Poker Discussion
|
|
Please help support pocketfives by using our links when choosing to download a new site!
CarbonPoker · Full Tilt · Cake Poker · PokerStars · Ultimate Bet · Players Only · Bodog
Look there are going to be things that are unpopular in online poker. But this move is necessary for online poker. From most of the card rooms standpoint they need to protect their player base. It has become all too common to have people recruiting from other sites in a massive way.
Party Poker used to be flat out ridiculous.
This is an easy fix. Each site should look at having a part in their application where people can go to chat. Separate of the tables. I know that everyone will complain but sites lose millions of dollars unnecessarily by having chat at the tables. If you guys can't see why they would protect themselves from this you have lost your minds.
In the mean time I would be happy to set up 2-3 sites with chat formats for people to log on to. If anyone is interested in helping me with this project let me know.
|
|
|
|
|
Im with wowswift here. What sites are they losing players to? Maybe UB should just worry about being the best site possible. This is foolish on their part. Ive stopped playing on UB because I like a couple other sites better. Now I will stop watching there too.
|
|
|
|
beanie
(United States)
6,274
Posts.
Joined
01-20-2005.
02-01-2006 6:19 PM
-
In reply to
|
|
|
I am not UB staff (currently there are at least a few people at UB laughing their asses off at the suggestion that I am). And can we just quit it with the drama. For gods sake its just observer chat. How about a little perspective.
What I am saying is they don't lose players-they lose OBSERVERS!
f ME
|
|
|
|
|
jw
(United States)
197
Posts.
Joined
03-06-2005.
02-01-2006 6:21 PM
-
In reply to
|
|
|
|
<but no one playing 15-30 consistently leaves the site for this reason>
- I would agree...bonuses are not a big a factor to the middle and higher stakes player.
<truthfully the people that would leave aren't that valuable to the site in the first place>
For UB to take this step, they must have some incremental value.
Personally, I don't chat much, but to me this will just alienate some players for marginal gain.
|
|
|
|
ok explains u'r attitude then... :P
|
|
|
|
but beanie, i can't skeet at your table and bring you luck. this hurts me :(
|
|
|
|
|
beanie
(United States)
6,274
Posts.
Joined
01-20-2005.
02-01-2006 6:27 PM
-
In reply to
|
|
|
Right. I have a bad attitude because I am explaining to you the reason. Oh my god. I am so horrible.
Just because you don't agree with the reason doesn't mean its not valid. There are many instances where a democracy is not the best way to handle a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
beanie
(United States)
6,274
Posts.
Joined
01-20-2005.
02-01-2006 6:30 PM
-
In reply to
|
|
|
IT IS NOT MARGINAL GAIN IT IS MILLIONS POSSIBLY GAZILLIONS. You might just have to trust the beanman on this one that there might be things that you don't know. This is not just bonus related. The incentives being offered are out of control on all sites. Sites need to protect their player base.
|
|
|
|
|
beanie
(United States)
6,274
Posts.
Joined
01-20-2005.
02-01-2006 6:31 PM
-
In reply to
|
|
|
|
I wasn't referring to people leaving for bonuses I was saying the 15-30 player won't leave a site because their buddy can't say "hi" to him on chat.
|
|
|
I am trying to understand the issues here but, i get more poker spam in the mail, email, pop ups than i ever see at the tbls. I am a long time UB player and have many people I enjoy playing with and watching and chatting when they are on other tbls. I for one think it's a risk they have to take. The traffic UB has been getting has jumped at least 25% with the changes players want. this is not one that the majority of UB players will. I know of at least 60 in my buddy list that will not like it.
Hazy,
Also, would this not open the door for other wise honest players to "cheat a little" when they resort to useing IM of some kind to chat. like I have AA, when your friend is in the sb and you are in the bb and its folded to him. I right now do not have im but this will force me to get it.
|
|
|
|
|
beanie
(United States)
6,274
Posts.
Joined
01-20-2005.
02-01-2006 6:41 PM
-
In reply to
|
|
|
They might not like it but they ain't gonna leave. (input random boycotting thread here)
When a site spends millions to get players they don't won't some random donkey stealing their players at no cost.
Not to mention TEC scammer and beggars.
|
|
|
Well there is a way to apease both,, How about leave observer chat,, and get a decent bonus. Trust me, making players mad isnt going to solve the bonus problem UB has.UB has made some good strides with tourneys and sitngos lately. Then they turn around and wiz off the regulars.
How many people stick around a site when they cant be social. That is one of the big advantages to online poker. Friends and site members supporting each other.
|
|
|
|
I agree with beanie on this. As long as UB doesn't use the lobby chat, like pokerroom's. And as long as observers can chat with me at a FT(the few times i make one) im good with the sng and cash not having observer chat.
|
|
|
|
The problem with UB is that they don't think how their actions will affect players before they initiate a change. It seems that they always jump into a change without testing its effect on its players(customers). Many of the suggestions listed in this post would work fine without totally banning observer chat on all cash games and sngs.
|
|
|
|
|
Sortable Rankings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|