Quote:
Originally Posted by simpledude16
this is an absurd comment to say that hypers have more skill than turbos and regspeed (not saying that they arent a skillful game)
You know, I should have phrased what I was trying to say differently. I wasn't trying to take anything away from Reg speed or Turbo Speed grinders, and I apologize if I offended anyone. I've played those games, and occasionally still do, and understand the skill they take. Obviously I hope for all the games to coexist, I'm just saying if traffic moves naturally it doesn't mean hypers have any less right to draw the traffic.
My point about relative difficulty is off topic and could have been left out, but since I made it, I'll just clarify for anyone who is raging over it. I simply find that hypers offer less room for mistakes if you want to be profitable pre-rakeback. In nonturbos, I believe the achievable ROIs are 8-11%, therefore a player with 2% worth of leaks can still make a good living, even if he never learns what his leaks are and addresses them. In Turbos the achievable ROI is lower, and therefore that same 2% worth of errors becomes a greater proportion of that player's potential earnings. It hypers, it's even more unforgiving. The achievable ROI for the BEST regs is probably somewhere between 2-2.5%, if even that high at the $100 level or higher. So a player making 2% worth of errors in these games could be losing their entire profit margin pre-rakeback. There is a common misconception that Hypers are "easy" but in reality, they require a ton of skill.
To your credit you pointed out that they require skill, and I appreciate that. I think a lot of regs believe they "dumb down" the game,and that is the ignorant criticism I was attempting to address with my quickly and poorly worded comment. The edges in hypers are so thin, the differences and details of spots become much more important, and a leak that could be ignored in a slower structure b/c of the other opportunities to accumulate chips cannot be ignored in a hyper or the results over a massive sample become catestrophic. There are A TON of good poker players, players who have won a lot of money in various forms of poker, who over significant samples of hypers can't crack a 1% ROI. It's because the margin for error is very small, and many don't know what their errors might be, how to spot them or how to fix them. And the variance only adds to the confusion. There are elite players who beat these games by only 1% more than the majority of others, but that 1% is FREAKING HUGE over a sample. These players are some of the hardest working players in the SNG game today. They simply can't afford not to be.
If you saw someone who was only breaking even in a regspeed after rakeback, you'd probably note them as bad. How can a reg with a significant sample not beat the game pre-rakeback. They must make fundimental errors. You see otherwise good players, who are really trying, stuck in this spot over thousands upon thousands of games in hypers, blaming variance b/c they simply thought the games were easy and can't fathom what they're doing wrong.
Hypers are not easy. Hypers are not easier. Hypers don't dumb down poker or ruin the game. These misconceptions are one reason why so many people are attracted to hypers, but so few people are really good at them.
I hope all the games can flourish, and I think promotions for all types is a good idea. I just don't wanna hear any "ZOMG, all in, all in, it's not poker!" arguments. To your credit you never made one, and I felt obligated to give this explanation for my comment since you took exception to it in an educated manor.
/derail