Softness of Micro-Limit Ring Games

[imported_adhoc]

Hey guys, I was looking over the different assessments of various micro-limit games at www.bonuswhores.com and noticed that they rated the Party Poker .5/1 full ring game as a "B+" in comparison to the Cryptologic (Interpoker, etc.) games of the same limits, which they gave an "A+" to. I also noticed that they rated the Party Poker 1/2 game and the 1/2 game at Pacific as equally soft with a "B+" for each. I am thinking about branching out (I currently only play at Empire) to try and collect some different bonuses, and was wondering if it was the consensus of those of you who play different micro-limit games that these comparisons are accurate. My feeling from reading these forums has always been that the Party Poker games were considered the most beatable, but if other games are as good or better and have bonuses attached, maybe I will give them a shot, too.

[SoftcoreRevolt]

No other site has better bonuses than Party poker and more beatable games.

Absolute has better bonii, Pacific has fishier games as does Sportingbet (but Pacific is slow and you can't multi table and it SUCKS SUCKS SUCKS) and Crypto is slow and the bonuses aren't as good as Party (although not bad)

[aK13]

Although I have no personal experience, I've heard that .5/1 at cryptos is indeed softer than party. However, the advantage of being able to use the PV-PT combination at party, IMO far outweighs the softer games.

1/2 games at party are tighter than .5/1 by a pretty decent amount, but 1/2 at crypto is a rock garden. Never tried pacific.

My 2 cents.

[Tapin]

I dunno, it's probably just luck and variance but I've never had good results at the Crypto 1/2 levels (I whored the Plex and Inter bonuses for a few months, a few months ago -- not a huge sample size). I think I might actually be in the red there, whereas I'm solidly in the black at Party and skins.

I hear the Cryptos have sped up a bit now, though, so since my two complaints were "the games are interminably slow" and "my results have been poor", I might have to go back and see if I can, uh, regress to the mean. Or something like that [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[PokerMatt]

I've had by far the best success with Party. I didn't have as much on Paradise but I also didn't play as many hands. It's funny hearing some of my friends who refuse to play on party anymore, complaining it's too loose and they get bad beats. Then again, a fish never believes he's a fish, but I digress.

[gonzo787]

I work at BW and I am the one responsible for these rankings. The reason that these games are ranked so highly is because of the very loose £0.25/£0.50 games. Because of the exchange rates (£1=$1.84)these games are grouped with the $0.50/1.00 games. I realize it isn't very clear on the review-- I'll get this changed ASAP.

[bottomset]

£1=$1.84

I remember when it was

£1=$0.75

[imported_adhoc]

[ QUOTE ]
Pacific is slow and you can't multi table and it SUCKS SUCKS SUCKS

[/ QUOTE ]

I usually play four tables at once on Empire. Assuming I could concentrate equally as well over four tables whether all four are on the same server or not, do you think it might be more profitable to play three tables on empire and one on Pacific (collecting a bonus at the latter)? Or does this create problems that don't immediately present themselves?

[sholvar]

Nothin better Party Poker?
haha
you never heard of eurobet?
If you send me an e-mail to sholvar@gmx.net , with the reference "eurobet" you will get 100$ on eurobet (that is no signinbonus, If you want more money on your eurobet account you will get a 25% deposit bonus, too). There are some other things like rakeback we will talk in the mail.

[fflyer]

Can't comment on .50/1 as I haven't played at that limit for a while. I can give a view on 1/2 however.
I have played most of my online poker at UB. There are a few decent regulars there, but you can usually find a reasonable table with a VPIP percentage in the mid-thirties upwards. Overall I have a solid winning record there.
I started chasing bonuses at InterPoker. When I first played there it was painfully slow, but it is now a lot quicker and, if anything, has moved to the opposite extreme.
Although I have a plus record there from my two bonus clearances, I find it is very difficult to find a table with a VPIP of more than thirty percent. I don't know why this is, but the games do seem to be a lot tighter than at other sites.
I have had one successful bonus clearance at Poker Stars. I was generally able to find a table to my liking there, although the majority again seemed to be quite tight.
My worst record by far is at Party Poker. I am well down from two bonus clearances, and only my bonuses kept me in the black. This is not due to any particular tightness of the opposition as much as just running badly. Party is such a huge site that it should usually be possible to find a loose table if you look for it. It took me a while to work out how to find these tables however, and it showed in my results.
Generally I think the differences in quality of play at the various sites is over-stated. The only site that I find to be appreciably tighter than the rest is InterPoker.
As for enjoyment of playing, there is not much to choose between UB, Poker Stars and Party. I have a soft spot for UB as it is the one that I am the most used to and I have got to enjoy playing some of the regulars. It can be a pain downloading the hands for PT though, particularly if you are multi-tabling. Party is a little too big for my liking.
My main gripe with the Cryptos is that you rarely see any hand other than the one that wins. For those of us who like to use PT and adjust our play to suit our opponent, it can be a major pain building up any meaningful data. It is a lot better now that the speed of play has improved however.