Yeah, sometimes the target tourney has already started, or does not match the title. It is not often, but you have to check carefully before entry in the satellite. Global should definitely check on the algorithm that generates the satellites, imho.

I had similar situation happen this week. Won satellite into 3-M on Sunday. As I won, the little ticket pops up in the lobby saying congrats you won etc etc. 3-M starts and I am not registered. Double checked items to confirm no spare ticket.

Sent email to support (including screenshot of satellite lobby, doesn’t specifically list the ticket you win but the title of the tourney was “Bounty 3-M satellite), they followed up saying that my satellite win successfully auto-registered me into 4-M on Monday.

So it seemed like the satellite was either mislabeled or just was sending ticket to incorrect event. But I can confirm they auto-registered me into 4-M, so still received the *value* of ticket won


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again, I did check carefully, which a poster above and GP support both helpfully told me to do. However, it still clearly says "Satellite to Quick Eleven" but I appreciate the assumption that I made a mistake registering for a satellite to the Quick Eleven, that said it was to the Quick Eleven.

Just a thought on the "amped up" splashed pots:

According to the advertisements, a free 5bb splash pot happens normally about once every hundred hands randomly. I play 6-max holdem mostly. So, just by raw numbers that is the equivalent of AT LEAST .8333 bb per player per 100 hands. Rake varies between different stakes and with different play styles, but a rough estimate would be 10 to 15 bb rake per 100 hands. So, AT LEAST the free splash pots equate to 5.55 percent rakeback.

This only gets better with better skill and higher stakes. A winning player, who plays at NL100 for instance, should expect to win that splash pot more often, and to pay less rake overall. That could easily bring the equivalent virtual rakeback to 10 percent:

1bb/100 free, paying 10/100 rake = 10 percent rakeback.

Just wanted to put this out there for people who say they never play on Global because "ma rakeback".

thanks Robert! I was wondering, but I didn't know how to calculate it.

Global's long skinny tables dont set up well alongside tables from other poker-rooms. Last time I played there, they had an option to revert back to their older "square" tables. But I can't find it this time. Is the option still there?

Not an option anymore.

Doesn't it drive people crazy trying to find a way to tile that s**t? Or am I missing something? I haven't played there for a while.

It's not optimal but the site isn't meant to be optimal for players multi-tabling

That's funny, because last time I checked, they were letting players sit at 12+ tables instead of setting a limit.

I just have them overlap slightly now. It's annoying, but they did fix some of the text sizing so it's playable or maybe I just got used to it. I can 6 table on one screen without much of an issue.

Please add a $2 hyper and $1 all-in satellite to the Lunchtime Eleven.

That is true. But they openly state their objective is to be a rec friendly site. A ton of features on the site are in line with that objective. Recs on average are probably not playing more than 4-6 tables if that. I highly doubt they have making the software better for multi-tabling is high on the priority list

PLO 5, option to run it multiple times, downloadable hand history, rake back instead of cash drop pots, straddle option, bounty sit n go….

It seems like Global offers the bare minimum to retain their users, the rake, bonuses, game formats, small guarantees- it's all gotten worse in the past few months. I've been playing a ton of volume lately haven't even gotten a decent SC-ticket (plenty of GC tickets though)

Conversion of stack sizes between the number of chips and the number of big blinds would be nice. Seems like this sort of feature would be appreciated by all players and lots of other sites have it as this point.

Yeah sites probably make way more when they offer the BB display, out of all the possible improvements this is the one I'd like to see most

I think the time has come for Global to limit the number of open cash ring game tables to four.

This should serve the purpose of protecting the poker ecosystem.

If a reg chooses to not play at global because they need a dozen tables of action and miraculously can play well that way, then you don't want that player anyway.

As someone who plays 6 tables during my sessions, I would find this to be a bummer. It's not a predatory action, I just get bored only playing 4 tables. What stakes are you playing where there are so many regs that it's a predatory environment? I play NL50 and it's almost all recs and I sometimes spectate higher and except at the highest limits, there are clearly clueless players all over.

Like you, my handle here is the same as my handle on Global. The stakes higher than you play feature several regs that play literally every open table NL 100/200/500. Just sit out and open all those tables and watch. It is eye opening, imo.

I've watched NL100 and have not observed that whatsoever. Games look super soft, I'm just not rolled for it.

My request for a table limit is not because I consider it predatory behavior in and of itself. I am glad that you see soft games higher up, and maybe when you are rolled for it you can test that theory out.

If it weren't for those same regs the games wouldn't run.

Lol, multiple regs aren't loading reg battles. Watch how fast a game starts/breaks when a fish joins 1k+. Even at 200 when there's a spot it's clear multiple people are waiting for a seat.

When sitting out at a table, is it possible to select an option where it will sit me back in on my next BB?