This is important, and it's why, all else being equal, rakeback or "promo money" if people want a more general term is better if given over the table in some sense - either as a free buy-in for something, or added to people's stacks, or as juicing the pot, or in the form of lower rake, than as some separate payment made later.

Only you peronally might not get back 51%, how is this so hard to understand.

Lets see, when you get 10% for 4 months straight and see if you still agree!

Exactly this, but I think becoming a boss has gone to his head, and he might actually think he is a dictator now, albeit a benevolent one, which is not all bad for us, as the site shouldn't get too rigged but of course a dictator will never listen either way!

This is completely fabricated! Only Stars gives nothing, all other sites offer 20-100%! And most offer 40-50%!

99% of sites offer 30-50% with a little play!

Retested the soft with the resizable tables, it slowly get better imo, still not really love the soft but its definetly playable. Seems to have gain a few players recently.

Hope to see an ambitious MTT offer in the near future.

What about an option to activate a more simpler table skin with sober design ?

gl @ the team

I don't know exactly what YOU mean by "average longtime grinder", but for ME, an average grinder is a smart one, one who knows what online poker landscape has to offer and will choose wisely where to play according to what maximize his own profit the most.
Therefore, that average grinder is well aware of RIO existence and probably informed himself on the loyalty program offered.

You just seem to live in a parallel universe where "longtime grinders" are uneducated donkeys who will jump on any site that promotes the higher % without questioning anything.
Please, don't project yourself on others, your life experience is yours and is unique and, accept it or not, you're not in the "average".

Its like if he did a social media poll and sees a bunch of people liking other forms of rakeback, he will still ignore it. He'd argue to himself that his customers know nothing and the only thing that makes them play is gambling addiction and subconscious programming via splash the pot... which could not be further from truth as setting up time to play, transferring money, logging in and seating are all crucial AND conscious processes adopted to play the game.

Try listening to your customers!

Ummm... because every other site which has claimed "rakeback" from the early 2000s to the present has done it in roughly the same fashion, and now this is completely different?

Not a single site or live cardroom prior to RIO has claimed a jackpot-type promotion is "rakeback". Not one.

Every single other program dubbed "rakeback" has been some form of players directly getting a percentage of rake paid while they were at the game, with some minor variations between sites and calculation methods.

I don't see why it's so hard to understand that people would continue to assume it was the same way, after nearly two decades of the word rakeback meaning one specific thing.

People don't have to "assume" what it means when RIO's website states what they mean by rakeback. Your argument boils down to "I assume people simply assume as opposed to looking into it."

I think it’s pretty clear that STP exists for a variety of reasons, but the one that’s seemingly pretty important to Phil and RIO is that it helps prevents bots from invading the site because it makes it a less attractive place since the bots can’t adjust.

It's usually best not to call people out for fabricating posts, when your evidence for said fabrication is very incorrect.

No, no, maybe, and no.

I won't get into a long back-and-forth as this isn't the thread for it, but the one example you gave (Stars) already invalidates your "99% of sites" statement, unless you're using some silly criteria like counting a network with 50 small skins as 50 sites. Off the top of my head, Ignition comes to my mind as a site that doesn't offer rakeback, and I don't believe Chico does either (which already invalidates "all other sites offer 20-100%"). WPN offers 27%. So there's 2 sites in the top 10 that don't offer rakeback, and another that offers below what you say most offer.

My point is this - I think he exaggerated a fair bit with "where 5% seems generous and most winning players on most sites get 0-2%", but he's right about the trend, and you're almost as guilty with exaggeration on the other extreme. It's ridiculous to say his facts were "completely fabricated", given what you posted.

Yes they do have to assume.

Go to runitonce.eu

Wait about 15-20 seconds.

Look at the 51% rakeback advertisement.

Not one mention of Splash the Pot there. In, it inaccuately states, "51% rakeback for all players", which isn't even true, given the immense variance of STP.

not only does the front page advertisement explain stp, but there's even an example splash pot animation that demonstrates what a splash pot looks like. keep grasping

btw, I would upgrade your computer and internet. the rio website loads in under a second

And yet you were able to figure out that rakeback was done via STP. If you were able to figure it out; what makes you believe others cannot?

Truly baffling how this conversation is still going.

