No Jackpot tables on Empire?

[SofaCoach]

I signed up at Party Poker over a year ago before I knew anything about rakeback. I've paid them over $7,000 in rake since then. I was thinking about opening an Empire account with rakeback (have read all instructions on how to do so) but I've heard that Empire doesn't offer the Bad beat Jackpot tables. Is this true? I usually play the BBJP $2/4 tables and IMO the looser play more than makes up for the extra drop (this has been debated extensively on other threads).

Anyway, does Empire really share all tables with Party except for the Bad beats? Why? And might this change?

[sumdumguy]

[ QUOTE ]
I've heard that Empire doesn't offer the Bad beat Jackpot tables. Is this true?

[/ QUOTE ]
Jackpot!

[MicroBob]

the BBJ tables are party's alone.

they share all of the other tables with the other skins.

I imagine the reason has something to do with party wanting to keep ALL of the proceeds from the BBJ tables and not split it with other sites...and that trying to split the costs would prove to be too complicated (or not cost-effective) perhaps).

But I'm not party so I don't really know.

But it is confirmed that there are no BBJ tables on empire.


I hear what you're saying about the extra fishyness...but at the 2/4 level that's an awful lot of extra juice you're paying. Typically a 2/4 hand will be raked $1 or $1.50 or so....33-50% more 'rake' is being taken out of these hands with the $0.50 JP drop (not including the value of possibly actually hitting the JP of course).

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
the BBJ tables are party's alone.

[/ QUOTE ]
True. Same is true for the High Hand Jackpot.

[ QUOTE ]
they share all of the other tables with the other skins.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is not true. There are a small number of other Party-only tables. E.g. "Daytraders Retreat #485246" $3/$6 hold'em and "PokerBulls #485245" $5/$10 hold'em.

I don't know what the story is behind these tables.

[ QUOTE ]
more 'rake' is being taken out of these hands with the $0.50 JP drop (not including the value of possibly actually hitting the JP of course).

[/ QUOTE ]
Jackpot money is just as real as any other money although you may not like the variance. The juice on the jackpot drop is 12.5% which means most of the jackpot drop is eventually distributed to the players. BBJ money goes disproportionately to loose players so the good players are giving up quite a bit even though they pay less rake. Still the BBJ is often large enough to be +EV or roughly breakeven in which case any extra fishiness on the table is profit. Just be careful about shorthanded tables. The chance of hitting the jackpot is roughly proportional to the square of the number of players taking hands. Paying jackpot drop on a 6-7 player table means getting screwed.

The HHJ tables actually favor good players. You pay the drop a lot less often but have virtually the same chance of hitting as anyone else. Just remember that with a normal sized jackpot you must never fold suited Broadways for two bets preflop and you should always draw out a royal backdoor.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, does Empire really share all tables with Party except for the Bad beats?

[/ QUOTE ]
They also don't share multi-table tournaments. All skins run their own. Also, I think the "step" sit n' gos are only on Party.

[Brainwalter]

[ QUOTE ]

This is not true. There are a small number of other Party-only tables. E.g. "Daytraders Retreat #485246" $3/$6 hold'em and "PokerBulls #485245" $5/$10 hold'em.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's been discussed before that these tables are only visible in the party lobby, but can be randomly accessed from any party skin through the "First available table" feature. So they're not party-exclusive tables. It's kind of weird.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
BBJ money goes disproportionately to loose players so the good players are giving up quite a bit even though they pay less rake.

[/ QUOTE ]
I disagree. The jackpot is better for tight players than loose players. For one thing, the table share means that when a hand is played out between the loose players (which is often), the tight players can potentially win some money but they pay no drop on that hand to compensate for it. Also, the hands that are likely to hit the jackpot, like big pocket pairs, are hands that tight players tend to play anyway. Obviously, they play less jackpot hands than loose players (especially suited connectors), but most of the "extra" hands than loose players play and tight players don't are hands with little or no jackpot potential like bad offsuit aces and offsuit connectors. When they play these hands, they are paying jackpot drop but are unlikely to actually hit the jackpot, so they are getting a bad deal.

[SofaCoach]

OK thanks for the info guys....no JP hands on Empire.

Although not the point of my original thread the discussion regarding the extra drop got me thinking....My reasoning for playing these tables is the looseness of the competition. I normally observe pot averages of $2-3 higher on the BBJP tables. I will gladly pay an extra .50 for a pot that is 2-3 bucks higher. Is that too simplistic? I guess I should consider that a percentage of the $2-3 was contributed by me, and the extra looseness will result in a few extra suckouts, but I think I'm still ahead.

Every time I go over to the normal tables I think "Man, these tables are tight!".

[MicroBob]

I do think your way of viewing it is indeed too simplistic...although that isn't to say that you aren't better off playing the JP tables.


but you can't just look at it as "$3 more in the pot for only $0.50 more being taken out" imo.


However...I also have been known the play the BBJ tables for their relative fishyness. Although I do this typically at 5/10 or 10/20....they are more likely to get raked the max $3....so the $0.50 being removed is a lesser percentage of the rake.

I have also played on the crypto brit-sterling tables. Even though the rake is worse on these i think the looser play compared to the dollar tables makes up for it.