i dont use spinwiz, what is the advantage of spinwiz?

makes u a wizzard at all ins i beleive

I'm Andrew West.

I think that MTT are a feature you absolutely need to have, while Spin & Go aren't. I don't think the variance is as high for MTT though, at least on a site like ours. We don't have 50k player tournaments.

I agree there're ways to build Expresso in a way that works better, but I don't think it'd give us enough of an advantage to make it worthwhile yet. There're better ways for us to spend a couple of months of development time I think.

Also, I wrote that interview before I knew about the PS Spins reimbursement thing. Just saying.



I hope pokerindustrypro don't get upset, but this is the whole of the Spin & Go section:

So it's mostly already in this thread and in the preview.

Hi Andrew, thanks for posting here

Do we know the PS reimbursements were related specifically to Spin&Go? Can you elaborate on your comment about 3rd party software? Does that mean software that is permitted on PS and some other sites but not on Unibet (e.g., HUD) or were you referring software that is typically prohibited at all sites?

I shouldn't really have mentioned the reimbursement thing, commenting on competitors is a bad idea. But I have no inside information, it's just from what people have been suggesting on 2 + 2, and it seems to be pointing in that direction.

I also don't know the finer points of what's allowed on other sites, but datamining Expresso seems a big problem to me for example. Knowing population tendencies sounds like a pretty big edge to me, let alone a specific player's. I don't think HUDs have too different an effect on Expresso than on other game types though.

Then there's the stuff coon74 refers to above. And then there're the solver programs that're out there now - the fewer players dealt into a hand, the easier it is to find an equilibrium, though I don't think anyone's doing this extensively in 3-max games yet.

Many thanks for the reply. Pressing my luck -- any opinion to share regarding lottery-payout SNGs and so-called poker ecology?

Hmm, what do you mean? I've not read the full thread so don't know the context, I just came here via a search for Unibet.

Are they good or bad for the long-term health of poker?

They're awesome for the short-term health, that's what matters to me

Actually, as some of you might know, lottery SnGs ('Fish Party') are coming to the MPN soon, and the Unibet group will have a chance to test their effects via its subsidiary - the online wing of Stan James. So I understand that there's thus far no need to duplicate the effort and roll out such SnGs to the main Unibet network until they're proved to work well (whatever it means to the management) on the MPN; the group can even diversify the brands and market the Unibet site to those who hate variance and sit at poker tables just to socialise, while advertising Stan James to avid gamblers.

Hi guys, when is the last time someone hit a jackpot either in 30/60/100$?

Has there even been a hit since the chances lowered?

Speaking about the jackpots, why would they make it so big??

It is SO bad for the poker ecology!! ( that they seem to care about so much)

Many people would play $100 spins with a jackpot of 10k that gets hit a lot more. Then you would have so many people winnings 10k's, then playing cash playing tournaments with their winnings..

But no, lets take 1.2mil out of the poker ecology and the players who won, you dont even see anymore...

And the argument that big jackpots attract players is such a bad assumption, most players that are able to deposit $100 would know that the chance of hitting a 1mil jackpot is so small...

They don't even have to lower it so much, they could even just make the 30's payouts like the scoop spin payouts, 60/1k/10k, i am sure more people would play those!

But no, they would rather screw up the poker ecology than improve it, it doesn't need to be saved there is nothing wrong with it, but if these scams of poker sites continues, in the future there will be big problems..



If they truly care so much about the poker ecology, like they remove deep cash tables and remove supernova elite etc, rather than doing all these stupid things why don't they just remove seat scripting, even Spin wiz took them more than a year to stop, even after so many people have pointed out how stupid is is.

Sad to say, but online poker seems to head in the directions of scamming all the players until there is no more left..
ohh well.........

They make it big because they thought variance will decourage regs to grind them, (fail i guess)

As you said, for 100$ make the bigger jackpot 20k or 50k , and the recs will STAY playing them, because more 4x 6x 10x ....

And even top jackpot is 10k for 100$, there is 0 opponents to spins,
It is the only way to win that big in 5minutes

Why on earth would they want to make something that they dont want people to play them as often as possible?

Ya there is no other format where you could win 10k quickly for 100$ buy in...
They actually had such an nice idea with spins but found a way to screw it up...

The main reason is that gamblers want a million hard. It's a much more marketable top payout than $300K. $70K is also slightly more marketable than $21K for a $7 spin, etc.

You simple overthinking guys, for huge jackpot it takes only 0,4 % of buy in. Amaya guys thinking as casino managers. Higher jackpot equals highest gambling desire of their "customers" lol. But in casino, player can actually enjoy gambling wit their money least way longer. Go to casino, on slots, is actually fun there. They might brought a few more customers in a game firstly but is just question of time when rate of players leaving must be higher than new one coming (or in slightly different words rake of stars + withdrawing of regs higher than fresh deposits). At first might be appealing for gamblers, but then it seems like a joke. Their money going down crazy fast in spins.

Okey would make a sense to keep a million dollar game when marketing a game heavily. Like making huge add on every table, lucky guys playing for a million. And make 2 minutes pause before start of game. Stables anyway have skype support and whole datamining system in full effect already. Or fak it, make a live play. Brings stories of these guys, what they do for a living. How their family respond, how gf screams. And bring em to play in live for this million.

