Moving on FullTilt...

    • Shakalis
      Shakalis
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.05.2010 Posts: 45
      Hello friends ,

      I wanted to make change , and now i am interested to move from pokerstars to Fulltilt ... why to fulltilt ? Becouse i am 24table FR grinder and i builded from 50 to 300$ BR and now i started to think i need rakeback... i wanted onli to ask whats the max number of tables on FT can play ? and maybe what are your thougts on this view ? :f_grin:

      Thank you.
  • 16 replies
    • nathanrenard
      nathanrenard
      Bronze
      Joined: 09.02.2009 Posts: 816
      Well max tables (if requested) is 16 tables at Full Tilt, rakeback can be awesome for a 16 table grinder there, and lowering you're tables by 25% will actually make you do some adjuments to your own game.
    • NightFrostaSS
      NightFrostaSS
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.10.2008 Posts: 5,255
      or you can just play rush and get 1k hands/hr quite easily
    • fuzzyfish
      fuzzyfish
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.01.2010 Posts: 862
      Can somebody explain how is 27% rakeback great?
    • OZSA
      OZSA
      Bronze
      Joined: 18.05.2009 Posts: 804
      If you dont like 27% you will prolly dont like the fact that 27% is only for sng/mtt, FR cash games u will get around 15-22% and maybe in SH with 40vpip you get 27%.
      Shakalis im just moving from FT to stars, I was 1.5year on FT. if you have a BR of 300$ you should stay on stars. take a look at this.

      so i guess u play NL10. if you do, dont ever go FT for NL10 :) hope this helps.

      http://www.pokertableratings.com/poker-rake-analysis/no-limit-hold%27em
    • fuzzyfish
      fuzzyfish
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.01.2010 Posts: 862
      Sry for trolling some more, but for me the immense popularity of FT (and Stars too) is an absolute mystery. Small sites have better rakeback deals AND fishier opponents. Despite that there's a massive amount of players that prefer to play at FT and Stars.

      Any reasons for that besides all the cool Pros there and tv-commercials? I'm trying to understand.
    • evertonroar
      evertonroar
      Bronze
      Joined: 26.06.2009 Posts: 737
      better software, more traffic
    • w34z3l
      w34z3l
      Coach
      Coach
      Joined: 03.08.2009 Posts: 13,295
      Originally posted by fuzzyfish

      Any reasons for that besides all the cool Pros there and tv-commercials?
      Sure....

      Multitabling is easier - depending on your resolution some sites don't let you resize windows anywhere near as small, everest poker for example.

      Some rooms max you out at 4 tables. E.g Bodog.

      Some table layouts make for extremely awkward HUD placements.

      FT and PS have an easier to use bet sliders than other sites, aswell as a nice selection of table themes and avatars (FT)

      Not to mention table selection is way easier. You can get on 8 CG tables at FT usually within under 1 minute. I'll be very impressed if you can do the same on ipoker without joining a bunch of new tables or crappy short-stack infested ones.

      cliffs - despite having the occasional whale, there aren't nearly as many games and the software often blows.
    • EmanuelC16
      EmanuelC16
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2010 Posts: 13,897
      Originally posted by fuzzyfish
      Small sites have better rakeback deals
      Really? Which one's?
    • fuzzyfish
      fuzzyfish
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.01.2010 Posts: 862
      Originally posted by EmanuelC16
      Originally posted by fuzzyfish
      Small sites have better rakeback deals
      Really? Which one's?
      I'm not here to advertise :) but there are many offers out there. Usually they offer 30% plus rakeraces, which makes over 40%.

      to: w34z3l

      I agree that Stars has best software I've ever used, although I'm not willing to sacrifice around 20-30% (rakeback + fish) of my profits to use it.

      About traffic - sure theres more traffic, but it's a nitty one. Playing NL25 on Stars is a devastating experience if you're not jumping tables every 10 minutes.
    • w34z3l
      w34z3l
      Coach
      Coach
      Joined: 03.08.2009 Posts: 13,295
      Originally posted by fuzzyfish

      to: w34z3l

      I agree that Stars has best software I've ever used, although I'm not willing to sacrifice around 20-30% (rakeback + fish) of my profits to use it.

      About traffic - sure theres more traffic, but it's a nitty one. Playing NL25 on Stars is a devastating experience if you're not jumping tables every 10 minutes.
      Yup. I get what you are saying totally.

