Why online poker sucks.

STOPRAKEGREED · #1 11-27-2007, 10:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In Nov 05, Party started taking $250,000 more per day. Didn't that hurt the games?

[/ QUOTE ]
Sure did. However, we seem to have different definitions of "killed". IMO, hurting != killing. For example, the other day I hurt myself when I stubbed my toe on my computer desk. BUT interestingly enough I didn't kill myself!

[/ QUOTE ]

This adds nothing to the debate. Absurd point really.

DMoogle · #2 11-27-2007, 10:27 PM

IMO if the games are killed, that means that either people stopped playing them or they became unbeatable. That rake increase did neither.

STOPRAKEGREED · #3 11-27-2007, 10:29 PM

the number of people beating the game for anything significant has dropped by about 80%

DMoogle · #4 11-27-2007, 10:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
the number of people beating the game for anything significant has dropped by about 80%

[/ QUOTE ]
Can you back this up? Most people who beat the game "for anything significant" play at stakes where the rake is a much smaller percentage of the average pot size.

STOPRAKEGREED · #5 11-27-2007, 10:43 PM

yeah, i'll back it up. about 4 years ago almost all of the top san francisco pros were playing online. now about 80%, roughly 40 out of 50, have given it up. online is now just a bad joke unless you are one of the very best players.

edfurlong · #6 11-27-2007, 10:47 PM

About 4 years ago I could beat online poker, people learning hand rankings probably had more of an impact than the rake.

Wires · #7 11-27-2007, 10:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
About 4 years ago I could beat online poker, people learning hand rankings probably had more of an impact than the rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very true, ed. I started back in 2001 (maybe 02) with a PokerRoom account. Poker wasn't all over television yet and people had no clue about what constituted a good starting hand - players were splashing around with anything. I spent most of that time playing 5/10 and 10/20 LimitLHE and I don't think things were ever better.

I'm a much better player now than I was back then but I don't make as much. I'm getting all misty eyed just thinking about it.

The OP's assertion rake is killing the .01/.02 game is awesome though.

El_Hombre_Grande · #8 11-28-2007, 07:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]
About 4 years ago I could beat online poker, people learning hand rankings probably had more of an impact than the rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the(censored) unfortunate (censored) truth. There were people on party playing 5/10 limit who didn't know whether a flush or a straight was the winner. Well, the unfortunate part is they either went broke or got better.

PoorLawyer · #9 11-28-2007, 12:10 AM

[ QUOTE ]
yeah, i'll back it up. about 4 years ago almost all of the top san francisco pros were playing online. now about 80%, roughly 40 out of 50, have given it up. online is now just a bad joke unless you are one of the very best players.

[/ QUOTE ]

nice sample size.

Why are people even responding to this thread? Oh wait, I just did too. damn, foiled again.