Marketing genius from pacific poker - NOT

[Yobz]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, that is just idiotic. But maybe it will make Pacific even fishier if they keep weeding out the winning players.

Maybe I should go back and play!!

SamJack

[/ QUOTE ]

My exact thoughts, make it fishier! I'm going back after I whore Paradise and then some more party skins and then interpoker...maybe next July [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[DeucesUp]

[ QUOTE ]
I would seriously submit this to Jek + Granny and hope they can make them suffer in some weird sadistic way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I'm anxiously awaiting responses from Granny and Jim Kuhn who, if I remember right, already have it in for Pacific.

[ QUOTE ]
They base poker bonus points on amount wagered, not the
rake. It's their fault they used flawed thinking, and
they should fix the system rather than punish a successful
player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, its actually close to the same thing. Points are based on amount wagered as is the rake, so there are close to being proportional. The fact that the rake is taken in "chunks" and that it is capped on each hand make it slightly different. Rough estimate at 15/30, rake is about 1.5% of the each pot, 0.1% of amount bet is returned in bonus points so it amounts to about a 7% rake rebate. Less at lower limits since the rake is proportionally higher.

It amazing that they would risk getting $0 in rake from me just to try scrape out that last little 7% of the rake I generate.

[ QUOTE ]
i just started playing pacific poker last month and the games seem great and have been been doing quite well . just a quick question of how much you were winning for them to send that letter to you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I'd prefer not discuss my winnings in detail, but I will say that it certainly is not any kind of exorbitant amount. The amount probably isn't relevant anyway, I'm guessing this is a new policy since I haven't been playing there much lately, so it's not like I just crossed some "threshold". I'm guessing we'll start hearing from quite a few players who've received the same email.

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, that is just idiotic. But maybe it will make Pacific even fishier if they keep weeding out the winning players.

Maybe I should go back and play!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Ha Ha. This went through my mind as well. The great irony of Pacific is that the only reason it's worthwhile playing is that it is SO crappy. You can only play one table, the software and games are so slow, the disconnects so frequent, the cashouts so slow that most serious players can't stand playing there very long.

Of course this is exactly why the games are so fishy. If Pacific ever improves things (particularly allowing multi-tabling) the site will probably completely die as the ratio of good players will go up and the last reason for playing there will go away.

[TobDog]

Ok, maybe I am missing something here, but it seems like not allowing you to exchange 100 points which is wagering over $1000 to get $1 seems small, when Pokerroom changed their policy a while back, no one was upset about it then, I thought is was poor judgement and posted about it and did not get any replies, so I am assuming that no one cared, this is even smaller than the Pokerroom bonus and you can only 1 table at Pacific, the points were best used to keep track of bonuses. jmho

tobdog

[Tim&Joe]

Tim: I wonder what would happen if you emailed them threatening to leave

Joe: Good idea Tim, You could point out how much you bring in for them and state that one of the major reasons you play at Pacific is for the points program.

Tim: Thanks Joe, You mentioned that it works out to only a $1/hr but still it is money that you are entitled to and at the very least could be given to charity or saved. If you managed to set aside $1/hr for every hour you worked you retire a very rich man.

[AngryCola]

I don't like your act... no tip!

[kiemo]

[ QUOTE ]
If you managed to set aside $1/hr for every hour you worked you retire a very rich man.

[/ QUOTE ]


I save at least double for every hour I and my wife work.

If your prediction of my future is wrong I will hunt you down good sir!

[largeeyes]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, maybe I am missing something here, but it seems like not allowing you to exchange 100 points which is wagering over $1000 to get $1 seems small, when Pokerroom changed their policy a while back, no one was upset about it then, I thought is was poor judgement and posted about it and did not get any replies, so I am assuming that no one cared, this is even smaller than the Pokerroom bonus and you can only 1 table at Pacific, the points were best used to keep track of bonuses. jmho

tobdog

[/ QUOTE ]

But PR has allowed them to be used for entering tournaments and such since then.

[Tim&Joe]

[quote

If your prediction of my future is wrong I will hunt you down good sir!

[/ QUOTE ]

Tim: Just remember it was Joe and not me [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[moondogg]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, that is just idiotic. But maybe it will make Pacific even fishier if they keep weeding out the winning players.

Maybe I should go back and play!!

SamJack

[/ QUOTE ]

All they have to do now is jack up their rake and I'm sooo there! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Thythe]

Also the problem here is that this change only punishes those that Pacific selects as winnings players. This is much different than total changes such as the pokerroom change. Even Party changed to 700-1000 raked hands instead of 500, but it was for everyone, not just winning players.