SnG's on different sites

Phoenix1010 · #1 05-26-2005, 10:07 AM

So I just read here about Party possibly gearing up to crack down on 8-12 tablers who have multiple accounts at the different skins. I'm fairly disturbed by the thought, and I want to have a backup plan in place.

I've become really accustomed to the SnG structures at the Party skins, and I don't really want to switch to a different kind, but I will if I have to. I have to continue 8 tabling at least, and I don't want to mess with Party so I'll only be playing 4 on Empire.

On to my questions: Are there any sites that run a structure similar to Party/skins? What site is closest? Does anyone play UB, PS, or FT SnG's at the same time as Party ones? If anyone has tried, could you tell me if you had any trouble playing both styles at once? For anyone who has played both the 800/1000 chip games and the 1500 chip games, could you tell me if you had any trouble adjusting from one to the other, and could you please compare your hourly rate in each?

Any and all feedback is greatly appreciated.

-Phoenix

yid3655 · #2 05-26-2005, 10:16 AM

I only currently play Party for SNG's
However, I have viewed and also been told that Poker Stars and UB's SNG's are nothing like PP in terms of structure

Doesnt really help but eliminates 2

Phoenix1010 · #3 05-26-2005, 10:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I only currently play Party for SNG's
However, I have viewed and also been told that Poker Stars and UB's SNG's are nothing like PP in terms of structure

Doesnt really help but eliminates 2

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I believe FT, UB, and PS are all very similar to each other... and all far too slow for my needs. Anyone know about Pacific or Paradise or any of those other ones?

Iamafish · #4 05-26-2005, 10:22 AM

Ya know, just as I' am getting good at all forms of hold 'em, online poker looks like its going to s h i t. Perfect.

BradleyT · #5 05-26-2005, 10:37 AM

Everyone just stay at party please.

Phoenix1010 · #6 05-26-2005, 10:41 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone just stay at party please.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure everyone would like to, but not too many people want to take the risk. I predict Party losing a lot of business if they start taking a harder stance on multiple account holders. If they go so far as to freeze someone's account, the great Exodus will begin.

Blarg · #7 05-26-2005, 10:46 AM

I dunno, if you can play higher at fewer tables, you might do the same monetarily.

And if the excellent players somehow ever get prevented from playing more than four tables at all of Party and its skins, your chances of bumping into the good players has to lessen, as you can only encounter them on one skin instead of multiple ones. This also means the fish pool will be given new life, as they could only be beaten four times at once instead of 8, 12, and 16 times. All it takes is one really good player to do a lot of damage to the fishes, so cutting the sharks down to four tables would leave a lot more money for lesser players to make. Everyone but the sharks would benefit.

Anyway, being able to play at only one skin doesn't mean the poker hindenburg has burst into flames in mid-air and nose-dived into the ground. There are still those four games, and plenty of other sites.

I'm pretty skeptical Party would even do this in the first place, except for people who have really egregiously pushed the envelope.

Iamafish · #8 05-26-2005, 10:50 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone just stay at party please.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you stay, you give them POWER. The few people they lose will be nothing compaired to how much longer the fish will play.

But...If we all leave, they might learn not to f*ck around. Find somewhere else to play for a while, wont kill you would it?

Iamafish · #9 05-26-2005, 10:55 AM

[ QUOTE ]

And if the excellent players somehow ever get prevented from playing more than four tables at all of Party and its skins, your chances of bumping into the good players has to lessen, as you can only encounter them on one skin instead of multiple ones. This also means the fish pool will be given new life, as they could only be beaten four times at once instead of 8, 12, and 16 times. All it takes is one really good player to do a lot of damage to the fishes, so cutting the sharks down to four tables would leave a lot more money for lesser players to make. Everyone but the sharks would benefit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, doesn't sound too bad.

Phoenix1010 · #10 05-26-2005, 12:32 PM

I don't know. I don't know why fish play poker, or why they keep coming back. I really don't think that this will have a great effect on the number of poor players out there, because most of them are casual players anyway who probably don't realize that they are long term losers. They're not going to all of a sudden realize that the games are easier and start playing more. Of course the losing players who play a ton will take longer to go broke and hence contribute more to the rake, but I don't think this type of fish is what keeps Party afloat. Also, I remember Daliman talking a few months ago about how he was upset at some site's customer service, and told them that he was leaving and then quoted how much rake he had generated for them. I then realized just how much rake the high volume high limit players must be responsible for on their own, even with rakeback. I'm sure Raptor is as valuable to Empire as an army of $11 fish. I don't know how the whole thing works though, and maybe getting rid of the sharks is the optimum business move.

Btw, I'm going to be bumping this thread, sometimes with inane responses like this one, in the hopes that someone will meaningfully answer my original questions. I apologize for any inconvenience this causes.

-Phoenix