Hard to see on mobile. They need to change, make it easier to view from phone.

The exteriors of the set are still way to dark for the potential viewing audience.
They learned nothing from the LATB set 'catastrophe'. The 'ratings' will be a 'disaster' because viewers hate black backgrounds.
A first year film student could have done a better job with the set. I just don't get how they can make the same 'set' mistake again.

I would have thought it was impossible to have a worse 'set' than LATB, but they somehow have managed to do it.

00:00 Stream Start
19:12 Game Start
1:05:52 Patrik v Rob - $167K
1:10:02 Berkey all in v Robl - $127K
1:18:32 Berkey v Robl - $133K
1:25:32 patrik all in v Berkey - $254K
1:45:42 Polk all in v Robl - $227K
2:32:32 Persson all in v Robl - $140K
3:13:16 Berkey all in v Justin - $225K
3:16:36 Persson v Berkey - $176K
3:54:16 Persson v Robl - $125K
4:06:16 Patrik v Berkey - $139K
4:18:56 Justin v Suvarna - $247K
4:45:16 Polk v Persson - $103K
4:48:26 Rob v Suvarna - $195K
5:14:16 Rob v Suvarna - $136K
5:18:46 Berkey all in v Rob v Suvarna - $147K
5:44:00 Rob v Suvarna - $341K
5:50:20 Polk all in v Robl - $613K
6:00:40 Berkey v Suvarna - $130K
6:19:01 Robl v Suvarna - $211K
6:24:44 Polk v Berkey - $249K
6:39:14 Robl v Suvarna - $122K
6:42:34 Persson v Berkey - $229K
6:54:04 Persson v Polk - $125K
7:03:44 Berkey v Suvarna - $136K
7:09:44 Persson v Suvarna all in - $407K
7:25:34 Suvarna v Polk - $118K

Weird, I don't hate the dark set at all. Sort of reminds me of the ESPN featured tables of the mid-2000s or the WPT final tables: a well-lit table with the bluish stripper glow on the background.

I don't like Doug as a poker news personality, but he is good for the table, no one else seems to want to banter with RY for fear of upsetting him. Doug doesn't seem to care and uses sarcasm well.

It wasn't a bad watch, proper balance of personalities and the vpip game (feels forced) but works to generate action.

So exciting, this battle between what only .0000000001% country watches

I wonder why Rob Yong is so sensitive. Surely you need to have a spine made out of steel to become a titan in the casino industry, no?

Having watched him recently in the HCL streams and this stream, coupled with absolutely no research beyond knowing he is a casino owner.....here's my take.

Organized crime is likely still involved at the highest levels of all casino industries globally. It has evolved from the days of DeNiro movies. If this is the case, one thing that would benefit these "people" is to have someone who they trust and/or who is actually one of them as the "front." It is probably a much more difficult situation to take the oxford business school/lawyer and manipulate him in that position unless he is dirty. He would know more than those "people" and also be smart enough to have some contingencies/leverage.

One thing that makes me think this was the comment on HCL "do you believe I am a person of below average intelligence?" He asked someone this multiple times. The well studied, or the entrepreneur is a lot less likely to make this statement due to the meta aspects of relationship building and inherent confidence. Who would be inclined to state this? Someone who feels like they have always been questioned by others in the arena that they are already doing well (chip on the shoulder).

tl;dr, I think he was just the best actor for the position because he does a good enough job of regulating his ego. The live streams give us a glimpse of when it is out of check. I don't watch much of the Triton stuff but does he behave this way around the other "big dogs"?

Ya I gotta say I think you might be over thinking it. In the UK theres a big name operator who has dozens of casinos and then a few mid sized like Robs. These seem to be highly regulated and unlikely to have much organized crime imo. If there was to be any room for organized crime it would be at the sportsbooks/slot parlors that seem to be on every street. But the actual casinos dont feel shady at all. Nothing like Leon and Kings, that place is strange ngl. I love that they swapped crypto for euros for me at spot at the casino cage. While an amazing service it doesn't exactly scream legit.

Fwiw Rob also led the way for the big changes Partypoker made after their site was in the dumps and brought them back to having some relevancy for ROW players and some of the USA regulated skins. Hes been in the gambling world for his entire adult life and seems like a relative straight shooter.

He seems really just like someone who can dish it but not take it. He talks a lot of trash and needles relentlessly but seems to get butt hurt when it is given back to him. It reminds me of my sister tbh. She's vile but try giving her any sort of constructive criticism or sarcasm and its gg civility.

If you don't think the "regulators" and/or those who report to the "regulators" are potentially criminals posing as good guys, then you have much more faith than I ever could in the gambling industry and the "governments" who supposedly regulate them. I am also in the us of a, where organized crime and gov't is somewhat synonymous lol. UK may operate differently, but the org crime people evolve, and having clean people in high economic places, who are willing to take their money and do what they ask, happens on the daily all across the world. I obviously can't speak to him specifically, but it's not impossible.

channel name ?

ive heard about Yong for years but didnt see him until the big poker go game and of course the million dollar HCL game. He comes off as a passive aggressive whiny little bitch

Not sure the forced VIP game is a good idea. Doesn't it just make it harder on the fish? Who are probably already playing over 35% When you force good players to play x amount of hands they're more than likely to raise those hands which makes it harder for the passive fish to limp in. In short it forces weak players to play more hands for more money against stronger players

None of the VIPs want to play with people nitting it up. If playing more hands in the first place made more money more pros would be doing it in games like this.

Also interested.

Do think the pros will be limping or raising those extra hands?

If playing higher vpip than usual made the pros more money then they would already be doing it. How is this hard to understand?
Mind numbing

Forced high vpip and big antes are excellent for the game. The Asian poker apps from few years had this requirement, best games ever.

Ones who are affected most are nit nut peddlers.

You're right or you would be but don't forget the bad players are also forced to play 35% or more. Forcing the skilled player to play X percentage of hands is no disadvantage if the donks are also forced to play that many hands. The reason pros dont play non optimal ranges is because they would severely disadvantage themselves versus other pros.

The problem with the VPIP angle is that people were obviously "gaming the system", especially early on. I think it was a $400 dead ante every single hand for the following dealer down if you fall under 35%, so people were limping in UTG with like 94o just to boost that number. And it's probably far less to do that 3-4x a down vs paying the $8,000 in penalties

That clown Vertucci does it on HCL, he'll just literally throw in some $50 limps with any 2 to avoid the shame.

As far as the production of the show goes, it looks great. I was someone who bashed the original LATB reboot because it was taking place in a dungeon in 240 definition. But this is absolutely as good as HCL and I like Jaffe/Dankness on commentary

Limping should definitely be banned in a min VPIP requirement game.

The "donks" are already playing over 35% so its not like the requirement affects them. It just lowers the win rate of the best players who would prefer to nit it up.

These games traditionally exist of 2 types of players

1. Nit pros who play a lot less than 35%
2. Gamblers/fun players who play more than 35%'

Bad players who are also nits are almost non existent because they have no entertainment value for the stream. The only exception is people who have control over lineups inserting themselves into the game like Nitucci on HCL.

Obvious which group is affected most negatively by a 35% VPIP requirement.

They discussed that it should be $1k open or better, however a limp is allowed in small blind if folded around.

That sounds good but that wasnt what was going on in the most recent game was it? Pretty sure there was a lot of limping. Rob commented that Doug didnt have to limp because he was already over 35%. There was also a hand where he limp/raised KK UTG so limping was not banned.

Ok but we have different definitions of nit. To me a nit is someone who plays less than 15 percent of hands. 35 percent is borderline spewtard territory as you should only be that lose from the blinds and button.