I have come to terms with the bots. It is what it is. BetOnline doesn't seem that interested in stopping them, but I have spent a couple weeks studying them intensely, and it's been hugely beneficial to my winrate. They have massive leaks and I will gladly sit them HU or even play at tables with just myself and 2-4 other bots. However, if you switch the tables to anonymous, bots will still be rampant, but now the honest players will have no idea who they are which makes it even more advantageous running an illegal botting program.

I am against any changes that benefit the bots like anonymous tables or daily cash races divided by stakes.

This week I will contribute more in rake to your site than any other player, by a sizable margin, b/c I enjoy the games and promos as they are, but I would probably leave the site and look for other options if the games go anonymous.

I'll also +1 to Run it Twice, especially for PLO.

I'm not a fan of anonymous games at all. I think it makes it harder to detect cheating from the players' perspective and...

This is such a damn good post. A+++


In this day and age I think it's important to gear the majority of the bonuses towards the recreational players with stuff like reload bonuses. The more recreational players you have coming back the healthier the games will be.

I do think high volume regs should be allowed to compete for a rake race, but don't let the total get too excessive.

I think a fixed amount of reasonable, but not too high, rakeback for all would be OK.

You just don't want to encourage lots of tight players to play tons of tables with the incentives of large rewards for putting in tons of volume. That is detrimental to the games.

This

+1

+
It's all about volume not skill, if you think ABC poker is going to rake in all the money, then I dunno what to tell you. It may encourage more reg's, but rake races also encourage 24hr/bot accounts. How can a low to mid level player compete with a high end accounts playing 24/7. I don't even bother trying to compete with any kind of rake race. It's always the same people on every site. I've hit gold+ on WPN and still not even close to a minor pay out.

All they do it take it from the low to mid stakes players and give it to the high volume big time players or 24 hour accounts. It was much better tiered SNG weekly cash. I am not a bot, at the time i played a medium amount of SNG's. I could make the leaderboard because i was just better. Not because I paid a huge amount of rake. Give rakeback % to tier levels then instead. There is NO incentive for anyone but massive volume players on BOL...or many sites for that matter.

I know this is cash so some things don't apply. The trend PS set when they got rid of tiered performance based bonuses and weekly races was when they started to lose people. Most sites follow the trend and then added rake races. Sites have taken away any rewards for playing well or sticking around. In fact they would rather you lose money, which I suppose most people do.

Do causal players that just want to have fun care about rake races? No. As far as not letting people compete, that's just nuts. Everyone should have a fair access to anything poker sites offers. Tiered races do that. If low stakes players have to compete with huge volume players, what is the point? Then if you exclude high volume players from anything, what is the point for them to stay? Hence the site loses rake without any benefits.

The luck factor is going to keep recs around if they really want to play poker. Penalizing good players is wrong IMO. This discussion would be mute if sites would stop 24/7 accounts and bots. The volume some of these accounts put in is nothing short of insane.

Bottom line, i don't know if poker sites care much if it increases the bottom line.
If i was in control, i would get rid of rake races and just go flat rakeback % based on a level system. Maybe even some kind of weekly competition where skill matters.

A lot of what Windpspro is saying is false. I've played with most of the accounts in the current top 10 of the weekly rake race. There is only 1 bot in the top 10, it's in 9th. There are no 24 hour accounts, bots will play 3-4 tables for about 6-7 hours per day. The top 10 is not all pros. I know at least 3 in the top 10 are what I'd consider casual players who only 1-2 table PLO. I even briefly chatted with one of the casual players and he told me the rake race is the reason he's playing such long hours and higher stakes than usual. So I believe the weekly rake race is at least an improvement in terms of making sure the rewards are distributed to regs and casual players and not bots.

Is it the perfect system? No. But I don't think misinformation should be spread either.

it is nice to hear different points of view on this.
I always struggled with what one person thinks is an insane amount of hands?
Windpspro what would you consider a lot of hands lets say a day or a month?

Hi Fossilkid,

It is nice to hear this feedback. Maybe its not the perfect system, what do you think would make it better?

Kind Regards
Mike

My comment wasn't criticizing the system. You could interpret it more like "It's not perfect, but it's still good."

I think it is clearly much better than the daily cash rake races divided up by stakes. In those, I would check the leaderboards nearly daily and almost always the top 4 spots had 2+ bots.

