I actually agree with all of this

I hope 110% he is able to deliver something that rivals the full tilt hay days, but in all honesty I would be more excited for a new season of high stakes poker

Hi Lee Jones

Really good news!

Also, when money can be transferred for free, (I have no idea why this isn't the case in 2016) we can have rake-free poker. Finally a skill game that is zerosum.

Ungreedy profits could be ads at the tables or cosmetics like in other games.

I'm just rambling. I hope for the best! Good luck!

I'm not "thinking that." That's simply what is transpiring when they openly say that's what they're doing by limiting HUDS, etc. There is no data backing up the benefits of that, but that doesn't stop the entire industry from focusing on it.

All while the crappy changes they made to their micro-stakes MTT schedule post Black Friday have gone mostly ignored by their staff until recently due to the entire industry focusing on HUDS and screennames, seating scripts, etc. As they said one of their main goals for the new MTT schedule in 2016 was to increase the amount of big guarantee MTTs daily in the micro-stakes range. You can see that in one of their bullet points in the 2016 MTT schedule thread.

Ruining the micro-stakes MTT schedule on Pokerstars is what caused the poker eco-system to tank and Amaya is slowly realizing this FACT. They are now making proactive changes to the site to do something about it.

I never claimed anonymity helps recs. I didn't even know Bovada was anonymous until this morning and I have no opinion on anonymous tables. I was just pointing out you how bad your argument is. You claim:

Bovada games are softer
Bovada games are anonymous
Therefore anonymous games are softer

A is B
A is C
Therefore B is C
is not a valid argument

Hope that helps.

Are you talking to me?

I always claimed Bovada games are softer because of Asian sports betters. The anon thing is the most worthless thing ever invented in online poker history. It does NOTHING.

That's why the action is so good on Bovada at 9:00 am Central Time..it's 10:00 pm in Hong Kong and the sportsbetters are just starting to get drunk at that time. I'm awake and fresh while their tipsy and tilty.

Bovadas games primarily are softer bc of the low table cap and the fact it's mostly a sports betting site/casino -which is why they're now going to segregate the poker room from the sportsbook/casino.

That's a bigger factor than being anon.

I agree with Borg. I think you're way off base with your stance re: anon tables.

Um, you might want to read Borg's post just before yours. You probably didn't see it because you were typing up your post.

It's not even the anon tables that allows "bad players to play against other bad players." It's the lack of a seating script that allows a "first come first serve" scenario when joining tables. If you simply remove the ability to seat script regs can't hog all the spots at tables with high pot averages. You don't need anon tables to do this...

Getting rid of seating scripts is far more important than screen names.

Well i said those things were a bigger factor- but I don't think anon is a non factor the way you do either.Not being hunted,getting to play other ****ty players and not having idiots tell someone they're down x dollars on a site are good things.

I completely understand you feeling this way but it's too late dude, it's happening.

I agree, but 95% of the players are down. Everyone is losing money. The guy pointing out how much a fish has lost is probably losing money himself.

I've never used a HUD.

I only criticize the obsession the industry has with them because that focus causes them to ignore far more important issues...like the MTT schedule. The changes they made to the MTT schedule for $20 depositors (95% of people who play poker online) created a break-even environment for 95% of people who deposit money to play poker on a site.

This causes a bottom up domino effect that causes players in higher stakes to suffer loses because there is no good micro-stakes MTT schedule to create an army of inexperienced final table binkers who take those winnings and dump it in the cash game prize pool. If you screw up the micro-stakes MTT schedule you screw up the entire mid-highstakes cash game ecosystem by removing a feeder system that brings new players and new money to those stakes.

This scenario has created a break even situation for the min depositor all the way up to the highest stakes player. The only player that benefits in the game is Amaya....they can just sit their raking everyone while issuing cashouts far less. If you'd like to believe that Amaya created this scenario accidentally go ahead, but I don't think these people are that dumb. And, it's about time we call them out on it.

One solution is party style aproach where you cant see you opponents until you are dealt a hand. And to make it more effective you cant change the seat getting up and sitting next to the familiar stack that you know belongs to a fish.

No, it isnt. Teh problem is that teh boom is over and due to education education education we created an environment with way too many pro's and semiregs and not enough bad players to feed all those.
Only thing a massive rake reduce accomplishes is:

Shorterm: regs win more money
Longterm: more regs and exactly same status quo as we have

Wouldn't rec players inherently last longer, and have a higher chance of spinning up a roll with lower rake? Also wouldn't it allow mediocre regs to build a roll faster and move up where good refs are gonna beat them for a worthwhile winrate due to lower rake?

What do you think is teh implication for a -20bb/100 rec if rake drops to 2.5% and he's paying 3bb/100 instead of 6bb.
What about a -50bb whale?

Teh farytale of REAL RECS (aka funplayers, fishes, whales) magically lasting 100s or even 1000s of hands longer w half teh rake is laughable at best and delusional at worst

THE not TEH

I don't think you understand just how many people are breaking even out there.

If Run it Once poker doesn't offer lower rake or a better VIP system then it's competitors, then what's the point in opening the site?

Why would I even bother moving from Pokerstars?

The point of opening the site would be for Galfond to make money.
You'd move if you could make more money there or if something else important to you was better there.

For those who think the rake is the be all end all keep in mind stars for years (if not now) had the lowest effective rake and the ****tiest games.Sites in the old days like Pacific had amazing games and higher rake. Rake is far from the be all end all and i'd happily pay 2005 rake to get games half as good.

Fwiw, I'm not saying your wrong, just interested in the topic.

On an individual level the rake probably wouldn't save the fun players/whales (#SavetheWhales). But if you talk about the entire player pool that's a lot of BB's staying in the ecosystem floating between regs/recs. If the site is able to produce an environment that doesn't always pit one fish against a table of nitty regs, it's going to make the recs have a more enjoyable experience and continue to redeposit.

Is it naive to think this way?

All I know is that I played 3000 hands of 10 NL the other day in 3 hours and paid $30 in rake.

So, basically I was at a 300 bb disadvantage over the next 3 hours before I even played a hand.

****ing joke. I don't care if players are bad. That's a tough disadvantage to over come

You played 3000 hands of poker and paid a penny a hand for the privilege. Boo hoo.

I do hope that Phil makes money. He's a nice guy. But he doesn't have to bleed players dry like Amaya. That's why people are so pissed off to begin with