PDA

View Full Version : My own personal review of online sites


schroedy
05-21-2004, 07:28 PM
A question came up in another forum that involved "which site" did something happen on. So here is my own personal ranking based on results and "feel." This is for ring games only at stakes from $5/$10 to $20/$40:

1. Planet Poker. You gotta love a site where you have to buttonhole on of the regular winners to ask the question, "Where is all the money coming from?" There are many poor players and I have never had the slightest bit of a twinge of suspiscion about the integrity of the games. They seem not to have too aggressive an advertising/bonus/giveaway campaign so the player universe is small. The software is also slow, so maybe some crave more action. But I would think that the site would be teeming with action as the fish pool could support at least twice the sharks.

2. I also have a big win rate at Pacific Poker, although I have seen some things there a little too often and have some doubts about the integrity of the game. PLEASE DON'T JUMP ALL OVER ME AS ACCUSING THEM OF CHEATING. I am just posting my own internal doubts about whether their game is straight up or not. Call it sour grapes for a guy that got AA cracked by J3 (or similar) when an A fell on the flop (along with a 3, followed by 3 on the turn and, of course, 3 on the river). I won big and left when the incredible beats started to fall, so I probably shouldn't complain.

3. Poker Stars -- I have had success here but I always seem to give it back. I have never doubted the integrity of the site. I am not a Stars tournament junkie and many say the Stars tournies are softer than the ring games.

4. Paradise Poker -- Paradise used to have some good $10/$20 Omaha but the last time I was there all the games had tightened up tremendously. As a newbie to online poker I ran $300 to $6,000 to $300 at Paradise more than twice and at the time I felt this "big win" followed by "big loss" was a sign of crookedness. After a few years experience, I am more willing to attribute my results at Paradise to an inability to handle success well. But at the time, there were plenty who were eager to confirm my suspiscions that something was up at Paradise.

5. Ultimate Bet is the best software, and there are no doubts about integrity, but the players there are SO DAMN GOOD. I don't think I have ever had a winning session there and I have felt totally outclassed at every table I have ever sat at there. They gave me a big hand jackpot shortly after my first visit and they pester me to no end with email, but I have given up trying to prove how good I am by beating that crowd.

6. Party Poker -- I have not had much success at Party and I have my doubts about their games. The players seem bad but they end up with my chips anyway. I cannot point to any particular streak of incredible beats like at Pacific, but I just have kind of a bad feeling about it personally.

Generally, I play at Planet, where I have a good and consistent win rate. Occasionally at Pacific. Maybe once a year I will test the other rooms to see if anything has changed.

GrannyMae
05-21-2004, 08:27 PM
PLEASE DON'T JUMP ALL OVER ME AS ACCUSING THEM OF CHEATING

first of all, i admire your report/opinions.

second, there has been documented cheating at pacific where the site operators have admitted it. do a recent search on poster Jim Kuhn and you will see that your suspicons were dead on.

http://smilies.sofrayt.com/%5E/_950/bee.gif

Jim Kuhn
05-21-2004, 08:31 PM
Thanks Granny for pointing that out. I will bump the post for him.

Thank you,

Jim Kuhn
Catfish4U
/images/graemlins/spade.gif /images/graemlins/diamond.gif /images/graemlins/club.gif /images/graemlins/heart.gif

schroedy
05-21-2004, 09:09 PM
Jim -- Do I know you?

Like from the Cornhusker Bridge Center?

Don't want to tie my real name with my id here, but . . .

BreakEvenPlayer
05-21-2004, 09:31 PM
Wow. The most in-depth and professional kook post I have ever seen.

cardcounter0
05-21-2004, 10:31 PM
Sorry, I don't think that's it. Looks to me like any site he loses at is "rigged", except for the one site where it was totally obvious he was outclassed.

KOOK.

schroedy
05-21-2004, 10:59 PM
You can call me a kook. I was just giving my personal impressions.

