O Doyle's Army - WE WANT YOU! - Page 20

Walrus · #**191** 07-26-2005, 12:15 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I am interested depending on the details.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sintax · #**192** 07-26-2005, 12:52 AM

[ QUOTE ]
For the record, the rake from ODoyle's 120,000 hands did not cover the cost of the promotion

[/ QUOTE ]

The only reason that did not happen was because O'Doyle was relagated to playing every and any table he could because of the short timeframe. Obviously this included a number of low and microlimit tables.

A flat 120k hands of 3/6 or higher (and maybe as low as 2/4)would easily cover the WSOP expense.

I've noticed that a large contingency of zoo'ers are microlimt players, and I suspect many of the interested posters in this thread fit that description. I hate to burst the bubble, but at 1/2 or less, a deal such as 120,000 hands for a WSOP is never going to happen. Now, 120,000 raked hands would work, and probably even less than that but I havent done the math.

Shoe · #**193** 07-26-2005, 01:02 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For the record, the rake from ODoyle's 120,000 hands did not cover the cost of the promotion

[/ QUOTE ]

The only reason that did not happen was because O'Doyle was relagated to playing every and any table he could because of the short timeframe. Obviously this included a number of low and microlimit tables.

A flat 120k hands of 3/6 or higher (and maybe as low as 2/4)would easily cover the WSOP expense.

I've noticed that a large contingency of zoo'ers are microlimt players, and I suspect many of the interested posters in this thread fit that description. I hate to burst the bubble, but at 1/2 or less, a deal such as 120,000 hands for a WSOP is never going to happen. Now, 120,000 raked hands would work, and probably even less than that but I havent done the math.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would be playing most of my hands at $5/$10. I would also be willing to play $3/$6 but I would not want to play any lower than that. If the site also has limits like $4/$8, $6/$12 or $8/$16, I would play those too. I play $10/$20 occasionally but currently I only take very limited shots at those stakes (hopefully it will be my regular game soon). So I would need to play at a site where I could clear 120k hands at those stakes (and have enough time to clear at those stakes - if the site only has 2 $5/$10 tables going, then give me an adequate amount of time for how long it would take to play 120k hands 2-tabling).

I'm not willing to play 120k hands of $1/$2, although that may work for many others.

I play almost every day, with my play spread over 10+ sites. I would be willing to consolidate almost all of my play to this single site if I was given a long enough time frame to play the hands.

Whichever site does this will be gaining 120k of my hands that they would not otherwise have received. I get to live my dream of going to the WSOP. The site also gets a promotional bonus in that I will be wearing their clothing (even if the site does not require it I will definitely be wearing their clothing to show my appreciate for the opportunity), so they also have the promotional gain going for them as well.

I know most of what I said has already been covered in other posts, so I'll stop now.

EDIT: In rakeback alone I would come pretty darn close to 12k after playing 120k raked hands at my current limits. I think the sites should come up with a method to award the seat based on your MGR, not on your number of raked hands. After looking over the numbers I don't think I would be in it it was 120k raked hands for me, as i would not be gaining much over rakeback alone, where the games are most likely juicier and more widely available. Regardless, I am still very interested in this and hope it moves forward. Please keep me updated.

xniNja · #**194** 07-26-2005, 01:10 AM

I'm not sure I would do this, just because I'm not sure it's worth the trouble unless they were handing out 100 WSOP packages? (1 per each member) The reason it doesn't matter that 120K raked hands is less than, equal to, or greater than the price of the WSOP package, is because it's a larger rakeback than 0 or even 26%. If you put in that amount of hands anyway, and theres enough players on the site, it's a win-win deal, isn't it?

rusty JEDI · #**195** 07-26-2005, 01:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
We are studying the economics of this sort of promotion, with or without an "Army" element. (For the record, the rake from ODoyle's 120,000 hands did not cover the cost of the promotion, although it was certainly worth doing. If we want to launch a promo similar to this thread, it likely would be tied to raked hands played, not just hands played).

Truepoker CEO

[/ QUOTE ]

As long as truehostdon isnt the one running this thing, im pretty sure the minds at true have figured this out. Instead of X hands played raked or not, they could just tie it to the amount of rake generated. The game from here would be how much of the rake generated goes to the trip/entry fee, and how much goes to the site. Basically a large rakeback with all rakeback being tied to representing that site in some event.

Just some other thoughts.

Paris last year had 206 entrants, but was app. a $12,000 entry fee. Aruba had 647 entrants but was a $6,000 entry. So now lets assume we somehow really could get 100 people to this thing. At the more expensive, so more unlikely Paris we would have 1/3 of the field. That would make some noise. Or if we went to Aruba, having 1/7th of the field at a different sites (UB) tournament would be interesting.

Just some thoughts to make a splash in a different way other than the ME.

Also for a site not named party/stars where i put all my play, they would be gaining 100% of my play where they are getting zero without it. I assume this would fit many of us.

rJ

Jurollo · #**196** 07-26-2005, 01:47 AM

I generally play 2/4 and 3/6 and would move my play to one of those sites to play in a WSOP circuit event or perhaps the Foxwoods WPT event. 120K hands at 2/4 or 3/6 would almost definately cover the charges for these as well as some travel expenses as well. Or so I would think.
~Justin

rusty JEDI · #**197** 07-26-2005, 02:38 AM

Some way to include sit&go entries would be nice too.

rJ

DocMartin · #**198** 07-26-2005, 03:07 AM

O'D's 120K hand was pretty good to me, this is a bandwagon I could jump on.

Keep us posted.

willpower101 · #**199** 07-26-2005, 04:27 AM

I'm in. but i don't do limit at all. while you all fight over the limit tables, put me down for six tableing NL25$ and we'll have one hell of a plane party on the way to wsop!

count me in!

WackityWhiz · #**200** 07-26-2005, 05:22 AM

If any site ran a promotion where the top 10 players in rake each month got a wsop seat, then I think this idea could work. That would draw so many customers and they would be playing so many hands. If the sites would lose money doing that, then they could do this one as an alternative. If a player makes the top 10 one month, he gets 1/2 a seat. In order to fill his seat up, he'd have to be in the top 10 another month. Once a player gets his seat, he could no longer be in the running.

I like this idea a lot, do you guys?