The way how the VIP points will be allocated won't change, but it doesn't mean that their amount per € of rake won't change. As skins will be awarded less rake by the network (twice less for winners' play), they'll have to reduce the value of VIP programs accordingly so that no player is -EV to them. Instead, I think they'll be more focused on personalised promotions, like custom reload bonuses, targeted at players perceived as longterm net depositors.

PokerVIP said that 50% of rake on each pot is going to be awarded to skins proportionally to their players' contribution to the pot as before, and 50% - to the skins whose players originally deposited the money being wagered in the pot. I.e. 50% of rake will be weighted contributed and 50% source-based. That's what Pokerstrategy staff said too, though they didn't state directly (tbh, I didn't ask them then) that the proportion is 50/50.

let's say a skin X has a large number of net depositing players in proportion to the small handful of winners, they can still offer the same VIP returns as before if they wish, correct? or am i missing something?

They can, but should they? Is there any sense* in offering a deal to any player that is unprofitable for the skin? There will be as little sense in offering longterm 60% return on rake to a winning reg as it is now in offering him consistent 110% return.

* apart from skin's regs converting deposits of the same skin's recs, which will be a minor factor, as said above, because the network has so many skins that most of converted deposits will be those of other skins' recs.

yeah they shouldn't if they are smart, but just wanted to understand it theoretically.

very interesting to see what happens, the change creates a new kind of competitive situation and you still need the high volume grinders too, otherwise the deposits dont turn into rake if there are not enough games running.

The 110% is awarded to 2-3 players tops am I right? I am assuming you are referring to some Betfair promo combo.

The sense in that is to generate action amongst players that generate a lot of rake and therefore turn a net profit.

I think the problem with thinking of the 60% as 110% is that you are assuming that every other skin consists of 100% losing players. Take an extreme example where every skin consists of winning players (which isn't possible because of the zero sum, but I hope will help illustrate what I am trying to say). In this scenario the sites would generate 100% rake but only receive 50%. What happens to the other 50%? It is not given to charity, so it is then redistributed back to the skins at what ratio? 1:1. So every skin just keeps 100% of their action. So basically what I am saying is that there will be some sort of equilibrium between winning and losing players and the goal is to have a better equilibrium than your competitor so that you receive the maximum amount of sourced rake.

I wasn't saying that 110% longterm is realistic (it isn't), but yes, the idea is to entice people to rake more in an attempt to win a rake race that has a bit of variance (big payjumps, a lot less than the variance of poker itself, though). So if you want to assess the average return of a race at its top, you sometimes have to add up the top four prizes and divide this sum by the sum of the top 4 players' rake figures as they're very close

That the sum is actually not zero, but equal to minus rake, is quite important, moreover, there are always losers because rake is positive. But fwiw, if we assume that all the players are of equal skill and hence each player loses exactly his rake in the long run, each players' rake under the new system is the same as the old one (each player's source-based rake is half his net loss, so, in this case, equals to the other half of his rake). Of course, players' skills are very different, and the new system gives less to winners and more to losers, but the sum is exactly the same.

As Korn put it:

(1) total rake = sum of all players' w.c. rakes
(2) total rake = sum of all players' net losses
(3) total rake = sum of all players' converted net losses*
(4) total rake = sum of combinations [c*<w.c. rake>+(1-c)*<conv. net loss>] for all players
(for every c; iPoker is to put c=1/2).

Equation (4) is obtained by multiplying (1) by c and (3) by (1-c) and adding them up.

* SBR is not exactly (2) because some part of deposits is withdrawn by winning players and never converted to rake; instead of a losing player's net loss, his 'converted net loss' (the part of his net loss that wasn't withdrawn by another player) is used. A 'converted net loss' of a winning player is 0, whereas his real net loss is a negative number, but real net losses can't be used, as it would punish a winner even more (give him less than 50% of the w.c. rake).

The question is not how much money the skin will be getting overall (if it has a proper army of recs, it won't be hit by the new system), but what the skin should do to earn additional money with the least effort.