Stars is failing to do marketing and amaya failing to do business ( am laughing at everyone wit amaya stocks). They failing so heavily consider assets, position they have Rush game was not their idea, neither hypers, and not even spins. Those guys can do nothing, except taking salary. They are pathetic. Every excited new game format showed there is demand for poker outhere. But people getting bored and moved on pretty fast. Is 2016 for god sake. People need new things all the time. Imagine volkswagen making same fakin cars for years, just changing assumption of gas while complain times are hard, people taking airplanes. Lol people love gambling and poker is going to be always huge part of it.

Makes sense unibet does not want spins. They are slowly becoming history. As manager said is better focus on future.

Wrote from someone, who hit all jackpots. And got bored wit poker. So yea all that eco system talks is just bull****. Expect increasing of rake guys.

I think you need winners to even call it an ecology. I don't think that "kill every single lion" is ecology management, just like the previous strategy of "kill every single sheep" doesn't quality. "Do not allow the lions machine guns" or "give the sheep armour plating" is ecology management.

Marketing.

Coon74, you seem like a smart guy, but you might have the same flawed mentality as Pokerstars. (hopefully for us pokerstars has a flawed mentality...)

First lets say they marketing to gamblers, even more specific slot machine punters...

Have you been to a Casino Mr Coon74? Which slot machines are these "highly sought after" gamblers playing? The ones with the big jackpots? The ones that pay out more regularly? Any gambler with half a brain, not even half maybe 1% brain knows that playing a 10mil/1mil or any slot machine with a big jackpot is stupid because so many of the "slot machine money" goes to the jackpot, so they would play the big jackpot maybe like 1/2 and then say ok this is joke leave it and go back to the normal machine were they put almost all they play/money in.

Also, the types of gamblers that you attract for a big payoffs is so bad, it would mostly be people that don't even play poker, if they win the 1mil they are gone...
The real good for ecosystem gamblers that you want, and that you want to market to know that the 1mil or high jackpots are a joke.. Even those heavy sought after gamblers, if you asked them if they would rather have a lower payout more frequently then the big payout they would take the lower one, (Maybe pokerstars should contact their "highly sought after gamblers" and ask them what they want)

I think solution would be if stars offer a $30 with max 10k jackpot against the 300k one and see which one would get more traffic. Even a $100 with max 10k would get more traffic then any of the others...
ANd winnings from there would be more frequent and would be put into the "poker ecosystem" , people would play cash, play other tourneys.

Dont want to go much into this, but Pokerstars are forgetting they are a poker company, their customer are poker enthusiasts, they are suppose to make money from RAKE, not from scamming players, if they started like this in 2000-2004 nobody would have played their much, and they wouldn't have had such a good name, but now they are using their name to scam players..
I say scam because it is a scam, they know if make these jackpots so high, it is impossible for any regular player to win, whether your a pro or a recreational, at least when you go into a casino you know, ok this is a casino try your luck,

You dont need the jackpots to be so big for marketing, unless you are marketing to 3rd world lottery winners..
If it is just for marketing, have one $5 one for a million to attract these useless customers.. And then have better ones where people can actually win money.


It is such a bad scam these things from pokersites that i think will backfire tremendously !
Many big online casino dont like poker, they dont offer poker, atleast they are not scamming the players, i think when they see the model under which these spin and go's /espresso's work, i think they might start offering them..

I would rather go play those things on their site, because atleast i know poker players aren't getting scammed.

I don't know exactly what 'social responsibility' means in the i-gaming context, but I guess it's what you're talking about - that the gambling venue obeys not just the letter but also the spirit of responsible gaming laws and doesn't market to even potentially problem gamblers... Unibet did win the 2016 'Socially Responsible Operator' IGA Award, so it might be the case that it's overprotective of its players and doesn't trick them into losing more than they were initially comfortable with... but as a player, I'm quite OK with having opponents with 'less than 1% brain' at my tables who don't bother to calculate how much of their money feeds jackpots, at which rate they lose chips etc.

Hm, I'm not sure what I said leads to social responsibility - I am talking about strategy. It's good marketing to be able to say you can win a million playing a €10 game, and PS are within their rights to run that. They believe that the gain from marketing is enough to make the wins less frequent.

I think it is bad marketing that will backfire eventually... Because once people read more into it they will see that how horrible the games are, and it will shine a bad light onto the poker industry.

What would the reason be not to have $100 with max payout 20k, with the $100 with a 1mil payout?

Then you keep the marketing and you keep the poker players happy?

And they can see which one gets more traffic.

I think the old 3600x structure was sooo much better then this 1 out of million BS, even biggest whales imo are smart enough to understand that they never hit it..

I get having a buy-in that can pay out 1mm for the advertising value. I don't get having all of the other buy-ins use the same exact structure. They already aren't that advertising gold "1 million!", So using the exact formula you used to reach 1mm for $100 games on $60 games just feels like laziness.

And I love Andrew for saying what I've hoped a site rep would say for a while. Poker games need long term winners.
I don't know everything about the site, so I guess it's time for some researching, but from everything I've heard in recent times, you players should be looking to support unibet more.

You can easily make spins that have long term winners (Stars actually does with the regular spin offerings, despite some decisions many of us don't agree with, as do several other sites). The fact that Unibet doesn't have them ends up being a minus, even if they don't think the dev time is worth it right now.

If Stars system is too unattractive, and I can buy into that argument, I also think there's unnecessary variance that isn't in line with "we want to create games that consistently reward players that work hard and make less mistakes" then I think Unibet should become the leader in that area, rather than not offering them at all.

Like chess where only a couple thousand people earn a living with the game alone despite it being played in much more families than poker?