I wouldn't make any final conclusions about this after couple days, 6c volume fluctuates so much and april has been pretty quiet anyway, so i'll give this month or so until i finally make my mind. If this turns out to be good for the games, great, but we got legit fear that it's not going to be.


Well you get the general idea from BC leaderboards even though it's not accurate.

A legit fear? Do you guys have any idea how small of a change it is? You're acting like this is something extreme. Moving 6 to 5 or 9 to 8 is a very tiny change where it is almost impossible to prove causation.

As I said before, the time and energy should be spent mostly on growing the site and not on stressing over absolutely tiny changes. The way you are acting like this is something catastrophic is just silly. The differences between 5 and 6 handed will, at most, be minuscule. I prefer 5 handed myself and yet I certainly won't throw fit over it being 6 if that is what they decided. It's just not a big deal.

If what we've said is true, that there is a tendancy for tables to break quickly when they go 3-4 handed, then how the hell is a change to 5max not significant?

I specifically stated in my last post that it isn't a point of personal preference, not that it even needed saying as we have been pretty clear in our posts that our concern is for tables breaking. It is truly baffling to me that you cannot seem to grasp this.

why did you remove all the ante 6max plo tables? and no cap aswell? wtf is going on

why are NL omaha h/l hypers 16 blind deep at start?

I would play this format if it was like other hyper formats but just too shallow

Thanks for the continued feedback, everyone.

We're paying close attention to the 6 Card Omaha situation, and I expect some good analysis to come in shortly. We'll be looking at how quickly the tables are breaking specifically since that looks like the area of biggest concern so far. In terms of raw numbers last week compared to the previous week, there was very little difference in terms of number of unique players or hands played.

If the change ends up hurting the games, we will absolutely admit the mistake and return them to 6 handed, but we don't want to jump the gun on deciding what the impact is on the games.

There was a massive game consolidation last week. The games that we removed were getting very little traffic of late, and a big cleanup was needed. I do apologize if we removed a game you enjoy playing.

Specifically which tournaments are you talking about? We don't have Super Turbo NLO/8 SNGs that aren't Heads-Up, and all of the HU ones have 500 starting chips and 10/20 starting blinds (25bb starting stack).

Hi Shyam. Apologies again for being mean in an earlier post.

The thing that I am still really confused by re the 6c games is this. You stated that the main reason for the change to 5max for 6c was to address the issue that the games played tight. But the games really do not play tight at all. This is not an opinion btw, it is just fact. Given that this was the main reason for the change, and it is clearly an erroneous reason (because it is not true), is there actually any reason to persist with the experiment? Good reasons have been given to not persist with it. If there are no counterbalancing reasons to justify it then surely it makes sense to revert back to how it was right away?

Just my opinion

Also, who did you speak to about 6c Omaha before the change was made?

No problem on the "mean" thing, it comes with the territory.

At one point in the process we were actually debating changing the entire 6-max offering to 5-max. The thought was that it would create more tables, more action, and differentiate ourselves from most of the rest of the market (where there's an increasing "sameness" in lots of places).

Instead of going immediately to such a drastic change, we wanted to see how the game would react to a smaller change. After discussion internally, and with some external players (and no, none of them were the heaviest 6CO players, although they had played), it seemed like 6CO was the perfect place to try it. It was a large enough player base to actually see a reaction (being by far our third most popular game) but not so large as to do a huge amount of harm if it didn't work out.

One issue with choosing 6CO is that it's one of the only games we have that's already a unique offering, so the "differentiate" part of the idea doesn't apply so well. The rest of it does, though, so that's the reason for continuing the experiment even given the recent comments.

I hope that makes more sense and again, if it turns out to not work out, we'll be more than happy to revert back.

Aah, so you are using the 6c Omaha games as a guinea pig to try to get some data on how 5max effects things. You don't want to put your main games (NLHE and PLO) at risk, but you are prepared to take a chance with the 6c games. Well that makes sense now. Obviously I would personally prefer you not to do this since it is risking the health of the 6c games. But I do understand why you are doing so, and it makes sense for your business.

Thanks for the very honest and clear explanation.

did not know this was changed recently

There was some 300-600 action going just before

but in my lobby

Ring games > Mixed games > All Types

It only has 100/200 then jumps straight to 1500/3000 no 300/600?

^ I'm guessing you are referring to it saying $300/600 on HSDB?
There never was any $300/600 mixed stakes even before the change. But $300/600 is the stake of the big bet games, when the limits are $1500/3000. So sometimes HSDB incorrectly has that as the stakes.

They were posting hands in the April High Stakes thread which were played at 300-600 though?

I just received an email from Fulltilt saying that the Black Card Leaderboards are being changed and that the prizes are going to be changed/reduced.

Can you please confirm that this is not going to effect the current leaderboards that are due to end 30th April. Every player who wins their leaderboard on 30th April will have been expecting for the duration of the four month cycle to receive - if they win - red pro status and 4 months of 100% rakeback. It would be grossly unfair to move the goalposts at the last minute and award a much less valuable prize.

Yep, the current leaderboards that end on Thursday won't be impacted by this change. All the winners will get the 4 month Pro status as planned.

That is good news. Thanks for clarifying so quickly

so 6 ftps for every 100 is 89% rb equivalent?

25% from rb, 60% from bonus, and 4% from blackcard bonus ftps, am I missing something

The prize isn't in addition to your normal Black Card rewards, it's a replacement. So $6 per 100 FTPs (for winning the leaderboard) + the normal FTPs you earn (not double FTPs) is the equivalent of 64% rakeback if you earn 10 FTPs per $1 in rake.

Why no leaderboard for jackpot sngs?

In my opinion 6-max is the perfect number. You should NEVER remove it if you care about the health of the games and traffic. Personally I like to play short handed, 2-6 players at the table, I don't care. As long as it is at 6-max tables. But I always HATED these 4/5-max tables. It just doesn't work.

If something, remove the full ring tables (9-handed) and all the shallow tables.

Make all 9max tables 8 handed imo.

What are the numbers saying now? I ask because games at 1/2 and above seem to have severely dried up recently. We had a few running at the end of last month probably due to the guys grinding for leaderboard forcing the action. Now that's over the lobby seems pretty dead.

Also do you have the numbers for average pot / how long a table runs for, for before and after the change?

Yeah I agree that the 6c Omaha games seem to be struggling a lot now. Until the end of April they ran well, but this was because two of us were battling hard for the leaderboard and working much harder than usual to keep the games going. But nobody can sustain that intensity for more than a week or two without burning out. And since the leaderboard ended the games seem to have dried up. In particular, there are hardly any 1/2 tables running, and when they do run the games die very quickly.

Weird, i've had the feeling that games have been running better than they used to.

Ehh...

How do I contact Full Tilt.eu support?