Party Poker puts the screws to players!

[Penguinfan]

I can give you a pretty good example Scott. I am somewhat the kind of player BDB describes, though I don't consider myself a "winning" player so much. I do not sunscribe to the theory that the sites are fixed, I do believe I am one of the unluckiest players to manage to stay in the game.

Yea, yea, yea, you have heard it before, but I believe I hold a record for consecutive bust outs while holding the best hand when the chips went in, 23, yes 23 straight times when the cards were turned over I had the best hand and was drawn out on.

I make the correct decision concerning my outs, pot odds, the range of hands my opponent may have, etc and just can't seem to not get unlucky. Still I manage to break even or lose just a little bit. Last month I came out on the short end of things by $87 and played pretty much every day. My rakeback payments were a total of $376.

All in all I made $289 last month playing cards. I was, in that sense a profitable player, I was good for the sites I play at as I generate a decent amount of rake, I probably lost a bit to the better players and fed the fish who sucked out on me. EVERYONE is happier to have me at the table, the site, the other players, my affiliate and myself.

If play dries up at Empire and I stop playing there because of it then everyone involved loses out. Of course it will hardly be missed in the grand scheme of things, but still less money floating around the site is a bad thing.

Will I move over to Party and play without rakeback, no chance.

 

[marine]

So out of curiousity, to all the rakeback players I would pose a question.

Do you refuse to play in a brick & mortar pokerroom because you can not get a rakeback deal?

If you dont live near one, pretend that you did. Or, if you went to vegas for a week, would you NOT play poker there?
Would you still pass on playing there because you dont get a rakeback?

 

[Penguinfan]

I see where you are going with that question Marine, but your point is not valid here. Of course I don't refuse to play in a casino when I am in Atlantic City which is 3-4 times a year, however, I have the option of rakeback at other on-line sites that I don't at Party. So in response to your question I'll ask two of my own:

1. Would you play at site A for free when you can get rakeback at site B?

2. If two B&M casinos were right next to each other would you play at one where you got rakeback or one you didn't?

 

[BleedDodgerBlue]

So out of curiousity, to all the rakeback players I would pose a question.

Do you refuse to play in a brick & mortar pokerroom because you can not get a rakeback deal?

If you dont live near one, pretend that you did. Or, if you went to vegas for a week, would you NOT play poker there?
Would you still pass on playing there because you dont get a rakeback?

the maximum amount of hands you will see in a 10 hour session at a live game is between 400 and 500 depending on the dealer averaging between 40 and 50 hands an hour or 20-30 a down (per 1/2 hour dealer)

In a ten hour session on-line 4-tabling besides my eyes popping out, I can see close to 3000 hands. Winning players make their money over the course of time and individual hands mean little. Its playing winning poker over the course of an enormous amount of hands that you make your profit if you play well. If you are just a little winning player and can play at 1bb/hr, at say 10/20, thats 80 bucks an hour over the course of time and about 800 per 10 hour online shift. Over the course of time live that equates to 200 a 10 hour shift. Obviously standard deviation skews all this and your sample size has to be large, but over the course of time if you are a winning player your numbers will equate to this. Add in rakeback which costs nothing and of course you choose online.

So would I rather make 800 every 10 hours (example) and sit in a wife-beater and boxers or 200 every 10 hours and get a free meal?

I see where you are going and would much rather play live and still do quite often. But online gives you more bang for your buck. And its all about making money. You cannot replace the social aspect of live poker and live games are in general much better than online games. But, online is here to stay, so why not do it.

gl

 

[lawtchan]

I don't know what a "rakeback" is.

can someone explain,

Hell,

I just got my "rakeback" from my neighbor before the hurricane.

Thanks

lawrence

 

[saint]

I don't know what a "rakeback" is.

can someone explain,

Hell,

I just got my "rakeback" from my neighbor before the hurricane.

Thanks

lawrence

The rake is the automatic cut the house takes out of every poker pot. So every time as a player you see a hand of cards the poker site is taking a certain % (the rake) out of each pot. Over time it can add up. You can sign up through rakeback sites and get usually around 25% of your monthly rake paid back to you. The site you sign up with usually gets around 1-2% i think. I'm not positive about this, but I always assumed that rakeback sites get that % back because they are helping to recruit players to online sites. It is pretty competitive since it has blown up.

I'm sure PF or someone else can make it more clear if that doesn't make sense.

