Jackal has a lot of great ideas. Someone get that man a job at Run It Once.

Real question is not about this being not implemented yet on RIO, real question is how YOU don't have a successful pokersite up and running yet with such great ideas and management skills ?

This is the problem. STP is always going to favour winning players. Recreational players will play them badly and lose more of their bankroll than they should chasing them. Witness the stories about people playing badly chasing even the smallest splashes. This is not good for the recreational player and clearly doesn't target them.

-BD

Curious why they wouldn't have been specific about saying this when they announced he could play.

-BD

Just because something is bad for you doesn't mean it isn't targeted at you.
That's how the wonderful modern capitalism works actually in perhaps the majority of consumer driven industries.

StP is definitely recreational player centric as a concept - gamble, bigger pots, added variance etc. even tho bet effect is worse for them than flat rakeback. that's ****all anyways for low volume rec players.

The site utterly failed in being what we all dreamed it to be in our heads when Phil announced it- a safe haven for reg on reg battles with low rake.


Whether it will be successful for what he's TRYING it to be - attractive for fun players and re-depositors and in turn profitable for regs while sustainable in the long run is yet to be revealed after the massive marketing expenditure Phil is planning to do after he irons out the software bugs.


Right now it's like rollercoaster tycoon park with only employee testers and roller coaster junkies let in. We will see once he opens the site to public with marketing expenditure aimed at recreationals if the park is build on solid fundamentals

The brilliance of STP (in theory) is that everyone should like it. Recs b/c of the big pots/excitement, and regs b/c it increases their winrate. Not sure if that theory has or will bear out but the idea itself is quite smart.

I am a “rec”. Memo hasn’t arrived: why “should” I like it?

You always get the reward. You don't need to play a certain number of hands/volume and you don't need to colect it. Some players don't collect their bonuses/points/rewards whatever rakeback scheme there is in various poker rooms.

So in this sense it is more fair. I personally don't understand why people complain about it. The software, lack of trafic and anonymous games are valid criticisms. Of course I'm saying this just as an observer as I don't have the opportunity to play on the site, maybe if I played would feel differently about splash the pot who knows.

Some ppl like it some don’t I think it’s obv why they do and don’t, and have a right to complain about it, isn’t that the point of this thread

Incase you don’t know why ppl may not like I’ll explain why, they essentially are charging high rake just so can do stp then a rec who dep few buy ins , a few hands in is a decent stp , now he’s forced to flip some random hand, the guy prob just wants to play poker, if he wants to play bingo that’s available other places

Maybe they should offer stp tables and non stp tables and actually see what players want to play, now we just have ppl saying they like it or not

And they promote stp as”rakeback” so don’t tell me they can’t offer lower rake without it
8 months after launch and not even a sniff of mtts is pretty lol

Imo the best solution for the rb would be flat % + the splashpot. Recs can still get the occasional jackpot and regs can grind the rb. With this most likely everybody is atleast mildly happy and the splash protects keeps the bots away.

This.

You are much more likely to be a winner in games with high variance.

That's a pretty general statement. There is the potential to win more in higher variance games (that comes along with the potential to lose more as well). But high variance alone does not increase your likelihood to be a winning player, generally. As I often tell people; high variance play style generally leads to larger pots and more flops seen/played, unfortunately, you still have to win the pot.

no he's not

He prefaced that he was a rec. So yes.

I said nothing about being a winning player. I'm talking about having sessions where you win big now and then.

Or Just lose faster , bc now need to punt his stack if hits a decent splash but yah if gets lucky he has a chance to win more, just like in shot machine that offers jackpot

Couldn't have responded better myself.

Exactly. Time will tell if it's sustainable and healthy for the "poker ecosystem", but this is what I always assumed they were going for.

You prob mean have a winning session?

High variance makes it more likely that a loosing player will experience upswings.

But results over long run depend on your edge no matter what kind of variance.

Everyone crying about STPs - just wait 'till you can analyse your HH's and see the actual numbers. All this hysteria will go away when stats will reveal that STPs are working pretty much as intended and everyone is getting roughly same rakeback over a long run.

(Oh wait, no it won't, because most posters spreading this hysteria are not even playing on RIO)

Hi Everyone:

Somewhat related to this topic is my "Publisher's Note" in our September issue of our Two Plus Two Online Poker Strategy Magazine.

https://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/

Also, the idea that rakeback can only come in one form is silly.

Best wishes,
Mason

Unibet go a step further and give entry to a freeroll as a form of loss-back. If you lose more than 20 euros in a week, you get an entry to a freeroll that pays out 100x 40 euros. If you lose more than 200 euros in a week, you get an entry to a freeroll that pays out 10x 400 euros.

While the idea is good, the problems with the implementation are that a tournament with prizes 1-100 the same is effectively a mega-satellite and the subset of players who are regs who ran bad that week are going to have a better chance in it as the strategy for that type of tournament is non-intuitive. The second problem IMHO, like a lot of promos on Unibet, is that it requires you to be at the computer at a particular time that suits them (in this case 7pm central european time, 6pm UK time), so it doesn't match up with how the middle-aged "wage-earning dad" profile which makes the deposits are able to use the service (often after kids are in bed).

How about we get a choice to opt in or opt out? If you opt out, you get 51% rake back added to your account traditionally and you simply can't win any stp pots, you can play them but no money gets added, the money gets splashed again until players that have opted in win the pots.

Edit: The above problems could be fixed by giving the loss-back in a different form - e.g. a ticket to an SNG to play for their money back - the basic idea is sound.

Regs are important for the site if and when they do the things the site needs them to do. Particularly keeping cards moving by playing each other shorthanded when no fish is around, open-sitting SNG stakes which have not run much over the last hour etc. For that kind of "propping" or game creation rakeback could/should easily be 100% - but not for just coming in to feed in games built around other players, when the game was prepared by other regs who were willing to create the game for that player to sit in.

How about you just accept that STP is the way they're going to do rakeback and move the **** on.

I suggested above, they should start with 20% fixed vs 51% STP.

I'm sure they'd get a lot of takers.