Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Lock pulled bunch of tournaments? Lock pulled bunch of tournaments?

04-24-2013 , 01:35 PM
I thank you for your support. I hope you have as much energy and angst in writing local politicians. We need politically active people to help shape new online poker regulation in the USA.
04-24-2013 , 02:12 PM
I am in Canada, so not sure how that would help, and Lock ceases to exist if and when the US ever gets properly legislated, and frankly legislation has little to do with the issues with that room anyway.

Those sticking it out with Lock - best of luck.
04-24-2013 , 02:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tweeting
So i see Lock has their own tournament schedule i read. I'm confused at this.


Is lock and intertops sharing the same tournaments now or not anymore? I see intertops still has the daily 109 3k and 8k guarantee.


But lock poker i read has only the 162 2.5k guarantee and 109 2500 guarantee and the 215 5k high roller.


So does that mean no tournament on intertops i see now are on lock? Thus lock players play with lock players and intertops plays with intertops players only for MTT? And thus the only time lock players play in the same MTT as intertops is on Sunday?


If this is true, don't this mean the intertops schedule looks better than lock?


Also how come there is no more tournaments such as the high roller 215 12k guaranteed on intertops?


So does this mean if one has an intertops and lock account, you can only open one of them at a time even though that means one can play one set of tournametns only such as whether intertops schedule or lock?


04-25-2013 , 12:50 PM
why does Lock say they don't know who pulled these tournaments when they're the head of the network? Based on Lock's overall incompetence and their status on the network, I would assume they made this move and are the only ones that have the control to do so....whats funny is half the tournaments they pulled never overlayed(high roller,109,40r)......the rest would have small overlays but factoring in the rake they made it was about breakeven.......the worst move was eliminating the high roller - recreational players love "high stakes" tournaments and its much more enticing to put money on a site when there's a flagship tournament to be won....from the looks of things it seems whomever at Lock pulled these tournaments didn't think too deeply about their decision and just fired away. Sadly this seems to be Lock's MO.
04-27-2013 , 06:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SNGplayer24
why does Lock say they don't know who pulled these tournaments when they're the head of the network? Based on Lock's overall incompetence and their status on the network, I would assume they made this move and are the only ones that have the control to do so....whats funny is half the tournaments they pulled never overlayed(high roller,109,40r)......the rest would have small overlays but factoring in the rake they made it was about breakeven.......the worst move was eliminating the high roller - recreational players love "high stakes" tournaments and its much more enticing to put money on a site when there's a flagship tournament to be won....from the looks of things it seems whomever at Lock pulled these tournaments didn't think too deeply about their decision and just fired away. Sadly this seems to be Lock's MO.

Whenever something is not taken well by the community, it's "the network's" fault.


--
Kahn
04-27-2013 , 09:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by imjustshane

I know Lock will survive, I know things will get better, so when I talk I mean it and when I refer a friend to Lock I know that their money is safe.
Well with the inside story on all this, how did the transfer thread ever get down to 50c ?

Surely with all that knowledge, you'd busy yourself buying up all the transfers being offered?
04-27-2013 , 09:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonG
Surely with all that knowledge, you'd busy yourself buying up all the transfers being offered?
Think this through for a moment and see how that works out I mean, how could they buy it theirselves to then somehow pay out faster or elsewhere? That would imply they'd be able to pay out faster in the first place, or they could instead start taking fees to have your payout be faster.

And if you mean Lock employees buying on their own behalf.. well, they're not allowed obviously anyway, it'd send out a very weird message. Furthermore, Lock employees can't have an account on the site anyway.
04-27-2013 , 11:53 AM
If he knows the money is good, pretty sure anyone with >3 brain cells will be able to find the backing necessary to clean up there.... The fact is... no-one is buying, the price is falling in a straight line, yet someone is standing on a soap box saying that the company is in good health. Feel free to buy it. And by that, I mean the cr@p being spurted out AND/OR the 45c on the $ available.

They might not be able to pay out faster if they just don't have processing capability. But plenty of businessmen don't mind waiting a few months to double their money on a sure thing.

      
m