There is a NVG thread about Cole South allegedly having $100 milly in bitcoin. Seems like a second pod is in order, Papi.

There's a thread somewhere on the internet about me alledgedly have a foot long dong, shall I come on the podcast as well?

I heard he only has 10,000 coins. Like a poor person

no i wanna hear from that foot long dong guy

According to Jungle on PAD Ivey bought a milly worth of coin back during the Full Tilt days.

Link?

Get fgators on the pod as a comparison to cumicon's graph

Get back cindy for another podcast and talk more about his degen stories. His first podcast was good, but it was too much focus on his background.

Maybe someone like MMAsherdog? I always find the NL cash crushers fun to watch.

Maybe someone like anybody.

Please bring back Lex or dankdaddy

I know this is a bit off topic My bad Joey, but this was such a good pod from Ike if anyone is looking to enjoy a few hours and may have missed it, Much Love Joey as always have Ike on . . .

Thanks Joey good vid much love HNY . . .

Good Ideas Joey . . .

How about a program where anyone can play to win a chance to play HU vs there favorite pro online (cough Sauce) the pro puts up there own money and the Recreational player climbs the ladder to compete for a winner take all vs the pro . . .

You have to fix "bumhunting" by encouraging players not to "bumhunt". If you want to get rid of scripts, you make severe enough punishments for it, until this happens, it's just stupid not to use scripts as its clearly very +EV. And even if scripts gets banned there will be manual scripting, basically meaning that same thing will happen but a bit slower, like 5-10 seconds instead of 0.1sec.

If you want to get shorthanded games running without clear marks, you have to encourage ppl to do so. At the moment there isn't too much benefits for battling in -EV lineups, so that doesn't happen too much as most regs are pretty logical people and don't play much in -EV lineups.

Easiest way to do this would just rewarding each month those players with most amount of hands played in nonfull games or every player who played over X amount hands shorthanded. Effectively lowering the rake for battling or even making it rakefree.

Poker players will never stop bum hunting. We're in this game to make money.
If you force players to play -EV games, they simply won't play.

Look at Party's anonymous tables. People sit out for orbits, waiting for confirmation that a fish sat down. Regs open sits with fixed stacks, so we know who they are.
Tons of grimming and angling going on, and still 0 reg games at high stakes.

Even if you make it fully anonymous, regs will find a way to find out who they're playing against.

Strong players will always hunt weak players. Not just in poker, but also in other walks of life.
Stars should not make it too obvious that weak players are being hunted, so we don't scare them away. That's about all they should do.

Agree with all that you said.

Joey seems to think that it's some kind of win if very bad bumhunters are forced out of the game. You might be happy that they cannot "cheat" the system any more, but good "warrior" regs edges will be greatly reduced. Not to mention fish will lose at a higher rate than before.

Usually a fan of Joeys videos but this one was way off the mark. Maybe actually speak to the people who play in the games and make another video?

Reducing rake shorthanded just makes sense to me. The other ideas may have implications beyond what you intend.

100% rakeback when playing heads up on 6 max tables would work?
Sites get games started that wouldn't usually start so they make more
Works out best for the players and sites

I would agree but they actually increased the rake for headsup only a year ago.

As an online reg who does table select I don't want to talk about this
It would be outrageous but the sites could easily get away with selectively banning bumhunters, even and be selective about who they allow to play

Just look at sports betting, it's the industry standard there

I currently play more mid & high stakes than 99% of people that I know of at online poker. This is one of the biggest reasons I still give a **** about this.

I also do speak to people in these games often about this exact issue.


One of my main points is, there are a ton of players out there who would play online poker but can never get a seat, don't want to get seat scripted against every single table, don't want to play against random accounts they've never heard of & all sorts of other things. I also speak to these types of people often.

These are all types of players - winning regs, breakeven regs, recreational regs, fun players, super fun players. They all want to be able to play online poker still.

Obviously, you don't comprehend much of what I said deathorglory. I'm talking about getting rid of the worst of the worst at these issues. Some might change their approach/strategy, others might not and quit. If it doesn't work out like a few small number of people are implying it won't then change it ****ing back or tweak the system.

You're guys basic argument is let's not try anything because xxxxxxxx terrible approach by some other site is having this impact. Let's keep it as it is because it benefits me.

I'm also not saying to get rid of table selection at all but to modify the system to also reward players who want to play in a mixture of different lineups. I don't know if any idea I brought up would work or not as is. I'm sure most of them would need to be messed around with to see what happens.

Enjoy it while it lasts



In some ways, this is how the untracked American sites operate right now.

I've already had regulars who stopped playing online and various levels of other players reach out to me and basically say I'M GLAD SOMEONE FINALLY ****ING BROUGHT THIS UP. The more that I see a select few of the current players who are benefitting the most from the current system get so defensive about it (afwijakjterijwatkkljewt NO THAT WILL NEVER WORK WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT NO ONE IS GOING TO CHANGE THEIR WAYS!) the more motivated I am to actually keep up with this. Plz keep telling me how trying anything new won't possibly work

Any of you are invited to come talk about how impossible it is to change anything or improve the way the ridiculous bumhunting strategy used by some can't possibly be changed/improved/experimented with on the podcast. Or why trying anything new can't work because of xxxxxx yyyyy hypothesis.

You are playing on Stars recently? With the hiked up rake and basically 0% rb?

Games actually don't insta fill for some recs on Stars midstakes. If the player isn't losing enough bb/100 then tons of regs won't even join. Ask yourself why that might be then ask yourself if you really want the games to be made any tougher by banishing the regs with the worst skill level.

Stars has basically encouraged more bumhunting by increasing rake and cutting rb to a laughable couple of percent. Get angry at them for that more than the players trying to get by in a very competitive environment.

Look at what happened to HU if you want to see what Stars will do as a "solution" to bumhunting. Zoom only and more rake.

I'm not sure if you listened to anything I talked about in the video. This isn't intended to be a Pokerstars only thing, it is every current & future crypto/non-crypto poker sites that I've talked with.

I'm not completely sure you even read what I posted above you either.

I'm almost positive you didn't do either of those because you keep focusing on the first thing I discussed changing/modifying.

It's clear Stars has no idea what a solution to improving anything is.



Also, many of the ideas I discussed are unrelated to the issue you are bringing up. I'm not sure how anyone could possibly argue some of them aren't a win/win/win for everyone involved.