 

[marine]

I see where you are going with that question Marine, but your point is not valid here. Of course I don't refuse to play in a casino when I am in Atlantic City which is 3-4 times a year, however, I have the option of rakeback at other on-line sites that I don't at Party. So in response to your question I'll ask two of my own:

1. Would you play at site A for free when you can get rakeback at site B?

2. If two B&M casinos were right next to each other would you play at one where you got rakeback or one you didn't?

both answers to the questions are the same for me. Which location is going to have a better game selection for me, and which location do i think i will earn more BB per hour?
But all things being equal, I will without a doubt play at a site/room that gives me a cut back. On the same hand, I know that that is a BONUS, and not a right, and if they take it away... well... it was fun while it lasted. I also know that if I am playing at location A, and getting a rake back... do I think it's really realistic to be able to play at other locations and get that rakeback? heck no. each place has their rules. Party is suffering enough from the terrible earnings statements they released. They can't go giving their profits back to the players.


Remember about 2 years ago when there were big hooplahs about people being paid per hour to sit at the online tables just to keep games going?

something else will evolve from this rakeback exlcusion much the same as the rakeback clause evolved from the extinction of shill players.

just sit back and relax and let things happen.

Now, given the 3rd quesion, would you play poker if no rakebacks were given? yes.

 

[marine]

I see where you are going with that question Marine, but your point is not valid here. Of course I don't refuse to play in a casino when I am in Atlantic City which is 3-4 times a year, however, I have the option of rakeback at other on-line sites that I don't at Party. So in response to your question I'll ask two of my own:

1. Would you play at site A for free when you can get rakeback at site B?

2. If two B&M casinos were right next to each other would you play at one where you got rakeback or one you didn't?

PS.
To answer #1 for you.

Play at site B and stop crying about Party.


oke

 

[marine]

Obviously standard deviation skews all this and your sample size has to be large, but over the course of time if you are a winning player your numbers will equate to this.
gl

Ya know, I used to really subscribe to that theory with heart and soul. And I was cranking around 1-1.5 BB/hour most of the time. Mostly recreationaly and it was just extra money to have in my pocket once a month or so.

I've thrown that out the window. Playing online is crazy. With the tremendous amount of people at a site, game selection is paramount as there are fishies everywhere.
In early september I started playing at Party again and won a decent sized tourney one night. Normally I am a 3/6 player and if I got giddy I would sit at 5/10. Anyway, I had a nice sized bankroll and it allowed me to be a lil more careffree one night.

So I decided to kick the playing tight crap to the curb and decided to play to my table and opponents. (breakdown: do things just a LITTLE LESS stupid than my opponents)
Ya know what? it worked!!!!! I moved up to play the 10/20 tables after 1 week and things started snowballing. Talk about crazy. After grinding for months and years and years and months and playing "solid ABC poker" vs unknown crazies, I have literally found myself in a boatload of money. If I ran into tight tables I left, I hopped around till I found those weak, aggressively wild tables that have 8-4o three betting preflop.
I can't believe this. So, its been one month in this "wild man" mode for me. Yea, Clem D kinda had an impact on me with his throwing away his career for 6 months to sports bet...
I've played about 3 hours 5 days a week between 10pm and 1 am.
I started with $410 (after I took out my tourney win) and have cashed out approx 1k each friday night for the past 4 fridays. It's insane. Most nights, A-x is a winner for nice sized pots.


ABC/tight poker can kiss my @ss. So can the rake back. I will stick to Party where the fish are always up and take my chances winning pots instead of minute %'s of rakes vs tough opponents.

 

[BleedDodgerBlue]

ABC/tight poker can kiss my @ss.

ABC poker isn't necessarily winning poker. People who play ABC poker solely online are the ones complaining about it being rigged and whining about their millions of bad beats.

These are the ones that are going to be affected most by the loss of rakeback as they are the break even players in most instances.

glad you've been winning lately, nice to see other mjer's do well.

 

[saint]

ABC/tight poker can kiss my @ss. So can the rake back. I will stick to Party where the fish are always up and take my chances winning pots instead of minute %'s of rakes vs tough opponents.

I'm somewhat new to online poker because I fought the urge for some time to play online. I've played for the past 2-3 weeks and have done well but also come to realize that playing tight hands is pretty much a grind. The whole theory behind playing only top hands takes a hit because those hands lose value when playing online. Something like AKo or even KK, JJ for example is much weaker than in a "true" game because so many people on there are willing to chase a flush draw (insert anything here). So playing tight expecting to win a high % of the hands you play isn't even a reality.

 

[Agent 0659]

Online isnt poker. You will get run over like a freight train if you sit back and play big cards. Gotta raise, reraise and narrow the field and get it down to 1 or 2 opponents and then put pressure on them if you have ANYTHING. At least thats what I do. I play anything. 2-4, 69, AK, it doesnt matter. I do pretty well also.

 

[Penguinfan]

Marine, I appreciate your point of view, and hope you don't think we're arguing here. I absolutly fall into the category BDB mentioned, I break even/lose a bit but come out ahead via rakeback because of the number of hands I play, thats the kind of player I am so yes this affects me very much, or at least as much as it can affect a $2/$4 small timer.

