Pokerstars is already doing the fair play "technology"?

I just don't like the sound of this fair play stuff. I don't care about the semantics of it either. It's just feels like this is one of those lines you don't cross.You can call me this and that but if you call me a Bi$7h, Punk, or Pu$$y you're gonna get knocked the F out. If you come into my house trying to rob me you're gonna get shot.

In this case, since the first thread came out by BLEWJOB about segregation, and some other reasons, I decided to quit playing on Lock exclusively. I never really liked Bovada or Merge either so haven't even been playing recently. I am financially stable and have money saved up from my prior winnings and am planning on investing in a business I have been planning for 3 years now and play some live on the side. If Lock had a bit of integrity, I'd probably be grinding right now, but they don't so I am not.

I don't need to play poker for a living so moving out the country just to play on Pokerstars is far fetched. Now I just stake some players here in there to get a feel of the action, study my business and have general fun. Even playing some play chips, but playing level 0 thinkers gets annoying real fast. When the money rolls in from my business my goal is to travel the circuits and events playing majors. I will be able to experience new cultures, people, and food, etc. And play a game I love.

I may buy some funds here in there to play tournaments but am not sure I can get myself to put any $ on Lock poker, it's a battle of pride.

Here's a cool flash game to play when you're bored
http://www.shockwave.com/gamelanding/deep-mining.jsp

lol

No I was saying they are a successful model for how NOT to artificially impose your will on the natural flow of a poker site and still profit long term. Reading back I can see why my wording was pretty bad. It doesn't mean they couldn't make more money than they currently are, but those are some complex decisions that for whatever reason they opted not to pursue. Walmart has paper thin markups due to things like in-house distribution, but when you have ridiculous volume you can still make millions on paper thin margins. Initially Lock Poker wanted to go this direction and really cater to the grinders and high volume guys, unfortunately this obviously changed.

Hopefully they don't change their model either because it'd be nice to have a benchmark comparison going forward b/c I do believe most sites are going to shift to cater to the recreational player and I'd like to see it fail obviously, however in theory I see why they're doing it.

Did you read the post I was responding to? I was saying nothing about how lock was running their company. Mc was saying that poker was the "epitome" of capitalism. My response was that the changes Lock is making to that capitalist game seem like socialist changes to me.

The point being, I guess I should say it in order that it not be misconstrued, is that they are changing the basic nature of the game.

You were saying "they" in first sentence and then said "we" after that, hence my confusion.

So wait you people won't even tell us which group we are in? Seriously?

I don't think PS will change their model. They have so much more traffic than other sites and I don't think they have a problem getting new players and recreational players.

Party will probably be the best company to watch to see if their actions result in negative/positive changes. Revolution catering to the US market means their results can change drastically for many more reasons.

I believe the shift from catering to grinders/high volume to recreation players is in response to dwindling numbers of recreational players on the site.

Looking at Pokerscout, most of the networks that are popular but below PS/FT (iPoker, Party, Bodog, Revolution, etc.) are fairly close in traffic. There's a couple thousand difference between them but adding up PS's numbers they have over 200k players. Basically, PS has no competition. It's all the other networks that are pretty close in traffic and are taking measures to stay competitive with each other.

This "fair" gaming stuff sounds 100% "unfair" to me.

The problem for us is all the fish and new players that deposit, bust, re-deposit, and don't follow 2P2 or anything and have no idea that this is even taking place and if it's something they may have a problem with, as a poker player. Them being fish they probably don't care and are just going to play anyways it's in their nature. So how do we get their input on this or have more power in our stance that seems to be brewing daily. If we start a mass unrest-boycott there will still be all those fish on the site clueless and grinding in hopes of becoming the next poker star. Maybe we need to massively spam the chat boxes with links to help support a boycott.

Sounds like we're going to war.

I don't even play on Lock poker right now but I'm not the type of person to witness a 15 year old girl getting beat up by a 250 pound man and just stand there and do nothing about it. Or idiots that witness a car wreck and pull out their cell phones to record it instead of helping the victims. I'm just not that person, I feel a need to help the victims, and put the assailants in the dirt.

Resist Tyranny

www.infowars.com
www.abovetopsecret.com

Educate yourselves, arm yourselves, have some discernment and wake up stop being sheep because we need more strength in numbers. All we have is each other.

Let's add some pheromones to this pot, because that's what we need to stop this. Do you guys really think this will be a good thing?

Shane try's to desensitize people by saying:

This is incremental ism folks the frog in the boiling water we're the frogs, well not me but those still still playing here...

Okay that's it for now

ARM YOURSELVES WITH KNOWLEDGE

just dont play on any site that robs players problem solved
/thread

Yeah, I see what you're saying now. Your analogy of the changes being more in line with socialism than capitalism as far as the changes are concerned is good. I guess where I was coming from was just pointing out that the changes they made are common in any area of a capitalistic market. Everything changes, for better or worse, and this is just another year on the timeline of what was/is/will be online poker as we know it imo.

Agree with everything you said, especially the above. I worded it terribly when I initially wrote about PokerStars being the model to watch. I don't think they'll drastically change their current model.

I do believe Party Poker will be the one to watch, but they are much larger in size so I don't know just how much of a comparison we can make of it unless we just look at overall ratios or %s of decline or increase etc.

Agree that the smaller networks are struggling to keep up. Ipoker created IpokerI and IpokerII. Ongame messed around with their Essence program. Bovada created anonymous sn's. PartyPoker thing of course, and now this. All within about a year.

cliffs? when does this roll out

according to Shane whenever the next update hits. Either later this week or next week

Why can't Lock just make select 50nl tables and lower for new accounts only? Does anyone know which limits this affect?

All limits.

A lot of people seem to think that the player pool will be split equally into thirds. Can anyone point me to a post by Shane or someone else reputable that could confirm this? Because I can't find that being said anywhere. All I see are vague statements about 3 groups. If it really is going to be 33% each then this is obviously totally screwed from the get go. If the top and bottom groups are going to be 1% of players then it may be worth entertaining some discussion.

supposedly this is an incorrect answer...we'll see

lol, first, Shane says that LOCK's player pool falls into different percentages than the overall network's player pool so that supposedly his site's breakdown will not be 33% across the three levels...reason for the "lol" from the git is for you actually thinking its open for discussion

Shane has confirmed that network-wide the split will be 1/3, 1/3, 1/3.

Page 1 of this thread:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/19...-skin-1305949/

He also confirmed that the g911 article was accurate, it says the same thing:

http://www.gambling911.com/poker/onl...es-030413.html

Source?

Well Shane of course...remember his graphic he posted; post #175 in Fair Play technology (previously reported as Lobby Catalogue by other skin) thread

Post #10 of this thread, by Shane, says that the middle group "will be by far the largest." That necessarily implies that they will not be the same size.

I edited my post and put where he can find what i know he's already seen

Found it, you're right. This is gonna be a trainwreck.

"Shane has confirmed that network-wide the split will be 1/3, 1/3, 1/3."

This is not true.


--
Kahn

waste of time Kahn, he only knows how to write...reading's an additional skill his anger doesn't allow

lol