they be silly

thanks for the support

Thanks for the quick reply. I just did some math and it appears the numbers match up perfectly at the levels I was looking to reach. So no loss in value on the Ronin promo.

It was absolutely imperative that our players not lose any value so that was exactly what we were aiming for.

The dealt method is really a nightmare for promotions though so we will definitely look to do away with it in the future.

And signs of the future money grab begin already.

Shane can you explain exactly how the 14% vip point conversion works?

Like you rake x amount, receive x amount of points, and redeem them for x amount.

Thanks.

Wait so if cash players are now earning points at 1point per $1 raked, we'd have to rake $70 to get the first $1.50 level of the ronin promo? That can't be right...

Under the dealt system, I think it's the whole table raking $70.

I would appreciate more info on this as well. Thanks Shane

This looks correct.

As the poster below you pointed out because its dealt its the tables rake.

So for every $1 in rake paid in hand you are dealt you get 1 point. So if there is a $1 in rake and you fold your hand you still get the point.

Yes please

Rake $10, get 70 points, exchange for $1.... am I right?

Switching from dealt to contributed means better rewarding the players that are earning us our money, this is the way we prefer to work.

Max Cut beat me to posting the math. See below.

You are pretty much right. The math we have now comes out at 99c not $1 so we are still considering bumping it to 15%.

This is so completely wrong.

Seems like contributed has to be the most fair, that way you get rakeback based on the exact amount you payed in rake. Dealt means that supernits can sit and earn rakeback without actually paying rake, meaning they end up with a higher RB% than a looser player. Is this not correct?

I think it was wrong and a money grab when FTP and Stars did it because they didn't adjust the system to keep rewards the same for grinders while hiding behind the strawman "fairness" argument. Lock is giving everyone 36%RB and other VIP benefits for grinders so it's not the same. We'll see how it plays out in the long run.

Jim, Part of that is true. The other part is not. The contributed method means that Revolution will not be paying out nearly as much overall.

And Shane's contention that it better rewards the players that are earning Revolution the money is DEFINITELY incorrect.

Pretty disappointed to hear of their plans on this but am thankful they told everyone ahead of time.

Maybe there is a chance they actually believe the line that Shane gave us and are just misinformed in which case perhaps they could be convinced to not make the change. My hunch is that they do understand that the line Shane gave is B.S. and that they are going to go through with it anyway.

This is a fair point and I hope it works out that way. Calling it a strawman "fairness" argument is definitely a good way of putting it.

Just to clarify: If FTP had bumped everyone up from 27% to 36% and added black card at the time they switched from dealt to contributed then I don't think anyone would have had much of a problem with it.

Gotcha, thanks.

Ok, apparently everything I read about this in the past was either sophistry or just pure bull---t. I've been reading through the thread about Stars' switch to WC from dealt:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28...012-a-1145272/

and the Stars rep claims that the switch doesnt change the amount of VPP's being rewarded per hand, just that it only changes how the VPP's are dispersed.

Are VPP's essentially rakeback? They are leading the reader to believe that the same amount of rewards will still be given back per dollar of rake, but everyone in the thread seems to think its just a money grab for the site.

What I dont understand is how this is saves the site money, if they are still giving the same rakeback%, just calculating it more accurately per player.

Can anyone post a link to an accurate description of these differences? I've looked around a bit but cant seem to find anything that details how this results in less money being paid out by the site.

[edit]

Just found this article by pokeraddict, hopefully it can answer my question.

http://www.pokeraddict.net/why-movin...ms-more-money/

What am I misunderstanding here? If you rake $10 and get $1 worth of points, that's 10%. Where is the 14-15% coming from?

why would they not go to contributed, everyone else and there mother has so why would they screw themselves over and not switch?

The way we see the dealt vs contributed is that with dealt its harder to directly tie the VIP point rewards to the actual rake contributed by the player but by switching to contributed there is a direct correlation and we can better reward the players that are providing the rake.

Are you saying that by staying with dealt there are more VIP points awarded and therefore that rewards the players more or have I missed the point?

Shane - Yes, that is essentially the point....although maybe better to say "more VIP/rakeback dollars paid out" than total points I guess.


Jim - Stars is full of it. And they absolutely know this (because it would be impossible for them not to). It's pretty distasteful and it's incredibly blatant the way they do their points as opposed to Lock which certainly could be more debateable imo.

On Stars, the VPP's are essentially rakeback...but you get a VP-multiplier the higher up you go. If you are bronze-level on Stars you are getting maybe 6% or something. Bronze gets 1x FPP's for every VPP they earn. The FPP's are what they get to spend in the store to buy their bonuses. Supernova's earn 3.5x FPP's for every VPP they earn.

If you are Supernova or Supernova-Elite you are getting 30-60% or so.

By "redistributing" to reward the loosest player who pays the most rake, they are essentially raising some 90% see-flop single-tabling fish (who is going to go bust anyway and could care less about the points) from 6% to maybe 8%...while decreasing every other 40% type player at the table down to 25%. Giving more to the players that earn 1x FPP's while giving less to the players who earn 3.5x FPP's makes it clear how this will end up.

Something like that anyway. The basic point is, Stars has the number that they are doling out WAY fewer VPP's in total than they were before. They pay a player like me $10k less in rakeback for the same amount of play while paying out $100 more to a few of the very fishiest.

The vast majority of players end up way worse in the contributed system on Stars and it's incredibly disingenuous of them to claim otherwise. It's not just the super-nits who play 12% of their hands or something. It will work out less for a fairly active TAG or even semi-LAG type player as well.


For Lock, I think the increased "levels" as you go up Ronin could end up being kind of similar to this although not as dramatically as the Bronze-SNE difference on Stars.

That's my take on much of that nonsense anyway. The idea that contributed would help players who aren't super-nits has pretty much been proven false after the implementation of this contributed stuff. The idea that it helps loosen up the games doesn't seem correct to me either but I'm not 100% positive on that and I haven't looked at that aspect too closely.