Of course the network knows, I was referring to players having to wait to see the lobby.

Doubtful since they hate winning players too. I'd rather have P2P with segregation and ok traffic than no P2P, no segregation, and ****ty traffic.

The traffic issue will be critical in this program.

If you're in the top tier, you're getting cutoff from 1/3 of the players in the network.

So effectively, you'll have a player pool equivalent to Merge available to you, maybe even less.

Fair Play Technology......LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!

Yeah, Merge has lot's of problem. 2 more of their skins closed up shop today. Earlier in the week they shut down many of their high stakes tables. Like it or not, nearly every site is trying to do something to protect their ecology.

What 2 skins closed down?

Overbet and Ironduke.

Never heard of them.

True. I'm more than likely switching to winning network unless traffic stays relatively the same and cashouts get fixed. So yeah, probably switching.

I agree that the assault against winning players seems to be the main focus of all sites except maybe Stars.

However, there is huge difference between reducing rewards such as rakeback from 45% to 35% (Merge) and completely changing the playing field so winners don't have access to bad players as others do. (Party Poker and Revolution)

Party and Revolution are basically rigging the game to create more rake, payout less, and make more money. This is truly the most scummy move by a so called "poker site" in quite a while. Hopefully this is a massive fail and does not infect the rest of the internet poker community.

Quick follow up: Merge is not losing skins because they are choosing to leave. Merge is driving them out of business and the skins have absolutely no choice.

Have fun over there with the insane rake fest that is WPN. Games are probably the worst of all networks imo.

This, BBJ and The Beast is far more criminal than the segregation to me.

bye bye lock

i honestly believe the poker ecology improvement is far overdue and apparently the US online sites are now catching their tail (every US facing poker site) since pre BF. The only one that seems to be growing seems to be a site that doesn't accept US dollars but with another form of currency which does accept players. Pretty brilliant imo.

I would like to see Lock grow and with these sort of changes by segregation sounds pretty lame. I think there could be plenty of other ways to bring the beginning players into the fold than segregate them all together. Lobby could be redeveloped like most of the other skins. I don't see a beginner hitting a table with JeredHubbard from their first deposit. This also takes them out of the fold to even rail the high stakes if you are in the beginning level "to learn".

New software with lobby dynamics would be a better option and filtering the lobby for them would be better. Instead of offering tools like Holdem Manager, give them a free 30 day trial to a poker training site if they deposit xx amount of dollars.

Segregation (taking away something more from the payers) is not a good way of marketing the site. It is more damaging already in a proven negative state for Lock in the midst of payouts not being received timely (from 3+ months), constant negative feeds of multiaccounting of Girah, TMay (could have been handled more appropriately) and the like. Lock has a lot of work to do to bring the power of Lock back into the site as it was just after BF.

I feel the best option for Lock is to 1. get a gameplan together. #1 priority is get the elephant off their back and get players played. No more hiring of pros, staff etc until this is done. #2 priority is get the software fixed for all. Going away from Merge to make up Rev was a chance that has failed. In over your head is the way it looks. Get it up and going and get the software fixed. that 6 month window as was provided to players to revamp the software to an already messed up software was wrong.

When displaying info, honesty is the key. I would rather get the truthful information than the led like a dog type of information. I believe that is from Top down. Shane isn't the blame. I personally feel he is given information to tell us. I envision his calls are "what do I tell 2p2ers.." and management says "tell them this..." and in their minds, they are thinking that....

Is there hope for Lock? As I have seen from the past, something really "revolution"ary needs to happen before the ship can be turned. Right now, we are feeling like that boat that was stranded when the engines failed and forced to sleep in urine and fesces. As far as some of us, we can't really play on other sites like the wpn or bovada due to regions we live in or whatever other reasons.

I do hope the best. I enjoy the games on there. I would love for the day that Online poker is safe and in an environment that when we deposit, we play, we withdraw and have some solid games of choice with a good large player pool to wet appetites.

This is just my 2 cents.

You're missing the fact that the bottom line is that they want to make as much money as possible. Get players to pass money around = more rake. Any other line of thinking is naive to say the least.

Very well said.

You're missing the point that the players being against this their bottom line is that they want to make as much money as possible. Keep playing vs fish (and sit out when you face anyone remotely good. Any other line of thinking is naive to say the least.


I mean, really, i know what you're trying to say, but deciding who's right or who's wrong here isn't that cut and dry to me.

Nope. Everyone's running round analysing everything when no analysis needs to be done. They're in the business of making money, they don't make money off deposits, they make money off rake. Case closed. Everyone should withdraw. If you don't you deserve everything you get for being a moron. (Not you personally, btw.)

35% is the top of the VIP program before promotions. Considering you bless us with your presence in the Carbon/Aced forum, you are certainly aware of this already so I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you made a typo.


Also, I agree, segregating Limit Holdem with such a sparse player pool already is disastrous to game liquidity.


--
Kahn

They're a business. Ofcourse they're doing everything to make more money, it's very simple. Now, it's just up to everyone personally to decide if the whole deal is still worth it to them. To me, i know it will be: the rakeback is too good to pass up on.

Honestly? I pulled a number out of my ass because i knew it was somewhere around there but didn't remember exactly. Been a while since i visitted, actually. 35% is the top, which i'm sure not everyone would reach. 25% is a fair average probably still, or am i wrong there?

In either case: the point was basically the rakeback difference is immense, which i'm sure you won't disagree.

And it's people like you who are the reason that POS businesses get away with these sorts of antics. I hope your money gets stuck.

Wish you all the best too <3

I'm very sorry for trying to see things from everyone's perspective: my own, the breakeven-ish, the losing players/fish their perspective, Lock's perspective, and then the big winning players their perspective.

Let me sum it up to you: it's good for ALL but one group: the big winning players. And guess what, they're going to keep winning anyway.

That's basically the whole point of this. Infact, i've had this discussion before, where someone asked me "how do poker players get ranked?" I told him: they don't, it's only about money won/los. Then he said: "wow, shouldn't there be something like chess / ELO rating? It's a thinking SPORT right?" This is basically in essence what this does: much like in ELO make the system competitive and somewhat fair/useful.

I mean, poker has had a fight (and still has to some extent) a fight to being recognised as a worthy thinking sport, but ofcourse, if it hits people their pockets, they won't even consider acting like it.

They're manipulating games. Whether you like it or not they're taking away table selection at one level or another and that is totally not on, because they're doing it to level the playing field to create more rake for THEM, whatever they tell US.

Now, if i suggested fixing the deal to ensure a more fair outcome would you be fine with that? Why? Why not? It would mean basically the same thing, money gets pushed around and the winning players win a lot slower/break even/get an edge taken away.

There is no perspective to see it from. It's gross, end of, and any company doing it deserves to die. But they won't because people like you try to see some sort of justification in what they're doing because you get decent rakeback? Snake.

being cut off from 1/3 of the player pool would cut off much more than 1/3 of the games. what % of tables won't have 1 player in the bottom 1/3?