At least with the new weekly system with all the stakes grouped together the bots don't stand much of a chance. It also has encouraged some casual players to play more and try and secure a spot in the top 10. I'm sure there are dozens more trying for a spot in the top 50 or top 150 to win a prize as well. It's encouraging action, not just from multi-tabling regs, but 1-2 tabling casual players are taking notice of the leaderboard as well, and that's a good thing.

I like the current system and would recommend keeping it going like this instead of the daily cash race system. This thread is a good place to discuss ideas to tweak it further. I just wanted to clarify some things and make sure decisions are being made based on faulty information.

also +1

The eco-system is good now as it is, anonymous tables or any additional rakeback will most likely kill it
There are thin lines with promotions , weekly races and VIP-points to play with

How do casual players make a rake race? If he's playing long hours to make a rake race he's not a "casual" player. And of course higher stakes are going to be easier to make the rake race. You pay more rake obviously. There were at least 2 24/7 accounts when I was playing SNG's earlier this year (not sure about cash)...i took a few months off.

No doubt the players at top of the LB are going to defend it, they make good money. The rake from everyone else goes to them. I see how there is no comment on how a low/mid stakes player are going to compete with a higher stakes players, even if they put in more volume.

My understanding is bots tend to play low to mid stakes, of course they will have a harder time making a one for all rake race, as will any other players not pumping out high rake. Does that mean players who play everyday at lower stakes should just get overlooked? I mean if so, then just say it.

No doubt higher rake pay should get a bigger prize pool. Not saying they should be equal, but it is such a big gap for lower tiers. I'm talking every race, not just cash. Get rid of the bots as best you can, not make it so you are hurting low/mid stakes players.
Once they changed it to an all for one race, I never got close, even playing 8-10 hours a day. I don't put that volume in anymore, I play more SNG's. I can grind without any races to worry about.

I also never said the LB are pro's. They could all be losing players for all i know. Plenty of high stakes losing players.

I said volume, I was referring to all the weekly races. I would not think of it terms of hands per say. That can vary depending on play styles and what not. but if i put in X amount of hands a day at .10 how many hands would I have to play to compete with a .25/.50 playing 10k a day? You see my point? In theory I would have to put up 5x the volume just to stay even. Even SNG's...how do I compete with 80k+ points...wow.

If you guys want it that way OK, It just seems a perception that anyone can make it.
I'm also not in favor of daily races, anything you do should be weekly or monthly IMO. However, I question the logic of how daily races have more bot's. Why can't bots play 24/7 for a week? The big difference is you made it one for all, not tiered.

Anyways, i'll stop posting about it. I just don't see it changing. It seems most sites offer about the same thing, if one site changes the others follow the trend.

Agree with all of that, though I do play on ignition not betonline atm. The bot situation is not as infested on Ignition as betonline, and working to improve the game and gto works with anon table (what better way to test theories). No bum hunting.

That said, I have money to deposit, but not good enough to trample bots, so not on betonline. This is also the reputation out there. You get rid of the users mentioned by mcachitown (I do not know the list) and I am all ears about depositing on your site. I just returned to online poker since a hiatus from 2012 (June 4th this month), and if I heard about the bot problems, what about all the new players and fish you are trying to attract?

Just thoughts to ponder there.

Playing long hours doesn't disqualify you as a casual player. Look at any card room, there are people playing for fun who put in 10-15 hour sessions. One of the guys in the top 10 of the leaderboard plays 2 tables max, almost never raises preflop but sees more than half of flops and is super passive postflop. Far from the typical TAG or rock grinders. This is the exact type of player you want playing long sessions as it's probably some rich retired guy just playing for fun who doesn't care whether he wins or loses. And the rake race is encouraging him to play more, which is a good thing.

OK well that's SNGs. There is a separate thread for discussing those, but your comments weren't applicable to cash games, at least not PLO.

I play .25/.50, .50/1, and 1/2 PLO. I would consider that a mix of low and medium stakes, and I am currently winning the rake race. So yes, it is possible for those players to compete with higher stakes players.

The daily races had more bot winners b/c the races were divided by individual stake. So one for .50/1, one for 1/2, etc. The bots only 3-4 table one particular stake and they play for 8-10 hours every single day. In PLO, there are usually 2-5 games running at those limits. So a bot is going to win a leaderboard divided by stakes b/c they're in all the games running at those stakes for a large portion of the day.

