammering of the Over between the time he saw it and the bumping to the new line. 
|
|
#13
10-07-2006, 12:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Depressing, but surely value long term future.
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, that makes perfect sense - if the Over was at like -300. The only thing I was pointing out was that the poster couldn't have seen the Under 6650 at +120, and then have Pinny pull the line and replace it at 7650. Must have been a big hammering of the Over between the time he saw it and the bumping to the new line. [/ QUOTE ] This isn't always accurate. Pinny will hang an errant line. Catch huge action on it and just pull it instead of adjeusting.
|
|
#14
10-07-2006, 01:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Depressing, but surely value long term future.
[ QUOTE ]
Well, that's pretty weird because it's the over getting hammered now. I took Over +107, which moved to -116 not long afterwards, and it's now at -125. I'm considering hitting Under +109 now (though I'm not sure if I can after max betting the over earlier?). I was sure the over was a complete gimme, but now you guys have me second guessing myself. The numbers of entrants has grown every year since '71 except for one minor hiccup about 15 years ago. The trend would have to not only slow down but significantly reverse itself for the under to have a chance here. The legislation that just passed need not take effect until next summer, and may not put any restrictions on Neteller use, which would make its effects rather limited. I was present at the most recent WSOP and from the vibe I got out there, there's no indication this movement is slowing down. Everybody was once again surprised at having underestimated the amount of players. [/ QUOTE ] I can't see it getting to 6000 with the inevitable huge slowdown in online seats. Given that we don't know the buyin yet, or even if Harrah's will be under the same ownership, I think that over is very ambitious indeed. Lori
|
|
#15
10-07-2006, 02:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Depressing, but surely value long term future.
Eh, whatev. I just took the +109 to complete the 16 cent scalp. Might as well have put the money in the bank.
The line immediately shifted, as it did last time. Seems like the line moves wildly even if you just breathe on it.
|
|
#16
10-07-2006, 02:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Depressing, but surely value long term future.
[ QUOTE ]
I can't see it getting to 6000 with the inevitable huge slowdown in online seats. Given that we don't know the buyin yet, or even if Harrah's will be under the same ownership, I think that over is very ambitious indeed. [/ QUOTE ] I don't disagree with the rest, necessarily, but I think to call a huge slowdown "inevitable" is jumping the gun. As I've posted in the discussion in the legislation forum, i don't think this is going to actually affect the numbers of online poker in the negative much, if at all. We've yet to see what actual effect the legislation will have, beyond Party and a couple other sites pulling out of the US Market. I see nothing in the legilation that will make it difficult to get money to poker sites. In fact, if it ends up moving all the traffic to Tilt and Stars, we'll probably see some pretty significant growth as people find even better tournament structures there compared to Party. Party was never the best place to win a seat anyways... Not to mention the potential possiblity of a carve-out for online poker or legalization of US-run sites (Harrahs/etc) prior to WSOP '07 which would make this a slam-dunk over IMO. All in all, because of the high levels of uncertainty over the actual effect of the legislation, and because it's tying up money for so long, I'm certainly avoiding this. /my $0.02
|
|
#17
10-14-2006, 10:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Depressing, but surely value long term future.
|
|
#20
05-07-2007, 02:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Depressing, but surely value long term future.
Im expecting the number to be higher than last year. What was it last year?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