Before you take Party's side becasue of thier earning statements please consider how much money is going down that rake hole a year off of US playing, it has to be near the billion dollar mark. I'm not crying for them.

Will I stop playing because of this, certainly not, will I move over to somewhere I can still get a rakeback deal, absolutly.

 

[pd1]

PartyGaming (UKRTY: news, chart, profile) fell another 7.8%, Sportingbet (UK:SBT: news, chart, profile) retreated by 7% and Empire Online (UK:EOL: news, chart, profile) dropped 30.3%. PartyGaming, a component of the FTSE 100, has seen pressure since a September profit warning.

Along with the concerns on market growth, some of Monday's sector sell-off came after PartyGaming said that it's launching a new system that will allow its customers to play on their own exclusive platforms instead using the current system of sharing platforms with PartyGaming's white-label partners.

One of these partners is Empire Online, which also released third-quarter trading figures on Monday.

Empire Online said trading has been very strong, with net gaming revenue up 71% compared to a year ago, at $31.4 million, as poker operations accounted for $23 million of the revenue and casinos accounted for $8.4 million.

However, Noam Lanir, Empire Online's CEO, told Reuters that the market didn't go up much during the quarter.

"We still are seeing pressure in terms of yield per player and it seems that market concerns about growth slowing down more quickly than it had originally expected are being vindicated," said Michael Pacitti, an analyst at ABN Amro.

He added that the market is probably specifically concerned that Empire doesn't have a platform of its own and also said: "The conditions (Empire) has to operate on the PartyGaming platform may well be deteriorating as well, and that leaves them in a very invidious position."

 

[Loverboy]

The consensus right now is if you have a Party account that has been idle for 60+ days you will be able to take advantage of the rake backs once there set. The affiliates are working on getting some sort of other deal as well for people that play on both.

On the plus side:

You can now play 10 tables at one time on one account at Party. This is really key to the fulltimers. I have been playing on Empire for about a year and have been running two accounts at one time so that I can 8 table

Seth

Seth/Lockport7, thanks for the info. Please keep us updated on the Party rakeback deal.

My options are limited, because I play stud. Other sites just do not have enough traffic. This event is causing a lot of stress for me because it means losing thousands per month. :mj16:
:help:

I use to play a lot on Party and moved to Empire four months ago due to a rakeback deal a friend told me about. Since then, I played on Party occasionally...so my account has not been idle for 60+ days as I still use both for multi-tabling. Will I be able to take advantage of the rakeback deal on Party?

If I did not already have a Party account, no problem. I would just create a new one and get some rakeback (although not as high)...but what options do existing members have? By the way, do you already have a Party account or play only on the skins?

 

[Penguinfan]

Loverboy, and everyone for that matter just hold on for a day or so.

I have talked with several affiliates that MAY be able to handle this exact situation. Apparently Party knows they are going to lose players over this, including som high volume players and they really don't want that.

ANYWAY it LOOKS as if you will be able to have your current account closed and open a new Party account to get some kind of rakeback deal. It won't be 25-30% like you were getting, but it should slow the bleeding.

Give me a day or two to work this out and I will post here again to let you all know.

Hell, BDB should take advantage of this if he was already playing at Party without rakeback.

Hold tight.

 

[Loverboy]

Thanks penguinfan.

I definitely will not rush into anything hastily until things clear up a bit and some things become "official". Rushing inot a Party rakeback deal offered by Rakeback sites might not be a good idea at the moment. Besides the confusion, I don't think that route is "approved" by Party. As affiliates, they are not supposed to announce "rakeback" programs openly under the affiliates agreement. But I guess if you phrase it under "loyalty program", it might be okay.

I've been browsing the 2+2 forum as well trying to find more info. Found some good stuff there if anyone is interested.

In the meantime, I'm going to visit the old B+M rooms in Atlantic City. Maybe even go play at Paradise until things settle...back to where it all began. lol

Look forward to reading your post.

 

[Lockport7]

From what I am hearing from a few affailiates they are still negotiating terms but my friend runs an affailiate and says that Party is holding strong with the 25% max number.

Buyer beware also, there a few sites that have sprung up that are not rakeback but say switch back to party or something to that regard. As far as I know I have not seen a legitimitate affailiate offer any rakeback yet.

Loverboy, I have a Party account, it has been used for hte past 60 days and even though I am worried about that, I am sure in the coming days we will all figure something out.

I hate that they added blackjack and that guess the flop side bets.

But they have to make money especially as there numbers were dropping.

Be back later with more info

Seth

 

[Penguinfan]

This just in...

Party may be re-pulling the plug on rakeback, stayed tuned for further details.

 

[marine]

Hey p-fan,

You up for a referral? As a gesture of goodwill and to help you out, I'll be happy to have you roll me in under your rake back plan if it can get you some extra bucks if Party brings it back