I am negative at Stars, Party and Paradise (and UB). Of those, I only feel suspicious about Partyone. I am positive at one site that I feel suspicious about. These were just my impressions.

I totally agree that the online rooms could make a fortune without any unethical edge -- in fact, I think they could be way profitable with $1 rakes. But then again, there aren't any $1 rakes. And when unlikely things happen to you in a card game, you would be fully a fool not to think about whether someone was grabbing an unethical edge.

Baulucky
05-22-2004, 10:00 AM
Thanks for posting this. In the NL forum you mentioned $20-$40 games, and I thought: Where are there $20-$40 NL games online?. Are you talking here limit or NL?.

schroedy
05-22-2004, 11:41 AM
I was talking about limit.

The was a question as to why a player called a bet on the turn (I can't even remember the circumstances). It brought to my mind the $20/$40 (limit) game where the motto seems to be "In for the flop, in for the turn."

Jurollo
05-22-2004, 01:24 PM
[ QUOTE ]
You can call me a kook. I was just giving my personal impressions.

I am negative at Stars, Party and Paradise (and UB). Of those, I only feel suspicious about Partyone. I am positive at one site that I feel suspicious about. These were just my impressions.

I totally agree that the online rooms could make a fortune without any unethical edge -- in fact, I think they could be way profitable with $1 rakes. But then again, there aren't any $1 rakes. And when unlikely things happen to you in a card game, you would be fully a fool not to think about whether someone was grabbing an unethical edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you would be a fool to not think someone is scamming you because of some bad beats. Do you go nuts in a casino if you lose on a bad beats accusing the deck of having 5 aces? no. It is the nature of the game and those who realize that do not question the validity of the platform we are playing on.

GrannyMae
05-22-2004, 01:32 PM
You can call me a kook. I was just giving my personal impressions.

which is why i admire and respect the opinions. we have PLENTY of room for contrary opinions when someone takes more than 13 seconds to construct the post.

seriously, please post more often. we can address your concerns any time you want. i personally thought it best to leave this first post of yours i noticed with a story of proof of collusion at pacific and hope that you understand that that has much more of a chance of being the reason for your troubles there than the site itself being crooked. the runner runner defeats you saw were probably because teammates hit the "other" hand and when this happens it sticks out in your mind.

keep it up, you are not a troll (yet /images/graemlins/wink.gif )

http://smilies.sofrayt.com/%5E/r/cheese.gif

gonzo787
05-22-2004, 01:40 PM
I respect everyone who has an opinion about what are the best online sites to play at, but Planet Poker???? Do you work there? That site has to be the worst of the top 10 or 15 most popular sites. Have they updated their software since they were founded?

schroedy
05-22-2004, 01:44 PM
Didn't I say they had bad software?

Good games. Bad software.

gonzo787
05-22-2004, 01:51 PM
I think it would help if they offered a reload bonus or two. Hell, I'd even play the site again.

GrannyMae
05-22-2004, 01:51 PM
I respect everyone who has an opinion about what are the best online sites to play at, but Planet Poker???? Do you work there? That site has to be the worst of the top 10 or 15 most popular sites. Have they updated their software since they were founded?


1. no i don't work there, but it was the first site opened and the first site i played. i lost 18k there the first year and have never returned.

2. he has every right to tout planet as the best if he is winning there. there are players that have been there from day one and have won a couple of hundred thousand there. they used to have the best (and only) 20-40 5 max, but i could not beat it.

3. no, they have never done a "real" upgrade, which is why they are as tiny as they are. if they were not stubborn and too cheap and scared to DUMP that software early, they would be right up there today.

4. i know for FACT that they are one of the most profitable sites out there right now. (ROI% obviously, not total $$)

http://e4u.deltait.com.au/dressed/bek082.gif

Jim Kuhn
05-23-2004, 07:02 AM
I think there must be another sorry sucker out there named Jim Kuhn?