That would promote chip dumping though to give money to the guy who lost the most.

Surely, extra cash bonuses would be cool but don’t you like free tournament tickets or entries? I think Global Poker is pretty good in terms of bonuses. They let us play more. It’s obvious that platform owners don’t want to give players additional free cash, it means that they would lose. All in all, I enjoy playing here even without new promos.

They wouldn't lose by giving players extra " free " cash. Some cash players play for hours a week and don't want to play extra hours in a tournament for a possible reward. Player A rakes $1000 a month for GP ... Player B Rakes $25 ... Player C plays play chips .. All three players rewards is a ticket to the same game.

Don't forget to put your opinion down after you vote.

Any new players want to take a crack at voting / voicing their opinion ?

Why give the players that are the absolute worst for the health of the games, breakeven or slight win/lose regs, incentive to stick around?

If anything breakeven or slight win/lose regs should be targeted for double rake and Global can use the extra money to advertise and keep more and more rec players coming, or to give losing players rakeback without them even asking for it. Give some of the money back to the recs to keep them around longer.

Winning players don't want/need rakeback. We want the quality of the games to increase and every possible disincentive given to the group of people that ruined the game before Global came along.

That said, NO HUDS or any other such nonsense that gives nonthinking breakeven regs an advantage.

Basically Global, please continue to whatever you can to disincentivize parasitic nonthinking players from sticking around.

The rake back would be bad then its ACR 2.0. ITs hwy you guys play on global and bovada cause ACR is full of grinders your going to break even or can't beat. If you want rake back go ACR and gl to you. Your br is gonna shrivel up over time. They give you beast money too.

But there should be some kind of incentive where say if you put in 50- 100k hands a month it releases a deposit bonus. they already do that they said they pick people out of a lottery to get that deposit reward. But thats dumb because people should have to earn a reward like that. That way global gets more deposits out of it and we get some sort of reward for our grinding. So say you put 50k you get extra 25% bonus on deposit or 100k hands a month you get a 50% bonus up to 1k. So you get 500 bucks for grinding 100k hands. I think thats fair but not to much. That would be nice reward and it also helps global get more deposits. But at the same time the reward is not to big that would bring over acr grinders. If its to big its ACR 2.0

Its not about whether your winning or losing player. Its about getting rewards for grinding on a site more then other players and keeping the action going on the tables. Without grinders poker sites die off. Bum hunters ( winning players) they ruin sites because they take all the fishes money and jump off tables as soon as the fish are gone and look for more fish to bust and the tables break. So like if i sit cause I don't bum hunt anymore cause i see how it ruins poker sites, if i play for an hr or 2 almost every tables breaks away from me and i have to constantly find new tables.

Once the fish are gone the regs put their tail between their legs and leave the table. Its not good for the poker site for that to happen. But if they have some sort of incentive to play they will keep playing and as long as the table is going more fish will come sit. You gotta have some balance some reward for playing hrs on end but at the same time not to much that it brings over ACR grinders.

A casino in my area boomed because of rewards system if you play so many hrs you get 500 weekly bonus and it went up to 1k. THe poker tables were packed every day all day and night. And at the same time it wasn't big enough where it brought in to many grinders there was still a lot of fish and some of them would play at small buyin amounts but lose all week to get that bonus. It made them feel like winners to get that bonus. ITs great some kind of incentive like that. It keeps people on the tables instead of just bum hunting. But at the same time if you give rake back grinders make a ton of money off that and every table is full of top players to grind out that rake back and thats not good either. It has to have some balance to it. Some rewards but not to much.

That's a really, really, good idea.

Bull****. Grinders could all disappear for all I care. 'They keep the game going' is a straight up myth. What they do is whittle away fish bankrolls via rake. It's always been that way. Rewarding that nonsense with rakeback is the WORST possible idea.

That's not bull**** at all. How does a site survive without grinders ?

Answer ......

It can't .... Rec players don't play enough to bring in the same type of rake a reg does. Your posts are coming of as your angry at good players for beating you in the game thus only want bad regs at your table and fish / rec players.

Poker is full of slightly win/loose players that keep the games going. These players help the game not hurt it. Pull all the regs from the site and watch as the gntds in tourneys shrink and game play dwindle.

