Bob should complain about his boss making him work late, or his kids not being able to watch themselves.

I'll await an MTT expert to tell us if the gain is laughable. I'm quite certain we'll find the opposite is true.

The effect on the games is in discussion in this thread. You've added nothing to that discussion.

Being in the top 20 on the leader has nothing to do with luck. Anyone working hard enough to be in the top 20 will take offense to that.

Solid idea, imo.

Yes. Mirage's post made me rework all participants in September. He was correct; I was wrong.

What about guys like me that got a ticket for October 13th's tournament but can't play?

I get double screwed.

The beast is ******ed, even moreso then the monster promo party held back in the day. Congrats WPN, you created the dumbest promotion in online poker history. You win!

there is nothing to add to the discussion wrt this promo on the state of the games. its 100% unarguable that the promo is good for the long term health of the site. every single site rep for every single site that has ever been represented on 2+2 has stated that the faster depositing players (fish) lose, the less likely they are to be return customers. this promotion goes 100% in the opposite direction of making depositors want to redeposit.

this thread serves one purpose... to show or not show that everybody who actually gets something back from the beast is receiving a +ev experience. the effects on the site overall cannot be challenged, imo. the fact you don't see this is laughable, imo.

I would like to see are more detailed calculation that a player who plays 2000 hands at 25nl wins in average only 80 = 4% of them.

also, even though you're wrong, that's not what I meant and you know it. stop being deliberately obtuse.

Would you please show some type of evidence for your claims. I've not seen any of these posts and do not know these representatives.

I'm undecided on this. You'll need to give more information than unsubstantiated statements to convince me.

All I know is what I've seen while playing on this site before and after the promotion. I understand cause and effect is tricky, and I'm not ready to say the Beast is responsible for the site's growth or the amount of soft players on the site.

Obviously the promotion will create tables with 5 regs competing. This is irrelevant, imo.

Whether or not more fish have come, if they redeposit, the long term effects of the competition...I'm undecided. It's a complicated topic, and I'm not informed enough yet to reach a decent conclusion. I've been around this industry for a long time and been involved in quite a few different aspects of the industry. I'm wondering what your knowledge and experience is that makes your conclusion so incorrigible that you'd call it laughable for someone to not be persuaded.

I think it should be noted Mirages method does not include all of your contributions. It only includes money that would otherwise be yours if "The Beast" did not exist.

It does not include the money you contributed to "The Beast" in the pots you lose.

The $55 ticket does have some value to it but it's kind of silly to count that. I'd rather have the $55 - it's a tournament I wouldn't have played without being 'forced' to in order to hopefully get my money back.

Based on the revelations in this thread, I'm hopeful that the October 16 Beast Boycott will be a huge success.

As I said, I used my averages. In the last 10 days, I've played 220,000 hands. In 7,673 of those, I saw the flop and won the hand.

7,673/220,000 = 0.035

I'm tighter than most, but I probably win a greater % of my vpip as well. So, I think the numbers should be reasonably close.

Correct. However, I think this method will get everyone within a few percentage points of the method WPN uses. Therefore, if they do reveal the contribution amounts, the numbers will not match exactly with the results we get from filtering our databases. However, they should be close enough to serve the purpose.

Because 50ish of the 20,000ish monthly unique players who actually care are losing 5/1000 of a big blind per 100 hands? If I were a betting man...

This makes no sense.

You're not doing yourself any favors with this thread...

I´m pretty sure that your calculation is wrong!

Let us say at a shorthanded table 3 players see the flop in average. If you win 4% of these hands, this would mean that the other players win in average 48% of their hands: 4% + 48% + 48% = 100%.
This would mean that the other players contribute much more to The Beast than your calculation says. Despite from this point it´s unreal that you as a tight player win only 4% of your hands played while the others win 48% of them.

Let us say at a full ring table 4 players see the flop in average. You win 4% of those hands, while the other players win around 31% of their hands.
Again an unreal relation between your winning rate and the winning rate of the other players.

Most of these games have 4+ regs. Most flops are heads up. But most hands also don't see the flop.

When you lose a pot you don't actually contribute to the beast. Since the 25 cents is taken from the pot the winner of the hand is the only one who actually contributes. An example being say 4 players see the hand to showdown and each paid $10 ($40 pot). Not including rake the winner of the hand gets back $39.75. So while all four players get points only the winner paid into the beast.

Pretty distracted atm, but I think I see a problem in your calcs.

I'm not sure what percentage of hands dealt actually see a flop, but it's less than don't see a flop. The number I gave is all my hands dealt. A ton of those never made it to the flop for any player.

Hey Chopsy. I like to think about it that way as well. However, it's not the only perspective. WPN calculates the points differently. This is similar to the weighted/contributed/dealt rakeback stuff.

You can take a different perspective on it. The filter method mirage and I used is one way (the winner is the one who pays). The contributed method is the way WPN gives points, and I would guess the way they will calculate contribution. Their numbers will be different, but they'll be close.

He's a shill for acr, and he's playing his hand face up, which is kind of how he plays poker too.

The whoooole point of him coming here is to add 55 dollars to the beast rakeback and point to all the guys who contribute less than 50 dollars to beast and say hey look, all these guys are making money, all these guys at the top are making money, really only about 50 people are getting back less than they put in!

As if we're idiots.

Take out the 55 and keep it out. Now only the top 20 are making money. Which is actually more than I expected. I expected that only he made more money from the beast than he put in.

Btw, regarding the notion that anyone who beats 25nl is the best poker player.... lol, you understand peopel that beat 25nl move up from 25nl? You know that, right?

But if some fish comes and splashes around and wins some pots before you end up stacking him, that's potentially a lot less you win. So it's hard to quantify, but it definitely impacts your win rate more than a simple w$wsf * .25 calculation. Money taken off the table on hands you aren't even involved in is money you can't win in future hands.

If most flops are heads up, where you should win around 50% of them longtherm, how can he win only 4% of his hands when he see the flop, this is impossible(possible, but unreal).


The mistake in your calculation is that you win only 4% of your hands when you see the flop, which is not realistic.

QTip only c-bets for value, so that might explain some of it...

In 4% of MY TOTAL HANDS DEALT, I saw a flop and won the hand.

Perhaps you wouldn't mind taking a large sample of your hands. Take all the hands you played this year or whatever it is. Note that number.

Then apply two filters: (Saw Flop) AND (Won Hand)

See how many hands come up. We'll divide that and see if your numbers are somewhat similar.

In the 2,000 hand example, say the guy's a 20/15. Say he was a W$WSF of 35%.

He vpips 20% of his 2,000 hands. That's reduces his available hands to 400. However, he's raising a lot of those hands, therefore he's only see the flop a percentage of those hands because often everyone will fold to his raise. We could say he sees a flop 60% of the time he raises. That reduces his available hands to 240.

His W$WSF is 35%, so he contributes 25 cents to the Beast in 84 of the total 2,000 hands he's dealt.