Maybe not right now, but that could change at any time. Every site has gone thru processing issues at one time or another- STARS/FTP/Bovada etc....

Not anymore as of June 1st as Carbon Poker has closed their affiliate program with regards to new sign ups.

[ ] crash
[x] 15 car pileup

[ ] crash
[ ] 15 car pileup
[x] disgruntled government employee on a median mower driving down the middle of the highway at 1 mph covering both lanes with one finger firmly up his nose and the other flicking everyone off

I've been playing on Carbon for a few years now but would like a new screen name. I recently emailed support and had my request rejected. The only other option I could think that is available to me would be to make a new account on a different skin. From a quick google search it seems the only active skins are YouWin, PlayersOnly, and Sportsbook. YouWin doesn't accept US players if my information is correct so that really only leaves PlayersOnly and Sportsbook.

With that being said just have a few questions:

Does Merge allow a player to open an account on a different skin if already registered with another one?
Which skin would be best out of PlayersOnly and Sportsbook?
Should I use the same email to register?

I have more than a few questions of my own for you. The biggest one is why would you ever want to play on Merge at this moment?

lol just looking to increase my volume. Starting to get back into grinding sngs and have been doing well on bovada. Can only do up to four table there however. I've downloaded Black Chip Poker and have been lurking the lobbies before making a decision on registering an account but it doesn't seem their sng traffic is very good.

I'm aware merge payouts are ridiculously slow right now (my last withdraw was requested in Feb received in May). But at the end of the day I'm not quite on the Merge is Lock Poker bandwagon yet.

Even if khan does sound shilly, you guys have to understand that even if merge is having issues(which we don't know) with funds then the step they are going through are the best ones to get back to a solvent stage.

Lowering scummy regs to 1 or 4 table
delaying withdrawals on the most expensive clients(americans)
removing affiliate cuts
and a few more that are helping them earn more.

My guess with how good their ties are to a few good sportbooks, just that will let them get back to where they were if this is indeed a cashflow problem. They have too many sportsbetters playing poker to ever die unlike UB that had cheaters and little sportsbetters.

Please explain how limiting the people who rake the most $ for the site benefits them.. Also what does this have to do with khan saying withdrawals had improved 2 months ago?

The regs being limited to 1-4 tables are not the biggest raker, they are the scummy bumhunters. I see a lot of mass tablers and they are not winning a lot. The less scummy bumhunters win, the longer the fish play and the more they keep depositing because they arent being hunted.

The games are actually fun on merge for the fish. Most days half the tables have 3-4 fish/semi fish/whales and lots of bad regs. That's a good eco-system.

Seems counterintuitive, but I think the logic is that bad players will deposit more in the long run if the games are more fun and they don't lose as fast. The regs are generating rake but not depositing, and ultimately for them to make money they need deposits.

Sorry you're incorrect.. The site in no way targeted "bumhunters". The eco-system you propose is inferior which is why the biggest sites don't do it

The guy above you just explained it. If you think the limiting of tables is not aimed at bumhunters, table campers etc etc then you are just here to troll or play micro limits and know nothing about the network.

Right now if you look at the games at 100-200, it's mostly 4-5 rec per table. The recs are having a LOAD of fun thus re-depositing a lot and playing longer. No other site do you have recs playin 2-3-4 tables everyday for hours like on merge. These guys never withdraw, just deposit and as long as most bumhunters are gone, all that money is going to bad regs that play any table and they are losing it back mostly to the rake

explain why tourney players were limited and then explain how it's possible to bumhunt in tourneys then

meh. I was a "scummy bumhunter" (never table camped though...who got time for that ****?). I only played fishy tables and was never restricted for anything. Played 25 and 50nl 6m and fr.

I doubt a few 25 and 50nl bumhunters can hurt the network's economy. A decent bumhunter at 400-600-1k can easily take out 10k-20k-30k out of the economy every month while raking less than 2k.

The big problem with this thread is micro players making it all about themselves. Learn to look at a situation objectively. As a micro staker your actions do not have any impact on the site and you should know that.

