[Closed] Poker Stars or FTp

definitely ftp, not that big of a difference between the sites but being able to take advantage of all the stuff pokerstrategy offers is a huge plus

IF you play NL10 or beyond than stars is a almost a must.
Check out my post in this thread https://www.pokerstrategy.com/forum/thread.php?threadid=116897 , I took some time off and done calculations for myself.

Hope it will help.

@ Sinnology . thnx a lot man.. ur calculation makes a lot of sense.. as i was aware of Stars stellar reward system i myself was interested to move to Stars..

neways now i am more confident. i guess i have decided

thnx a lot man

Glad I could help!
Good luck

isn't FTP's rake lower for micro stakes? and if your playing NL10, unless your going to put in something like 50k+ hands/month, i think 27% rakeback would be a much better option for you.

unless you can constantly make at least Goldstar on stars, i'd say stick to FTP, plus that way u can access more articles and video's with your pokerstraqtegy membership

Originally posted by AlCaTrAzzALZ
isn't FTP's rake lower for micro stakes? and if your playing NL10, unless your going to put in something like 50k+ hands/month, i think 27% rakeback would be a much better option for you.

unless you can constantly make at least Goldstar on stars, i'd say stick to FTP, plus that way u can access more articles and video's with your pokerstraqtegy membership

this imo. stellar program sucks. it only adds like 8% rakeback last time i checked.. i think its like around 12% rakeback for bronze.. i could however be completely wrong about both those figures.. but that's what i remember the results were from my calculations like 4 months ago.. I've payed over $200 rake at stars so far and i haven't seen a $1 of rakeback yet since you need to have alot of FPP before its profitable to cash in..

I ve done some calculations on that link, but you can easily see it for yourself here : http://www.pokertableratings.com/poker-rake-analysis/no-limit-hold%27em