The weekly leaderboard combines stakes. So the bots aren't as effective b/c they only play 3-4 tables at a single stake, but human players might 6-8 table different stakes, so their combined points are greater than the bots, even if they play less hours during the week. That's why human players are currently holding the top 8 spots in the leaderboard, whereas the bots won the daily ones most of the time.

Sounds like your comments are probably better suited for the SNG thread.

I'm thinking of playing on the site but the lack of rakeback is holding me back.

I see the rake race, but it might be hard to place high on the leaderboard (and get a decent % rb) while playing on multiple sites.

I think a flat or tiered (more volume = higher rb %) rb system would get a lot of new players, including me.

Um, if you are playing 10-15 hour session on a normal basis, how in the world is that casual? What is your definition of a full time reg? LOL. That's 70+ hours a week if you need help with math. Nothing "casual" about that.
It seems you are basing it on whether they win money or not, or if the goal is to win money. Who would play 10-15 hours a day with no goal of winning? Degen i suppose.

I'm sure some people put in more hours, with no life I suppose. Even when I played Full time I would not put in 15 hours a day. Even playing 20 hours+ a week I'm not casual.

I think Fossilkid is probably using the word casual to mean non-professional. I think you are viewing his usage more literally, "irregular or relaxed". I think that is probably all there is to your disagreement.

Yah, exactly. I'm using it as a synonym for "fish".

My point was that playing long hours doesn't necessarily mean the player is a reg or someone who sees poker as a money-making venture. It could be a rich business-man looking to blow off steam or a retiree wanting to have fun and not caring if he wins or losses, but enjoying the rush.

If the weekly leaderboard can convince a couple of these guys to play long hours for the joy of winning a top spot in the leaderboard, I see that as a good thing.

My parents are ecstatic when they "win" a vacation to Vegas worth 2k or something. Doesn't even register that they've given 10k+ in action at the local casinos to earn it.

Hello

I dont thinks the dayli race is very good for the games.

The peoples who rake the most in a day where not even winning it since BBJ tables doesnt count toward the rake even if you pay lots more rake than other tables since you rake the BBJ, so if you wanna continue them i would at least count BBJ tables toward the race. Dont know if its the same for weekly race ???

Only plo grinders can win the race since they only play no BBJ table even if they probly rake less (less tables running)....

The best promo should be aim toward net depositor....

Any news about the pv i sent you @BetOnline Mike. I really appreciate you taking feedback from the players btw thx.

Sorry if everything is not that clear english is not my first language.

I would think overall just rb instead of rake races would be better for the ecosystem. Even if it is a low amount, everyone gets some and not just the bots or players that would play anyhow.

I agree. Even 10 15% flat rakeback would increase traffic guaranteed.

This

I'm not a fan of rakeback. All that money should be getting to the net depositors. Much prefer that money going back into making the game quality better than into a volume winning players pocket.

There should be something as far as lower rake or rakeback when playing short handed. There should be a good incentive to starting games. The focus should be on getting games to run so that net depositors can sit in. Having a net depositor and full rake is worth it for a reg. There's no point in getting rake back while playing with 2 fish and a full table from both the player and the sites perspective.

The goal is to get depositors into the game, then full priced poker.
Until then, a discount.

I agree with this in a sense that most of the promotion should be aim toward net depositor. You can do some for the for regs but way less imo.

People just want a game to play in and if rec show up more because they have an incentive more to play on your sites (reload bonus with low rollover ect) than others option you automatically win.

Rakeback tend to bring more bots(hello acr).

Hi Betonline Mike please give us straight answer for the following: Is it allowed to sitout at a table and wait for recs to join if there is another player sat in and the game is not running? At NL500 there are a lot of bad regs doing it all the time and they do it even 3 handed, which means that I am sat at the table and two of them join and block the table until recreational joins and then they start playing.

Thanks for the feedback, I just feel really stupid for not blocking the tables and other regs do it all the time and they do not get punished. Couple of us then have to play HU just to have the seat guarrantied....

Hi Discipline13 So I Just got the rules for seating scripts and table camping.

We do not allow seating scripts at all.
We do not allow table camping, the tables have settings that kick players off the table if they are inactive for certain amount of time or hands, whichever comes first.

kicks inactive players from table after 5 minutes or 15 hands.
kicks inactive players from boost after 2 minutes.
It unregisters logged out players from snug's after 5 minutes.

Unfortunately there some ways around this, like sitting in and playing one hand.
But we are looking into to trying some new things.

Kind Regards
Mike