In

lolz. dont get me started

tim has already told us he has neither the physical nor mental capacity to resist purposefully misspelling teh words.

I think he went so far as to turn down a 10K even money prop bet to simply not do it on 2+2 for 60 days. ya.... exactly.

It will be interesting where RIO poker decides to base its HQ and servers. Isn't the training site officially located in Salt Lake City, or something?

Move to the IoM and poach some Rational staff imo.

In theory this is correct. In practice i assume that longterm the number of regs will just increase and from an individual regs earning perspective it will be same same/slightly better

Sadly this is my concern as well. The site will mostly attract regulars and grinders at first and the games will be massive nit fests that recs won't stand a chance in. Definitely +1 to table caps, no huds, and anonymous names (or at least allow monthly changes). Also, this will be a very unpopular opinion, but I strongly recommend you consider ONLY giving rewards to losing players. Maybe even on a sliding scale so that the more they lose the more rake back they get all the way up to 100%. If a site has fish and low rake then winning players will go there regardless of rewards.

Also good luck dealing with the Russian cyber terrorists when they DDOS your site and demand recurring ransom as they've done to every other gambling network =/

Umm 3 buy ins went to rake. That makes the game almost unbeatable

U

If we assume no HUDs and a table cap wouldn't that naturally lead to regs playing less tables and there being a 'healthier' fun player:reg ratio at each table? The regs WR would increase due to this ratio (more fun players at your table on average) and the fact they're able to pay closer attention and exploit more efficiently while the fun players' WR's would also increase as there are more fellow fun players at each table/less winning players pillaging them for double digit WRs?

Everyone's WR increases, fun players deposits last longer, etc.?

omg, this was such a great thread, and then here come hudtards/anontards/tablecaptards. Get a ****ing life, people, and stop flooding every thread with your self-admittedly not-well-thought-out ideas (you claim to be losing players, meaning you don't understand deep in-game mechanics)

https://www.ycombinator.com/apply/
^Phil, if you truely want to make this work,ie succeed on a global scale, fill out the application form above. With your background, your a lock for aceing application process

Success of the project imo will be determined by the teams ability to create a "reg" ecosystem. If the rake isnt burning regs, regs will battle. They don't need "new fish" traffic, they need returning regevens (~10% to 33% of the player pool) who breakeven in the ecosystem and keep the wheel churning deposits.

His market base are 2+2 and RIO readers.

that's bc the buy ins are tiny.that's your choice.
you still got to play 3000 hands at a penny a hand rake. i would kill for that.

So, discussing different features that may be implemented on a new poker site is bad?

I think the thread was great until YOU posted.

Everyone mentioning table caps isn't a losing player.

So it's ok for people to have suggestions for this new site that people think will be so great (even thought it's never going anywhere) as long as they mindlessly agree rake is the biggest problem in poker and someone should make a site with almost no rake where pros just print money forever right (yea that's a real well thought out idea)? What great suggestions! Let's all ignore where money in poker comes from and have a site magically filled with great software,and enough donators (or course ignoring where they come from to begin with , how much it costs to get them and how to keep them playing) to mass multitable for enternity with no harm to the ecosystem at all, fast payouts, great customer service oh and we want to pay basically nothing for it.

The people who think that way or that it's ever gonna happen should get a life- because they don't understand how the real world or poker works and their idiotic temporary short term self serving behavior has destroyed the games over the years.

You're fine with this thread being yet another "the rake is too high " thread under the title of something else.That made it like omg such an amazing thread! Just a nice big circle jerk where some mythical figure is going to spend tons of time money and energy (with the possibility of losing tons of money) all in an effort to let poker players sit at home and print money. Just don't let anyone who disagrees with you in it.


And guess what- for the people that can't beat the game (either because they arent' smart enough to,down have the time to learn how, or just want to have fun) -you can learn a lot from them. Or you can continue with the "fish will play no matter what" nonsense so many on here spew.

Meh, getting it 'right' in re: HUDs/Anonymous tables/seat scripts/table caps/etc. is going to be important for this new site.

I take much more issue w/ those ITT who have chosen to focus on why Phil's endeavour will fail/are focusing on the (obvious) obstacles to starting an online poker site in 2017 - things that Phil and the no doubt highly intelligent/experienced people he's surrounded himself with have spent hours and hours discussing/debating/brainstorming about - versus offering solution-focused posts/ideas to ensure this group has the best chance possible to overcome these hurdles (especially since it's probably in the majority of our interests that this succeeds).

I mean, c'mon - does everything we know about Phil really suggest that he's the type who recently got drunk w/ a bunch of his buddies and they came up w/ the bright idea to launch a poker site in a few months #yolo? Should probably give him and those he's surrounded himself w/ for this project a bit more credit than that.

I don't know how difficult the following would be to implement, but I thought this was a great idea when Ansky brought it up during the SNE/Stars debacle

Ansky is 100 pct right. Not all VPPs earned (or rake paid) is worth the same or anywhere near it.

Looking at your raw rake paid-rakeback (or vpps etc) paid does not actually give you an answer to how valuable a player is to a site.For example if a player is only playing in games that would be running full anyway and is a net winner on the site, the site would have made more money if that player never existed.

umm, are you new to nvg? For years now this entire section of the forum is filled with non-pro players, showing their superiority and being condescending towards all the regs. I understand that it's payback for years of the situation being the other way around, but isn't it kinda natural that being good at poker is praised on POKER forum?

The misconception here is, recreational players realised that they are necessary for regs to survive (which is true and was overlooked during boom years), and they feel that it makes them experts on subtle nuances of the game. It doesn't, and most of their ideas are just way to make life harder for regs, following the rule "well, if I don't win at the game, why should THEY?". This, paired with common confusion between correlation and causality (like in Bovada case), makes the discussion idiotic. And boring, as the same **** is spilled by same people in every single thread in nvg.

Bro, you literally can't make a new poker site without discussing the subjects we're discussing here. It's just not possible.

yeah, but they are not being discussed in a manner even remotely close to competent. I remember a first huge anti-hudders attack in nvg around 1-1,5 years ago, when it turned out that most people attacking huds didn't even know what huds actually were. But they had to attack them, beacuse it can't be that they are losing because they are bad poker, it must be that damn, unfair software!

There is one guy who talks trash to pros nonstop. WTF IS HIS NAME? And if you know his name do you know if they finally banned him? He needs to be banned if he isn't.

I don't see how three months and $120k in a Silicon Valley incubator is really going to help.

We can discuss in pm if you like, not gonna derail thread.

Your right though, the 120K is insignificant.

HUDs give you information on the frequencies of people's actions - how much they raise, how much they 3bet etc. Without HUDs, you have to estimate that information yourself. With HUDs, that information is given to you precisely and accurately by a piece of software.

HUDs do a lot of work for you, hence someone who uses a HUD has an unfair advantage over someone who doesn't.

Yes but you need to be careful banning huds when they are technically possible to make.

When that is the case a skilled programmer can make a hud and has a tremendous unfair advantage over the rest.
But when you allow huds everyone can buy one so its even.

Just allow session huds.