Tightest site on the Net?

[MattHatter]

[MattHatter]

I can't vote in my own poll?

When I try I get an error.
/images/graemlins/crazy.gif


Matt

[Legend27]

Why do I get this message when I try to vote?

Not Found
The requested URL /&what=show&vc=1&poll=1076444430MattHatter&PHPSESSI D= was not found on this server.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Apache/1.3.27 Server at forumserver.twoplustwo.com Port 80

[MattHatter]

I agree with the results so far...

Poker Stars is by a long shot the tightest site on the net.

But this is counter intuitive no?

With the volume of players they have and the 'moneymaker' effect you would think there'd be more fishies?

Is it due to the micro-micro limits that the fish stay in the shallows?



Matt

[ElSapo]

I get this error when I try to vote:

The URL requested /&what=show&vc=1&poll=internetpokerisvirtuallyalway sloose1076444430MattHatter&PHPSESSID= was not found on this server.

[MattHatter]

I got the same error.

If you use ZoneAlaarm you need to open it up for www.twoplustwo.com. (http://www.twoplustwo.com.)

worked for me /images/graemlins/laugh.gif



Matt

[_And1_]

get the error too, but my vote still register...

[fluff]

WTF? 3 people voted Party??

[eugeneel]

Are there actually any full time players that play at stars? If so, why?

[MattHatter]

I was thinking that exact thought when clearing my bonus today and I noticed that the percent in for the flop was like 22% at 1/2.

Makes for a nice predictable game of poker though. They know how to fold /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Its gotta be diminished EV.

Again I'll ask. Any Ideas why? personally I think it's due to the micro micro limits.


Matt

[skaboomizzy]

I'm a low/micro player, but lately I've been playing just the $5 SNGs at Stars. I love them because there's a minimum of the OMG I HAVE AN ACE I'M ALL-IN syndrome like you see at Party, which means it's less likely I'm going up against a stack triple my own after four hands.

Also, it's nice to see stud/8 SNGs and the various 2-table HE ones.

[unome]

They must have never played anywhere else... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Webster]

I'm trying to get my 120 bonus at Stars and thought "How bad can it be" LOL! YIPES

2/4 25% flops!!!

Played at the table with 40% and after 20 hands it was 30%. Well - this one might take some time LOL!

[TylerD]

I don't think Stars is as tight as UB. I HATE UB limit games.

[steeser]

I agree with the UB comment. Those tables were the tightest I had ever played on.

Stars seems much tighter than Party, but my Pokertracker stats have players playing virtually the same amount of flops and pot size almost identical. It seems hard to believe to me, but it's possible.

[Mackas]

I play more or less full time at Stars and much prefer it to others. Plenty of opportunity to steadily increase your bankroll without the swings you can get at Party. I never liked UltimateBet to the extent I have left a fairly large uncleared bonus there which I haven't done anywhere else (and I've done as much bonus whoring as the next guy).

But this thread has got me thinking as to why I prefer Stars so much because I guess it is fairly tight. Whether or not its relatively tight, or maybe because of that?, my hourly rate there (playing mainly $30 & $50 2 table SNGs, 1/2 NLHE and 5/10 LHE) is much superior to other sites (including Party). Horses for courses I suppose.

Anybody else find this and if so why do you reckon that is?