Yes, let's agree that the "concern" about the "rakeback" marketing has been fully aired and that it is time to move on.

I will respect whosnext's decision to cease discussion of the topic, so this will be my last message on the subject.

In short, Mr. Giggity, you have no idea what you're talking about.

The front page advertisement about 51% rakeback is intentionally delayed for about 15 seconds as they first show something else -- kind of the same way a 30-second commercial appears on TV. It's not a matter of my computer and internet being slow. I'm sorry that this concept seems a bit too complicated for you to grasp.

Furthermore, once you do wait that 15 seconds, there is a VERY prominent advertisement claiming "51% rakeback for all" with not a single mention of STP. Also there is nothing on the front page which relates STP to rakeback in any way.

If you are going to claim otherwise, I'd love to see proof of it.

Amen.

only because you asked (I even circled the relevant information in red to make it easier for you):



it's the first thing that shows up when the page loads btw

Providing a screenshot that proves the other person right and then going Gotcha is an interesting strategy

This thread is mindblowing. I can't even imagine giving a **** about whether RIO calls splash the pot rakeback. Some of you guys need to start pumping iron and hitting the sauna hard.

Hi Kilowatt,

First of all, I want to thank you for all the great work you've been doing looking out for ordinary grinders like me.

I too know what its like to deal with these duplicitous sites with their opaque reward systems - just the other day I was playing on PartyPoker, whose reward system offered what they fraudulently described as "40% cashback".

But at the end of the week when I tried to claim my money, they told me they don't store any paper currency whatsoever and that my "Cash"Back was really just numbers on a screen!

I don't want to distract you because I can see that you're on the verge of cracking this RunItOnce case wide open, but I was hoping that once Galfond is finally behind bars you could bring your forensic linguistic skills over to the Party thread, it would be great to have someone with your eye for detail and tireless dedication to the fight for justice helping out.

Keep fighting the good fight brother!

Hi Sirin,

Thanks for your post!

I think I'm starting to see the problem, and it's more extensive than just Party and RIO. I recently discovered that another poker site's "fish buffet" reward system doesn't provide me with a buffet full of fish! Not even 1 fish, just numbers on a screen for me too! It was quite inconvenient because I planned on eating fish for dinner that night and subsequently went hungry due to deceitful marketing

Hi tgiggity,

Its good to hear from you, and I have to say I'm very sorry to hear about your awful experience. I know how tough it is being cheated out of your dinner by the mendacity of the Galfonds of this world.

I really hope you got something to eat the other night, but if not I'm happy to let you know that I've got some great news for you.

Kilowatt may seem like just another humble TwoPlusTwo poster with a passion for linguistic exactitude, but in fact he is an accomplished trial lawyer with a long history of bringing the perpetrators of marine and gastronomic based fraud to justice.

If you take a look at this video of a recent trial of his I think you can see that us regular grinders finally have the champion we deserve.




Vive la resistance!

I guess some people just love the market leaders "reward chests" rakeback.......

I have been playing vs. short stacks at PLO (IDN, GG) and it has its own strategy. I didn't find the GGnetwork STP at NLH interesting.

The reason why the STP is a bad idea is that it isn't a constant factor like it is when playing vs. short stacks at IDN all the time. The game is bigger and shorter only a part of the time when using the STP.

The STP not counting towards the pot as so is a better idea but makes the pot odds bigger. Where one has such games, does it really make the best sense? Small to large antes as small STPs look better to me and one finds those games elsewhere and in tourneys.

At GG, there are too short stacks mixed in and should not be allowed, IMO. I might consider a variety of dynamic short stackings in the future and it is fine one can sit up and sit right back in with a 20 bb stack like at IDN (the ratholer's paradise). The best size for the table situation based on action and location.

The attitudes towards ratholing are partly wrong. One should be allowed to buy in 50 bb also but as a minimum and ratholing not allowed below 200 bb. 200 bb is important and if you don't like it, you can leave.

PLO STP is fine and there is more strategy than in NLH where it feels dumb to me. But it needs to be a constant factor; all players more or less short stacking. The other option is that the STP is only a small to large ante; not more.

Update on Phil’s blog:

https://www.runitonce.eu/news/talkin...16_20-20-20-16