What you've described is the current system (soon to be taken down) where skins are fined for having too many winning players overall, but their revenue is still calculated basing on old-style rake, and under the current system, if a winning reg rakes €5K more, the skin will earn €1K (net) more (as soon as the player pool balance requirement is met) - the gross rake paid to it will be €5K, but €4K of them will be given to the reg as rewards. The skin won't earn that much for bringing in a group of recs who deposit €2K in total - they won't rake that much.

Under the new system, to earn additional €1K net, the skin can either persuade a winning reg to rake €10K more (because the reg will request €4K in rewards for that, €10K/2 - €4K = €1K) or entice a bunch of recs to deposit and lose €2K more. The latter option is much easier, isn't it?

Or, if we think in terms of gross revenue, to get additional €1K of it, the skin can either have a reg rake €2K or a few recs lose €2K total, but in the former case, the reg will request cashback, so the former option is more expensive.

I mean, under the current system, the skin still gets more revenue from an individual reg than from recs because regs are hard-working, while recs aren't ready to rake that much. But they can eventually lose more with ease.

Let me reformulate it as yet another (exaggerated) example.

Assume that a skin has 200 regs who rake €50K a month in total and demand €35K in rewards for that and 2000 recs who rake €10K a month and lose €40K a month in total.

As of now, the revenue of the skin is (€50K - €35K) + €10K = €25K, and the regs bring in most of it (€50K - €35K = €15K). The skin is interested in keeping recs mainly for the purpose of not being fined or expelled from the network, though there are indirect reasons like the fact that a rec can eventually go pro and that regs need recs in the pool (from other skins too, of course) to play.

Under the SBR system, the skin will start getting more revenue - it will become €10K/2 + €40K/2 = €25K, from the recs alone. Winning regs will still be welcome, but only if they rake more than twice what they want to get in cashback. If they demand more than half their rake, there will be no monetary incentive to keep them, as there will be no reverse requirement of keeping the reg-infestation ratio big enough (lol). So the regs will either agree to get <50% deals or be set free.

ladbrokes down for anyone else? I can't log in but support tells me everything's fine obv. yesterday my tourny lobbies didn't update at all and it kept logging my out from the server due to inactivity ( i was playing at that time)

I just cashed out my roll from ladbrokes, can't take this bs anymore, it costs me time and I'm not gonna rake thousands of dollars each month there anymore suggestions for a new room? pff online poker

this **** down again?

just wanted to ask the same - so, yes..

don't forget guys, from January we will be lucky enough to have lower rakeback on top of disconnections!

good times

Wow today sucked... The makeing millions and cant create/buy a solid software?

betfair down?

Lost about 100€ due to server crash and they offered me 10€ tourney ticket. Does other skins refound money for server crashes?

The answer is they probably dont, and even if they did youd have to jump through so many hoops you might as well recoup the money playing.

You probably won't see a dime, just went through it. I was told that the client installed on your system apparently runs through your browser and they are mostly optimized for Firefox. So the support guy tried to convince me that the disconnection problems are caused by the browser I use Chrome. Not sure how much of this is true or just the next ridiculous excuse they are using to not reimburse the players when disconnections happen.

do a traceroute and prove them wrong. After that you can be happy that you're right while you don't get paid

Hi, been travelling a bunch so haven't got round to changing. Anyone know what skin are available for UK players now that 24hr isnt. thanks!

Is ipoker only lagging for me?
I am scared to play big pots...

I guess it depends on the skin; I didn't notice a lag an hour ago at Titan (1-tabling the regional freeroll ); that half the table was sitting out was most likely because they didn't unregister after being enrolled (invited) by the staff.

Edit: I'll try to load a bit more tables (up to 9) at Laddies in half an hour and see how it goes

Swap request:

Hey guys, I have about 1700$ on Netbet (Ipoker) that I want to get rid of. I need stars and I'm willing to sell at a markdown. The thing is, my account is USD and I can only transfer to other people with USD accounts. They won't let me switch to Euro (which is more popular from what I've seen). Anyone else has that problem?

Anyways, if you want to help me and make some cash while doing it, please PM me. Thanks

Ph33roX: Would help if I had USD account. Let me know if you can change.

On another note, anyone else experiencing that you cant log in today? 4 December.

Login problems can be caused by skin, not entire network. On betfair everthing works fine.

Let me have a guess... ladbrokes?