Rakeback is only one option. There are tons of other ways to give rewards to those keeping the game going.

Wtf are you talking about? Grinders could disappear and recs would still play. Your conjecture that grinders 'start games' is just that, a conjecture. If all the grinding breakeven regs left it would be better for the games period.



No, I'm one of the best players at the limits I play and certainly one of the biggest winners. I crush the games without rakeback. I could give a **** about some 0.5bb/100 grinders making rakeback. Just quit poker and leave the site altogether. You're just annoying everyone including recs. If anyone needs rakeback, it's recs. People who are breaking even should be double raked so they **** off. You make the games worse for everyone.

I'd rather play 2 games vs. all fish and have a couple bb/100 go back to them than play 6 tables vs. mostly reg nits. Seriously just quit poker and leave it to the talented players. If you need rakeback, you're never going to make it in this game, so just quit.

Sn? What are you crushing NL4?

My post clearly stats what I am talking about. Go back and read it if you need to.

No regs means less tables ... which means less options for recs. Which means recs will find better options on another site.



You saying recs can keep a site going is just conjecture and very highly likely to be false. They simply don't play enough hands to bring enough of a profit into the sites. Its the regs that do that.

This topic isn't about winning / losing or break even recs. Its irrelevant if anyone is one or the other. This topic is about rewarding those loyal to the Global Brand. Those who put in hours of play ... winning / breakeven or otherwise.


Self-Entitled much ?

Break-Even players can turn into winning players and also help keep the games going. Seems to me your looking for a fairytale site where you are the only winning player vs. a bunch of recs. Good luck with finding that.



And most others would also ... whats your point ?

Again this topic isn't about just rakeback. ..... Rakeback is just one way to reward loyal players to a brand.

It's an obviously wrong conjecture, so I ask again a different way: why do you think what you claim is true, when its blatantly and obviously the opposite.


That's not how it works. Global is open to American players. Recs dont play because there are 'lots of tables' they play there because they can play there. If anything playing vs. more regulars runs the game for them and scares them away.

This is also the reason I'm against opening up the market to eastern Europeans etc. Once they come in they carrion feed for their $2/hr and within a year the games and site are dead. How do we know? Because it happened to every other site that ever was. This isnt something that might happen. It WILL happen if dolts like you get what they're asking for.



So you want the site to give that profit back to break even players....what can I say but what a genius idea. /s



I'm all about rewarding losing players. Breakeven or slight winners can piss up a rope. The only thing they're loyal to is their mediocrity. The second they destroy the games on global they'll just go be carrion feeders on another site. They dont give a crap about anything but pressuring sites to make bad decisions so they can feel slightly better they haven't completely wasted their time.


Just being honest. If you were in my shoes you would likely share my opinion.

I dont want break even players to turn into winners. I want them to quit poker. Every. Last. One. If you were a winning player you would too. Rakeback will do exactly that, so I will fight against it happening.

Its your opinion that its wrong based on your feelings and you being a " winning " player wanting what you think is best to keep yourself as a winning player.

My claim is true because of common sense. The more someone plays on any given site .... the more rake / profit the site will make. This isn't up for debate. Someone that plays 10 hours a day ( winning / losing or break even ) is going to generate more income for a site then a rec / fish that plays 10 hours a week.



That is exactly how it works. Recs play on the most attractive sites that are avalible to them. If they sign in to a site a handful of times and don't see the game they like playing running or lack of option for the game / level they play then they will move on to a site that can provide it. Guess who keeps these tables/levels running that recs like to play ...... its the regs.

Obviously lack of options is another reason why players pick certain sites.

Sounds like to me you are just trying to keep out players that make it harder for you to win. There are plenty of reasons why past sites didn't make it. Having loads of loyal reg players hasn't been one of those reasons to my knowledge.





I never said that .... I am advocating for bonus / kickback for all players. Dep bonus ... raked hand bonus ..... time bonus .... lots of ways to do it. Giving these type of rewards to loyal customers is the standard in the poker industry.



Again this is just you wanting is what is best for your own specific game and not what is over-all better for the majority and the site in general.




Another statement that further implies your argument is based on your own specific game and ability to profit instead of whats best over-all.



Lol ..... there will always be break-even players ... there is no game without them. If today's breakeven players quit then the slightly losing players become break-even and the cycle continues.