      Although imo stars 25nl is pretty fishy if you know how to table select properly, and it doesn't necessarily involve constantly jumping tables.

      I have played on plenty of out of the way sites for nice RB deals and always eventually go back to a bigger site. I even had an unofficial 60% RB deal on ipoker, but the software is so retarded I'd prefer to play on FTP any day.

      In the case of ipoker I actually figured that I was losing a lot of profits from the time spent sitting around waiting to join tables. Not to mention ipoker is generally nit infested imo, way worse than stars.

      It's the same with the smaller sites imo. I guess it's all a tradeoff between value and playability. But if you ever reach the higher stakes it certainly seems like FT or PS would be the better places to go, purely for game selection.

      Maybe it depends on your style too, if most of your value comes from RB, obviously RB is crucial.

      Kinda curious though, which site has the best RB/fish combo in your opinion?
    • EmanuelC16
      EmanuelC16
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2010 Posts: 13,897
      Originally posted by fuzzyfish
      Originally posted by EmanuelC16
      Originally posted by fuzzyfish
      Small sites have better rakeback deals
      Really? Which one's?
      I'm not here to advertise :) but there are many offers out there. Usually they offer 30% plus rakeraces, which makes over 40%.

      to: w34z3l

      I agree that Stars has best software I've ever used, although I'm not willing to sacrifice around 20-30% (rakeback + fish) of my profits to use it.

      About traffic - sure theres more traffic, but it's a nitty one. Playing NL25 on Stars is a devastating experience if you're not jumping tables every 10 minutes.
      Well, 4bb/hh and 1k hands/h + 30% RB are better than 200 hands/h at 8bb/hh and 40% RB. On Stars and FTP if you put in enough volume or play mid-high stakes you get almost 50% RB AND you have traffic. Smaller sites are OK for non-multitabling players. For multitabling traffic is very important.
    • Hahaownedlolz
      Hahaownedlolz
      Bronze
      Joined: 24.04.2009 Posts: 1,755
      For me the only reason is really the beyond imaginable poor software of other sites. They make millions of dollars a year and can't hire some decent programmers and designers? :f_mad:


      A real shame to be honest. I've played nl25 sh on stars and it's not that hard really if you don't play standard (bad)tag atleast since about everyone does that. You do really have to table select for fishes.

      If other sites had somewhat decent software i wouldn't hesitate to try them out.
    • poldinhoo
      poldinhoo
      Bronze
      Joined: 18.02.2009 Posts: 57
      Originally posted by EmanuelC16
      Originally posted by fuzzyfish
      Small sites have better rakeback deals
      Really? Which one's?
      nothing unusual..I have a 35% rakeback deal at 888 network..+ cashback there..so its way more than 35% in total..
    • fuzzyfish
      fuzzyfish
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.01.2010 Posts: 862
      to: w34z3l

      I currently have a nice deal at Microgaming, although I don't like the growing popularity of Anonymous tables.

      to: poldinhoo

      that seems like a nice deal, i've heard 888 is one of the fishiest room out there but their vip system sucks. where did you get the deal, 2+2 forum?
    • poldinhoo
      poldinhoo
      Bronze
      Joined: 18.02.2009 Posts: 57
      yope, it is very fishy..i used to be a breakeven reg at NL5 at fulltilt..moved to 888 two weeks ago and now i am like 25BI up on NL6..and i am already on NL10..

      VIP system sucks indeed..i have a private affiliate deal..
    • CRI4BRA
      CRI4BRA
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.02.2008 Posts: 147
      what good does 15% plus in rake if you dont find tables to play at

      if youre in mostly for the rakeback volume is the most important factor and not the rakeback% bacause volume means hands/ hour played

      at smaller sites yeah you got your 40% instead of 27% , but now you have to play . open up your tables at your limit/game/ and sometimes you find 3 tables at which 2 players sit out each of them. no selection , these 3 are all you can play

      in the same time stars or fulltilt action is heavy, you can find like 15-20 tables at same limit as previous and you can play (choose, switch tables during play etc)

      same thing for sng, mtt

      smallish sites , they can only increase the rake % , but thats not nearly enough , like i said rakeback means you have to make volume, and they are too small to make volume on them, making 40% seems like a 'fata morgana'

      gl