There's no shot Bodog can get the money back,but he's a pos if he doesn't pay them back.

I didn't say poker wasn't about money.

I said my complaints over anonymous tables had nothing to do with money. I hope your poker reading skills are better than your reading comprehension skills.

Bold mine. So, in the first quote, the "it" must refer to something, which presumably refers to the general subject of the former sentence, being "the game", which, I presume, means poker. The "Not money" part, although being an incomplete sentence, also presumably refers to the same "it" referred to in the previous sentence. Therefore, you did say that, unless, the "it" is referring to some nebulous concept that is not clear. So, perhaps it's your writing skills you should be questioning, not reading comprehension. Anyone with a 6th grade reading comprehension level would infer your post to mean what I interpreted.

Yea. "It" refers to my entire complaint about anonymous tables. Not poker.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Just give them a call. They will sort it out. I received a similar email recently because I use VPN sometimes. The issue was strengthed out in a couple minutes.

Sent from my A0001 using 2+2 Forums

See my reply above.

Sent from my A0001 using 2+2 Forums

Finally Dsl25 says something proven to be true.

haha

Force fed humble pie

I guarantee you the person I responded to knew what "it" referred to. He suggested the reason for me not liking the site was "money" and that's what I was referring to when I said "it."

Waffe jumped into a conversion without seeing the other end and misunderstood what I was saying. It happens on forums. His long paragraph was funny. I stopped reading after the first sentence the first time around. I didn't want to waste time reading it, but now I'm glad I went back and did. It was funny.

Typically, most players' observations about the site are based on the specific games they play and the $$ level they play those games at.

I play primarily single table SNGs at the $10 to $25 level, LHE $1-$2 and $2-$4, and
PLO8B .25-.50 to .50-$1.00. I play them profitably. My observations which follow are based on these games and levels.

Once you adjust your thinking and playing to the anonymous player scheme.... and to the primarily recreational player style of play.... this site is VERY profitable with relatively low variance.

My experience is that Fridays tend to be much higher variance, but overall more profitable, with much higher average bets especially on drawing hands, and much higher frequency of shoves with bluffs. Saturdays and Sundays tend to be no-foldem games in general and when I adapt to that they are consistently profitable and have considerably lower than Monday to Thursday variance.

I think it's fool's thinking to consider these games to be not "real poker". If you can't adapt to the games and predominant styles being played because you are fixated on a rigid style, then that's your mental scatoma to contend with - adapt or die. If these games don't suit your abilities then either learn or leave - pretty simple stuff, but a few sadly seem to prefer to bitch & moan about the site instead .... I DO like to see them at my tables however

I have no problem winning money with anonymous player pools. I just have a better time and get more recreational enjoyment playing poker when I can see my opponent. I just think it's a more realistic version of poker when you can see your opponent's identity as you can in real life.

And, I think it has absolutely no effect on fish losing their money as it's intended. It's a futile attempt at effecting the "poker eco-system" that has done nothing and removed one of the best aspects of the game in the process.

I wouldn't complain if there were 20 different websites, but do you really need to experiment with this when there are only 3 networks for Americans to choose from? Really? I just wish they would've thought of this pre-Black Friday and seen what a monumental failure it was when players chose to go to one of 20 different sites that show player's names instead. They have fast cashouts and that's the only thing giving them an edge in the current poker market. The perceived "success" of the anonymous player pool system and the perceived "acceptance" of it by poker players are actually nothing more than poker players choosing the fastest cash out option.

If they tried this 6 years ago the site would go busto.

bovada tiling for the MAC client is still so garbage. How hard could it be to fix?

Anonymous is great. If you don't understand why or it's simply not your cup if tea, that's fine. There's no point continually whining about it though.


Unless your point is to annoy the piss out of people who do enjoy the format, you're not doing anything productive. No Bovada/Bodog staff members are here to witness your moaning.

Um. I was having a discussion with the other guy. So...mind your own business.

I don't know when they specifically planned to go anonymous, but I'd be shocked if this wasn't at least 6 months in the works by the time Black Friday hit.

If Bovada's competitors were currently processing cash outs as quickly as they are we would have a better way to gauge it, but most players are going to choose the option that gets them paid the quickest.

dsl - I think you have an entirely false impression of the typical recreational player. You know, the "weak" players who just want to play for fun, within their means, and have a fair shot at winning along the way. You won't find almost any of them playing even the lowest games like $1-$2 NLHE or $4-$8 LHE at a casino - "real poker" as you put it.

