|
|
#11
06-13-2005, 03:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Stars vs. Party...is the gap closing?
According to pokerpulse.com, PS is really close to PP in terms of tourney players (MTT+SnG), but there are about 3 to 4 times more ring games/players on PP. Plus PP games still feel much softer to me. I love PS, but no rakeback is a problem...
|
|
#13
06-13-2005, 03:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars vs. Party...is the gap closing?
Not to mention the other poker adds are morons playing up some casino school wink wink or the cheesy Interpoker "I'll raise" bimbo. Everyone else has taken the low road except Full Tilt and Pokerstars that I have seen.
I might give PS and FT another try.
|
|
#14
06-13-2005, 03:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars vs. Party...is the gap closing?
[ QUOTE ]
According to pokerpulse.com, PS is really close to PP in terms of tourney players (MTT+SnG), but there are about 3 to 4 times more ring games/players on PP. Plus PP games still feel much softer to me. I love PS, but no rakeback is a problem... [/ QUOTE ] no rakeback sucks major, also they need to improve the quality and quantity of fish in the middle limit games.
|
|
#15
06-13-2005, 03:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars vs. Party...is the gap closing?
[ QUOTE ]
I have noticed that stars' games are tough. anyone else agree? And stars does not have an affiliate program correct? [/ QUOTE ] Stars affiliates get paid a flat amount per sign up, not payments every month based on MGR.
|
|
#17
06-13-2005, 03:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars vs. Party...is the gap closing?
right.
stars offers the nano-limit games which many players hang out at (virtually similar to play-money really). these don't generate any rake for Stars of course. if they get a similar number of tourney players as party then I think party is still beating them here since they charge a higher rake generally (including the fact that Stars does not charge an extra-rake in their re-buy and add-on tourneys while party does). On the ring-games, party rakes a little bit more at the levels where it matters....and, as mentioned, stars actually spreads tables where essentially there is no rake anyway. So party is indeed yanking in the profits. But I STILL think party is closing the gap. I agree that their TV ads are VERY helpful. Getting rid of that old Raymer/Moneymaker standing back-to-back ad and running the classier one's with them talking about their experiences was a good move. I still see a lot of the partypoker ads on the tube too though. A 3rd Pokerstars WSOP champion would be something Stars could REALLY push if they were to get so lucky.
|
|
#18
06-13-2005, 03:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars vs. Party...is the gap closing?
I will be so happy if Stars gets to be fishier than Party. I've always preferred their nice software to Diks*it's junk.
The only downside to that will be the relative lack of bonus offers from Stars.
|
|
#19
06-13-2005, 04:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars vs. Party...is the gap closing?
I'm rooting for Stars not because I like it, (I don't play there at all, only on Empire) but because maybe if it comes close to Party it will start offering more competitive bonuses and keep rakeback.
|
|
#20
06-13-2005, 04:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Stars vs. Party...is the gap closing?
Stars deserves to be ten times the size of Party. Why? Because the rake's lower. At low limit, the rake at Party is often around 10%. For the smae hands at Stars it's 5%. Now that might not sound a lot, but look at PT stats for the two sites if you play low limit and the difference is astounding.
Long live Stars. Onionman
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
