ive been keeping track of juicy games on both sites. for instance, ftp fr nlh games have a much higher % of players seeing the flop (25% avg.) and stars is like 15% on average at best. its like theres no action at stars but they got a ton of tables running.

if the games are brutally tight, why the hell do so many people play at stars? is the fpp bonus programs at stars that lucrative? also, these are comparisons of both sites from 5/10 on down.

now the funny thing is, when you play 10/20 on up to 25/50, the games are much more donkish at stars in comparison to ftp.

i would like to hear some views of why the stars lower level games are so tight in comparison to ftp when it comes to nl.

however, when it comes to plo, the lower level games are much better at stars than ftp.

do all these things run in cycles or is there a specific reason?

The betpot button juices up pots with donks.

I agree it creates action. I wish stars had a bet pot button.

because Full Tilt is rigged obv

If you're just comparing the different figures in the lobby, the difference is because the numbers are calculated differently.

What's the difference?

same question as Self Made

what is the difference? how is it calculated in different way and how does it affect?

it isnt calculated differently. the pot sizes on stars is uniformally smaller as well. the action at stars is consistently tighter than ftp. i still dont see why stars games are so much tighter. maybe there are more 20 tabling monkeys on there? i havent taken the time to figure it out exactly. i thought maybe someone would have a logical explanation. is the fpp system at stars more lucrative than the rakeback at ftp thus they can afford to play tighter at stars?

Once you get up to supernova and elite it is. I hear that the rakeback with supernova is 40% @ stars? Can anyone confirm/deny or give me the numbers of nova and elite novas?

You know this how?? I am willing to bet that Josem is correct.

this makes sense to me...

Pokerstars!!

There is only one way to correctly calculate the number of players seeing the flop.

You divide the number of players in at the flop by the number of players dealt in and multiply by 100.

Any other figure is not the percentage of players seeing the flop so I suspect Josem is wrong.

I would imagine that FTP games are softer because so many people from this site seem to think it's the only place to play and I suspect that there are a greater percentage of reasonable players here than in the population as a whole.

It's a trade off, really: shoddy CS and soft games v Good CS and hard ones.

the FTP software with all the cartoons avatars and all sounds can tilt you so hard.

the PS software suck.

If you want to withdraw your money in a timely manner there is only one viable option.

Hint: It's not FT.

So there you have it, really.

If:

1) You don't share a room with another poker player
2) You don't have a delinquent little sister/brother/mother/father
3) Do net desperately need to get money in a hurry
4) Are not paranoid about 'botters and colluders

Enjoy the soft games on FTP.

Otherwise, PS is the site for you!

Can u add Lederer headbutting Vanessa Russo so I can use this as my desktop background? pls pls pls

moneygram?

+1
PS

Why does poker stars want your SS # when using a bank transfer, and does full tilt do the same? for a U.S player.
Any better way except sending international M.O.

MyProblem: I love both.

But, if the new FTP beta goes online with a Hud working on it, i change to FTP for shure.

ftp.. the software is pretty, has 27% rb.

stars sucks b/c the tables are ugly, the sounds are rly annoying and their vip program sucks (for low stakes guys)

Stars software is about a bazillion times better than Full Tilt.

But at Full Tilt I get rakeback.

FTP ftw

to answer OP,

it is because in the full ring games there a number of mass multi tabling nits who are trying to just gather VPP's and at least break even.

You will find they are the main games effected by this.