Winning tourney players take out a lot of the economy and rake barely anything. Lowering their table count, when the guarantees dont hit, is a good idea.

They didn't just limit "scummy regs" and bumhunters. They also targeted MTT players and you can't really bumhunt in tournaments. Several casual/rec players have also posted here after they were restricted because of a couple weeks of profitable micro cash play or a tournament score.

The truth is they are limiting/banning anyone who they notice is winning and making withdrawals. You are only seeing recs play on the tables right now because many US pros have stopped playing on Carbon due to the excessive delays on withdrawals and the increasing questions about the solvency of the Merge network.

The timeline of these events on Merge is starting to look disturbingly similar to Lock Poker in 2013. From the Lock thread:

For those of you who weren't around or weren't following the Lock disaster, Lock stopped paying any withdrawals in 2013. For the last two years, they continued to operate and used the remaining player funds to throw themselves parties and continue advertising in the hopes of scamming new people into depositing. They finally shut down a couple months ago when the money ran out.

Merge has already restricted winning players. Withdrawals are grinding to a halt. Player funds do not appear to be segregated. How do we know this? Because they took away Skrill as a withdrawal option for many people, and because they can't pay out existing ROW Skrill withdrawals. Skrill transactions take place immediately; it is not a payment processor that has "processor issues." Yet Carbon still continues to market and try to attract new depositors with their latest pathetic "social media" gimmick.

I know people have a vested interest in remaining positive about Merge, but it's starting to look like these are some desperate, last-ditch attempts to avoid going under.

Im all in favor of merge banning guy's like twinsrnuts, sampei,mergersgonnamerge, and a few other seat hopping, table camping, scummy regs.They contribute nothing, they never ever start tables(vs anyone competent) they are gone as soon as a rec is busted, they sit out when the rec takes a pee, they move seats to gain positional adv on the rec whenever they can, it's disgusting.
TBH it would be amazing if merge and all networks would ban these type of players.I have reported a few of these guy's recently and encourage others to do the same.

Not disagreeing just simply pointing out that this isn't what Merge did... they targeted tourney players as well and seemingly had no rhyme or reason. Even if in theory they only went after the winning players who is going to be left to play the highest stakes/ generating more rake for the site? If you leave winners alone they play higher leaving the fish to duke it out at the lower stakes. In the end everybody wins and you end up with a site like Pokerstars.. Adding Zoom or Zone is another obvious way to help alleviate the problem

I rarely play mtt's, or sit n go, so I honestly have no idea what's going on with regards to winners getting banned or restricted .I can only comment on cash games. But of course I disagree with winners who actually contribute to the site being table restricted, banned,just because they are good/winning players.

Did lock have a huge sportsbook? Did lock have a casino? Did lock have a racebook? Does merge give 50%+ rakeback to it's players? Was lock in biz for 10+ years?Merge does use 3rd party to process skrill btw

This stuff must be good for poker in the long term lol

Well as long as you fish are having fun thats all that matters, who needs to be paid??

Sounds like all the pro's who generate tons of rake and make the site run should leave and let the micro payers who sparingly play take over. Im sure the micro deposits and very little rake paid should bring the site back to the top immediately..

You clearly have no clue what you are talking about and should stop posting right away, you are only embarrassing yourself

report mrpinkypink

I sent them a screenshot of him sitting out as soon as the fish busted and playing on an other 500nl table

When was the last time a player was confirmed to be limited to tables? It seems like that was a phase they went through a while for select players based on who knows what criteria? I completely disagree with the decision and I had hoped their recent problems with payouts would put an end to that practice. But, I don't really know one way or the other except that I haven't read about players lately being limited.

I have one of my buddies limited to 4 tables.. sometimes he can open a 5th but most of the time 4.. that's pretty much it. Maybe there needs to be complaints against you to get limited? A lot of rec complain to support about annoying regs from what i hear.

Mrpinkypink is scum and he 10+ tables so i suggest everyone reports him and we'll see what happens