I think there is a misconception about "the misconception"

[Syntax]

Ive never said that Party wasn't the softest site. I would agree that it probably is the "easiest" to beat. My point is that it is not so much softer then other sites.

UB and Stars games are definately tighter. But tigher and tougher are NOT the same thing. Most of those tight players at UB are still pretty awful, they just play fewer hands. These games are still easy to beat, but you have to play a different style then you do at Party.

The more I think about it, I doubt that at lot of the lower limit posters here have what it takes to beat those opponents. At Party you can post and fold untill you get a big hand and wind up beating the game. It certainly wont be optimal, but it is 'easy'. Im guessing thats what a lot of players who win at Party, but lose anywhere else do.

Generally speaking, I play a different style at UB and Stars then I do at Party, but I never really gave it much thought untill now. Its just changing gears and its second nature to me. But a lot of people probably won't find these games as "easy" as I do. Also, those who earning a kickback from affiliates or are affiliates would have no reason to play these other games as they are getting a better overlay at Party already.

All that aside, I still do not like the Party business model. I have been playing online poker for more then probably 90% of the people on this forum. When I started there was Paradise and Planet, and that was about it. Paradise was the undisputed King and everyone thought they were untouchable. I was a member of these forums back then (1998) and can testify to it. But, Paradise was run a lot like Party is now with regards to their regular players, and their reward programs. Look where it got them. Party is going to suffer a similar fate, it's just a matter of time.

I mentioned in another thread that I believe that in the next five years you will see that the most successful poker rooms online with have a very player-centric mentality. Look at how real world casinos and online casinos operate. They bend over backwards to award their players. Since I whored casinos last month, I don't think a day goes by that I dont get email from one of them offering some player bonus. Even though you are not playing against the house, online poker rooms make their money from action. Eventually the dust of this poker boom will settle and those rewarding thier regulars the most will be the most popular. This is not just an opinion I pulled out of my ass. Like I said, I have been playing online poker since its birth, and I have seen and been a part of its evolution. This is the direction things are heading.

[Wayne]

[ QUOTE ]
Ive never said that Party wasn't the softest site. I would agree that it probably is the "easiest" to beat. My point is that it is not so much softer then other sites.


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I really don't understand why it seems to be a consensus here that the easist and best games are at Party, thats just not the reality of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[Alobar]

did we really need a whole new thread for the same argument?

I think it's interesting that you say you have been playing internet poker longer than most everyone here, yet you are still a low limit player? Kinda goes againt your argument that you're better off playing stars and UB because it will make you better.

Also I havent read any posts where people say they can beat party but not stars or UB, it's jus they beat party for more.

The more you talk the more you sound like someone with an agenda, or someone who just likes to listen to their own voice so to speak

[Syntax]

Thats not fair, its taking things out of context. That second quote was in a post where my point was that you can find games that are soft and easy to beat, Party isnt the only site where the games are easy.

The general consensus around here is that UB and Stars game are harder to beat, or they are not easy.

So Wayne, would agree that is what most people think?

[Syntax]

Why do you insist that I have some sort of agenda. I don't, let it go. Thats a personal attack, what is wrong with you.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, if you can make the accusation that you think I might have "an agenda". Then Im sure you've given it some thought. Please tell me what one or two possible agenda's i might have that are consistent with what I have been saying. Be a sport and back up you accusation.

As far as your other comment goes. I started playing online poker my first year of college. Now, Im a graduate student in software engineering. I have little disposable income and don't get to spend a lot of hours developing my game. For now, I play at the limits I am comfortable with my budget, sometimes I'll go half a semester without playing much. I like what I do, and I don't have aspirations to quit school and go pro, but I think I could if I wanted to give up what I've worked for so far. However I have taken well over 15k out of those games over the past few years and that's helped me pay for some nice things my fellow students can't afford. When Im making 100k a year developing software, playing the bigger limits will be a quite profitable hobby.

[Baulucky]

Play wherever you want. We'll do the same.

[thomastem]

Syntax,

This is starting to look like a religous crusade or America eyeing some oil.

[OrangeHeat]

or some unhealthy obsession.....like those people who "like" feet....

Orange

[Wayne]

[ QUOTE ]
The general consensus around here is that UB and Stars game are harder to beat, or they are not easy.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what we've been saying.

[Alobar]

you've called remarks, other people have said in other threads, stupid. Yet now you're hurt and insulted by what someone has said because you feel it is a personal attack? heh.

one, I've never remarked before that I thought you had an agenda, therefore I can hardly be "insisting". Two, I'd actually hope for your sake you had an agenda, that would at least provice a logical explanation for your constant droning