Do you really think that those players would prefer to play at a site where their ID subjects them to ridicule from folks like you who maintain notes on them from past games? No... they like their anonymity and they probably learn faster in an anonymous environment. I'll also wager that your thought that they only came here for the fast payouts is complete balderdash and that most of them probably aren't even aware of that fact.

Why are you here weakly trying to defend an undefendable premise and conclusion? You seem to be preaching that YOUR concept of what poker should be is the only reasonable position. Have you considered for even a second that nobody has weighed in defending your position.... but so many have spoken out about how rigid and wrong you are? If it's your position that you're right and the rest of the world is wrong then hold on to that by all means. It's irrational, but it's your right to hold those truths of yours closely to your heart as you wander off to play at a non-anonymous site and leave us here to wallow in our collective mutual ignorance.

I'd be happy to do so. Feel free to continue your discussion via PM.

What? $1-2 NL tables are full of fishes at Casinos.

Yes, I do.

They would prefer to see who they're playing against just like their home games. Notes and data mining are of no concern to fishes. That's only a concern to CEO's who want to rake as much money as possible and have invented this myth of the benefits that anonymous player pools have on the poker "ecosystem."

There is no data to back any of this up. No data to back up that fishes are concerned about sharks and stay away from sites because of it. We have 2 decades of data that suggest otherwise. As fish have been playing at sites where their identity was shown for years.

Pokerstars wouldn't have been a multi-billion dollar poker site if fish were concerned about sharks data mining and taking notes. This is the fundamental flaw with your argument and Bovada CEO's argument. There are far bigger sites with far more fish and they show player's names.


Wrong. Every single person on Bovada knows about the speed of the cash outs. That's why they're stomaching and putting up with anonymous player pools to play there.

Wrong again. One poster stated that he was annoyed with me, but fully agreed with me on the anonymous player pools. That's how strong my position is...a person can be annoyed with me, yet still agree with my position.




It's not even "my position." It's documented fact that fish are more than willing to play on open player pools that show their ID...they never would've logged on to Pokerstars and made it a $10 billion site if what Bovada's CEOs claim were even remotely true.

We have my position, which is documented historical fact, versus your position; which is nothing more than theoretical jargon.


No thanks. I'll do it right here. Maybe, you should go somewhere else if you have a problem with it.

I don't understand.. you are taking whatever time out of your day to bitch about a site that you have no interest in playing on? There is 0 chance the site is going to go away from anonymous poker as it is their belief that it is the best decision for their company. If you don't like it, there are other options for you to go complain about. Perhaps you can try BetOnline or Full Flush next and complain there as well.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go tell ipoker and 888 Poker how I hate their software and constant disconnects.

I wouldn't say," I have no interest."

It's a good site and I would love to play there. Best MTT selection, much better software than WPN, and the traffic is good. It's just too bad they made such a horrible decision on the anonymous player pools. They screwed themselves out of a lot of money on that one.

I don't get this current generation of Pokernetworks and their management. As if it's hard to copy successful business models that are proven to work. Trying to reinvent the game in a market that is desperate for a poker site that's like their old one. Makes no sense. All they had to do was copy the successful aspects of their predecessors and give players a platform that reflected them, but no. They just ignored it, went and did their own thing. Amazing.


Crazy to think how much bigger these sites would be if they had management with even half a brain, or at least a moderate amount of experience playing Internet poker. That's all it would take.

P.S. Why don't you go take a look at WPN's tournament schedule? You'll notice that WPN now has 10 minute blind tournament offerings. So, don't be so sure that there is "0 chance" of anyone at Bovada listening. You guys said that exact same thing to me a month ago on the WPN thread and now there are 10 minute structures on nightly WPN tourneys. So...

Dsl, enough of the derail, please. We all get that you don't like the anonymous tables; time to move on.

BTW, telling someone to mind their own business when they reply to one of your posts, and then refusing to take it to PM is pretty silly. Either you're having a private conversation, which is what private messages for, or you're having a conversation in a public forum, where you'll get replies from others.

Because you're a recreational shark?

Bobo restoring sanity itt ^^^