My contention is that live games will slowly get softer over time as the online pipeline has been shutdown. It’s sort of like a good Major League Baseball team having a terrible minor league system. It will catch up to them.

Wow, what is happening here?

I have just deleted a bunch of posts that are a derail of this thread, to put it nicely.

If anyone wants to discuss immigration and related topics, please visit the Politics Forum.

Any further posts in this thread of that nature will result in a temp-ban.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Did this thread die or move?

There will be a new eruption itt whenever PG submits another post on the topic

phil, just buy the old ftp software , rebrand it = profit

it died long ago ... maybe it's also the reason RIO poker is delayed, b/c on a weekly basis users pop up and tell us what would be a good idea. i bet phil checks this thread daily and changes his plans accordingly

perfect time for Phil to launch his site and steal a good portion of stars players.

Ah! Good to know: Phil, ditch the Poker altogether and do sports betting and casino instead => Profit!

I wonder what Phil is actually doing re: RIO poker. I personally think he's doing one of 2 things:

- he's extremely busy working on the site, so much so that it's taking up all his spare time and he has no time to update anyone on the progress

- he's completely scrapped the idea, is now enjoying his life and forgot to tell anyone


Knowing Phil, there is no middle ground here. If he does something, he does it with 100% of his energy or none at all.

At this point it's definitely better for Phil if he scraps it.

i don't know him, but i'm pretty sure, the project is still ongoing. he said at the beginning, that he basically was forced to make the announcement, and in one of the updates he wrote, that it's much more complicated, than he had imagined (not too surprising for a big software project like this).

one poster brought unibet up, they where quite fast writing a new software, but besides the (probably) better funding, they most likely had a team together. so i guess apples and oranges.

anyways .. better a proper software, than some rushed through garbage ...

What's the story behind this? http://www.runitoncepoker.com

Did they really forget to register the URL??

lol, their official site is runitonce.com. So what are you trying to tell us?
you do realize that it's not mandatory to use that name for his poker site, and even if he does, he won't have to register every domain that contains any combination of those words.

I like the sound of it. Jason Mo - Highstakes Pro.

Anyone that follows Phil on twitter will know that in the last few months they have hired a number of people for various positions, and are searching for more new employees too.

Probably 1-2 months away.

Ok, so I was right about it being complicated and these projects taking far longer than expected (I said this a few weeks ago ITT). I was also right that Phil is either doing this with all his energy or none at all (clearly it's the former). Because I am very aware of what Phil is like as a person.

What I will say is I'm right about a lot of things.

lol are you childhood buddies with him or something?

I am not too entushiastic with a poker room with a training culture ingraned as I am with other poker projects. However I will share my thoughts on how to make it worthwhile for an income opportunity.

The underlying premise is however, that a poker pro either has to choose for the chance of bigger income or a lesser but more stable income. In my opinion, this concepts are mostly incompatible in the best form of sustainable poker.

Therefore the conclusion of my following writtings is that attempting to play poker as anything over a suplementary income stream would not be suggestable gamble by nature.

1. The rakeback scheme: Obviously we all know a good rakeback/low rake system is paramount for having beatable games, ceteris paribus. I would say though that even the most generous rakeback schemes in the industry have mostly been disruptive, and a much better one for the poker ecology could be introduced.

Rake as a form of tax, and the types of tax:

Regressive tax/rake: More percentage of rake is taken from the higher volume players. I.e: What Stars does with their high stakes cash games. This is a scheme counterproductive to the poker dream, seeing as it discoutages people to aim for bigger wealth, just as regressive taxes. It ultimately leads to a communist state where noone has too much dispite their merit.

Flat tax/rake: Same percentage of rake is taken from all players in relation to the skill level of field. This is the best way too go imo. Offering the same rakeback percentage(however it has to be a great one with veeery little volume requirements for the first sum) is considerate with the recreational player, and if we want a sustainable poker economy we dont the rec going broke so fast.

Progrressive tax/rake: More rake is taken from the lower volume players and less from the higher. This is the one stars used to have with supernova program, and it didnt last long plus it made the games super reg infested. This form of tax is a shortcut, and shortcuts tend to backfire in any economy. One could argue that this is similar to a "flat rake relative to the skill level of the field" and to a degree, its correct, the key lays in the amount. It is necesary to charge higher games lower to keep them beatable as skill level goes up, but doing it with a high volume requirement and a program that takes more from the recs than the pros is what crosses the line. //

Ideally a great poker site would focus on charging lower rake than on offering higher rakeback. However I still believe some, however flat rakeback is needed as it motivates players to put it in that extra end of the week/month hours that they otherwise wouldnt have. Again, the key is in the amount. A considerate amount.


2. Limiting multitabling: Typically the games on which
can be put a lot of volume are the toughest, and the ones with lower or highest amount of variance are the softest. See, cash games, fastforward, mtts, sping and gos, casual cash games in party poker, live poker...se how above logic apply to all of those. Sites that put a table limit or that are hard to multitable as much are less reg heavy(ceteris paribus) than the ones were multitabling is easy(Stars).

On a new site(low liquidity) it seems necessary to apply this ideas to have any decent money games running at all. The lower rake makes player loyal, the limited multitabling pushes them higher stakes amd keeps games beatable, plus the more considerate rakeback scheme allows them to pick a few more juicy games on other sites without worrying about making it to the top of the loyalty scheme.

3. Add game types for all sorts of players, but dont add ones that are in direct conflict with other similar games liquidity. I.e Have cash, mtts, spins and sngs, but dont have multiple types and speed of sngs.


Edit: sorry for the format and any mistake, im on mobile

Q1 of 2017 ������

It's common practice to register multiple similar domains for your business and have them all direct to your regular one. He's calling his site Run It Once Poker but didn't register runitoncepoker.com?? This is a ridiculous oversight.

Lol. It’s very obvious that this was a) an oversight by whoever was responsible for registering domains and b) you have no idea about the space.

And yes, I am bitter because a company I co-own missed out on multiple relevant domains and had to pay serious $ to get them later.
Lots of people said that 1.5 years ago right in this thread and almost everyone else with half a brain thought it.

Funny thing is, even with a great site it's likely to get crushed by stars. Rec's will do what people do with anything. They go where the most people go. Stars being #1 in traffic is huge for them. Unless a rec knows a reg that will tell them otherwise Stars could triple their rake and still draw huge numbers. If they were to lose that status though things change immediately.

There was a study I read to make my point.

They had batteries on sale in a store. No name brand was $1 for 4 AA batteries. Name brand was $3. (I forget the exact amounts but name brand was 3X price i'm pretty sure). They filmed people coming in and of those who bought batteries 90% bought the cheep ones (I think around 50 people total).

Then they had a person just stand near the display. almost 100% of people bought the name brand for 3X the price.

I doubt that Galfond foresaw Party, 888 and also the Asian sites coming out of nowhere

Party tournies have lately been beating their equivalent Stars counterparts in the 22-55 range too.

SageSmokedTruthy