|
|
#1
11-22-2005, 07:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
party > stars?
whats party like compared to stars, specifically in the 200-600 NL range? are they more crazy? more laggy?
im considering also opening an account there, from what i hear stars doesnt have many maniacs 
|
|
#4
11-22-2005, 11:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: party > stars?
I haven't played there much, so I can't speak from personal experience, but from what i've picked up Party has the softest games on the web. FWIW, muddywater (highstakes player, co-founder of CardRunners) says that UB 2/4 (or even 1/2) is harder than Party 5/10.
|
|
#5
11-22-2005, 11:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: party > stars?
I haven't played on Stars in months but it was pretty weak/tight when I did (1/2 full). Party's 6-max games at the 200-600 level are very soft and you can find a good game 24/7 (dunno if that's important to you). Getting rakeback is nice, too.
|
|
#6
11-22-2005, 12:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: party > stars?
[ QUOTE ]
you can find a good game 24/7 (dunno if that's important to you). [/ QUOTE ] very important .... i think ill play both for a while and see how it goes. i usually find my self playing in the 12-5am time and stars rarely has any good tables then. ive never tried rakeback at all. where do i start if im interested?
|
|
#7
11-22-2005, 12:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: party > stars?
Obviously Party>Stars. Due to Neteller issues, I'm currently stuck on Empire. But hopefully by the end of the week I will adding another fish to the Party Pond.
|
|
#10
11-22-2005, 12:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: party > stars?
[ QUOTE ]
I hear Prima is pretty soft from 11AM-3PM... that true? [/ QUOTE ] from what i played at prima, everything up to 200 NL was pretty fishy. 400 NL had a lot of the same name regulars playing, and a lot of guys who multi-tabled from 400 NL all the way up to 2000 NL. these guys also played all the big tournies too. 400 NL definitely had its fish but not as much as other, bigger sites
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
