Toughest Games

[1p0kerb0y]

[img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]I've noticed that the games at ultimatebet seem to be a little tougher than the other sites. Does anybody feel this way too? It seems like the competition is a little bit better there than at party poker, poker stars, or the pokerroom. Anybody else notice this too?

[ramjam]

Yes but I've found it a lot easier since I moved down to 0.01/0.02.

[Sarge85]

I concur - I've been feasting at True Poker and Royal Vegas for a few months, and finally decided to collect UB's first time bonus and am finding the competition to be a bit tougher than where I've been.

[goodguy_1]

UB's game are on average much tougher than Party.Matter of fact PokerStars now has better games than UB imho.

UB has good PLO games even with small pot averages.I find the LHE and NLHE at UB are just horrible.Most of the games have very bad pot averages when you compare them to Party(even with Party including un-called bets into pot averages).Worst of alot of these pot averages are for full kill or half kill games.
For me it's never worth playing at UB even for a bonus because the games are much less lucrative.

I think PokerStars 6MAX and Paradise's 5MAX are both better than UB's short games.Party being the best obviously.

Prima Network big bet ring games were better before the Nightly $3K freeroll and OIC but still can have very good games.Golden Palace/skins can also have some wild games but very spotty.Total Poker with their still very slow software has some very very fishy games and the room has seen a pickup in activity over last 2 months.Pacific Poker is another room with really slow bad software but with very good games.I counted 8 $5-10 LHE games at Pacific last nite..musta been some kind of promo ..dont know.

PARTY still rules!!!

[MrGrob]

I have found UBs games to be better then they used to be, though you wouldn't know it looking at my roll (I have had every possible horror happen in the last month). I find the players are worse then in the past, but maybe in the past, it was harder then I thought. I don't know.

[colgin]

MrGrob,

I feel your pain. The last week has been a tough one for me and I have taken it on the chin the most at UB. I have taken so many bad beats there that it is difficult for me to evaluate how good the play is. I had always thought of Stars as being a little tougher and I still do. If nothing else, the tables at Stars seem to be a little tigher to me. Today, I finally signed up at Party (what the hell was I waiting for) and had a field day. Started me off on a good run for Stars as well. Now if only I can get on track at UB. . .

[Cyndie]

Does anyone think the new www.cardplayer.com affiliation with UB will bring in more fish?

Card Player Mag will now have at least name recognition with Party and UB now. Seems like an unusual partnership.

[Stagemusic]

I haven't made a habit of replying to you Cyndie because of what you generally post. However, I will comment on this one. In a word...NO. The Cardplayer affiliation will do less than nothing to bring in more "fish" to UB. CardPlayer is and was an industry mag. The popularity rise in poker aside, how many "fish" do you expect to find that swim their way to these sites through that media? I would expect not very many. The key to the rise in population of novice players will be through more mainstream advertising and exposure, not industry rags.

[crockpot]

anyone else who has been at ub for a year or more...have you noticed the game drying up lately? i remember around the time of the world series, when the first regular PLO high games were going on, they were incredibly juicy. even the limit hold 'em and stud games, though not as loose as party's, were quite playable.

i think the fish are all swimming to party, for reasons we know of. hopefully ub will fight to get some of them back.

[scrub]

The PLO dried up in the past semester. It was amazing when that .25/.50 used to run with AceofKings, Crybaby, and other assorted idiots. Not sure when it stopped running, but I made out like a bandit in it before I stopped playing for a few weeks to do schoolwork.

NLHE--hard to say. The 50 buyin tables seem to have gotten tougher, but the 100s seem softer and filled with short buying morons. My friend who plays higher claims that the 200 and 400 tables have tightened up way too much to be worthwhile lately. He moved almost exclusively to party, except when the 5/10 NLHE run.

Low-limit. I moved over to limit in the past three weeks or so just to try something different. The shorthanded players at 1-2 and 2-4 are abysmally bad. 2-4 ring games in general are pretty soft. 3-6 seems to play tight weak with a few morons. I've never played limit at another site, though, so I'd assume these games are "tough."

-scrub