Yes I want to maximize my profit. Giving breakeven regs rakeback maximizes THEIR profit. I dont care about their profit.

I dont care about the site. By giving rake back to people the site makes less money, not more. Otherwise every site would be implementing rakeback instead of getting rid of it.



So give recs rakeback. Fine by me. If theres A game going they will play they dont need 25 tables of nitregs to choose from.




Boy you're smart how did you ever figure this out. Oh right it's what I've been saying the ENTIRE TIME.

Past sites didnt make it because nitregs infested all limits and ate all the fish until they were all losing to each other and all left to another site. In recent years most poker sites have caught on to this fact and removed rakeback or otherwise disincentivized rakeback nits yo prevent or slow this from happening. Get with the program







Its standard nowhere anymore because it destroys the poker economy. You're basically arguing to destroy the poker economy so you dont have to breakeven anymore. I say nope.





You've got it exactly backwards. What you're proposing has been tried many times and always results in site bankruptcy and destruction of the poker economy. I want what's best for the site and my game, which is preservation of the games. The best way to do that is to limit or disincentivize parasitic rakeback grinders from playing as much as possible.

Giving rake back / bonus or any form of kick-back maximizes everyone's profit and helps cut back loses for each individual player / keeping players playing.... which in turn generates more rake.




And there it is ........ you want all break-even / slightly winning players gone and don't care about the site. . . . . LOL ...


Giving bonus incentives leads to more deposits from people trying to win that bonus. Thus creating more action at the tables and generating more rake.





Actually recs do want 25 tables to choose from.


Correct I am smart. Thanks for noticing.



There are plenty of reasons past sites didn't make it. Having a bucket load of loyal players isn't one of them. Poker isn't as popular and sites are decreasing ... this is why bonus incentives are decreasing. But they are decreasing not vanishing. You would be hard pressed to find a site that doesn't offer at least some sort of deposit bonus / rakeback or some sort of loyalty program. Global Poker is the only one that comes to mind.









Its standard everywhere..... list some sites that don't offer deposit bonuses or rake bonus or other bonus incentives such as loyalty or rake races. Go ahead .... I'll wait for that list.







Wait a minute ..... didn't you say you don't care about the site .... but now you do. Why the sudden change in heart ?

What I am proposing is the standard that has been tried and tested to work. The biggest and most profitable sites in the industry use this model for a reason.

No it doesnt work you mong. That's why sites are trending away from rakeback. Stars is the biggest site in the world and they changed their rakeback scheme to maximize their profit. This is an objective fact.

Get good at poker or quit. But at the very least have some self respect and stop asking for handouts.

You keep on running back to ... Rakeback ... this topic isn't about that. Stars are not moving away from rewarding customers they are simply doing it in different ways and giving less. SO as I said its a proven model that works.

No-one is asking for handouts fool. Unlike you who /////// " want break-even regs to quit //// grinders to quit //// and don't care about the site " ..... I would much rather see the site prosper and as many players as possible along with it.

Listen, my fundamental concern is my own winrate. Of course I am interested in the long term longevity of the site, but primarily I care about ME. Maybe not having that mindset is holding you back?

Giving rakeback or rewards can and should go to losing players. Breakeven players shouldn't get any, because it incentivizes them to stay. I don't want them to stay. If they leave, my winrate goes up or stays the same for longer.

I crush the stakes I play without rakeback. I don't need it or want it. The last person it should go to is someone who neither wins nor loses, because it will just turn them into a winning player. Fewer winning players is better for the longevity and healthiness of the games.

This isn't debatable, it's a cold fact.

Rakeback and rewards schemes worked when there was high demand for poker. There isn't high demand anymore, so sites are moving away from that business model. This isn't debatable either, it's another fact.

I'm sorry you don't win but tough luck. Git gud.

It was you that said you didn't care about the site ... I was simply quoting you. My mindset isn't holding me back ... nothing is.

Rakeback and rewards should go to loyal players not losing ... not winning .... not breakeven .... Loyal ! A loyal losing player can get more rewards ( per their raked percent ) then a winning / breakeven player but breakeven .... winning players shouldn't be discluded from getting rewards.

Your cold hard facts seem to be without facts.