Pokerstars vs FT

    • spit22
      spit22
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.11.2008 Posts: 309
      which one you prefer and why ?

      i find pokerstars to have easier competition at lower limits but i don't like the interface so much. Also if a player disconnects his hands afterwards are not folded automatically afterwards which sucks. The good thing is they have the local time adjustment..

      FT is my favourite! when they add the time adjustment it will rock :)

      also i find FT to have better tourney/prize structures variety and they write how much 1st player wins etc.. pokerstars gives percentage which i find annoying
  • 32 replies
    • Joronamo
      Joronamo
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.10.2008 Posts: 649
      Pokerstars > Full Tilt Poker. The only thing FTP has over Stars is the bet slider, weekly rakeback and higher traffic in the high stakes games IMO.
    • SalamiandCheese
      SalamiandCheese
      Bronze
      Joined: 16.07.2008 Posts: 569
      If you have rakeback at FT then staying there is the best option unless u have a chance at supernova status. Stars changed their VIP program so it's better for micro stakes but it still doesn't compare to rakeback at the lower stakes. And yeah, the bet slider sucks and the text is too small at Stars, both of which annoy me. Pics of ugly people, babies, and stupid little doggies irritate me too. :f_mad:
    • andyb43
      andyb43
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.07.2008 Posts: 903
      FT has the worst connectivity of any site that I play on....therefore Stars
    • amplifyd
      amplifyd
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.08.2009 Posts: 1,769
      Originally posted by andyb43
      FT has the worst connectivity of any site that I play on....therefore Stars
      I don't think this really adds much to the argument tbh - just because it has worst connectivity to you, doesn't mean it will to the OP. Just seems a slightly dumb point to make.
    • spit22
      spit22
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.11.2008 Posts: 309
      connectivity is great for me at FT.. rakeback is good also..And to get supernova at stars is crazy, i like my life :P
    • kubernetes
      kubernetes
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.02.2008 Posts: 34
      My two cents:

      Pokerstars, great customer service. Ft, awful. This is specially importan if you have bad luck enough to be associated with a fraudulent player for god know what reason. If that happens to you, forget about the right to appeal.

      If you play the micros, you are paying less rake in pokerstars even if you have rakeback on FT. But to be honest, I havent done the math, just followed the advice of more knowledgabe people.

      I have also had ridicuous conectivity issues with FT playing from wireless internet. Same conection and it runs fine in stars.

      However, Id appreciate someone made the math comparing the rake in stars to FT (27% rakeback).
    • randomdonk
      randomdonk
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.08.2009 Posts: 1,984
      i will never get how can anyone like full tilts shitty soft more than stars
    • kubernetes
      kubernetes
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.02.2008 Posts: 34
      Originally posted by kubernetes

      If you play the micros, you are paying less rake in pokerstars even if you have rakeback on FT. But to be honest, I havent done the math, just followed the advice of more knowledgabe people.
      I'd ike to correct myself here. What I posted is true for cash games. However, the rake structure for SnGs, at least the 6-max, is slightly better in FT if you have rakeback.
    • HannesNL
      HannesNL
      Bronze
      Joined: 18.11.2008 Posts: 4,590
      It is 27% rakeback, plus midyear and endyear bonusses which can add up to $600 each 6 months, full tilt points, and iron medals.

      So rakeback FTP = like rakeback stars if you achieved sn status
    • andyb43
      andyb43
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.07.2008 Posts: 903
      Originally posted by amplifyd
      Originally posted by andyb43
      FT has the worst connectivity of any site that I play on....therefore Stars
      I don't think this really adds much to the argument tbh - just because it has worst connectivity to you, doesn't mean it will to the OP. Just seems a slightly dumb point to make.
      How can this point not add to the argument? What is the point of higher rackback or whatever if it disconnects during a vital hand and $$ is lost?

      Would you play on a site that disconnects a hell-of-alot?

      You may note from the thread that I am not the only poster with this problem at FT.

      We were ASKED for opinions. There I conclude your response is er..slightly dumb.
    • 1wayman
      1wayman
      Bronze
      Joined: 08.09.2008 Posts: 430
      I also have connectivity problems with my wireless which sucks alot especially because i play Hu sngs and it has costed me in this month at least 10 buyins total... I am seriously thinking of moving elsewhere grrrr.....
      Also FT support sucks. Stars is great.
      FT has super turbo sng, stars dont, so plus for FT, FT doesnt have DoN so mins for FT...
      Rake on stars in micro cash games is lower than in FT with rakeback included!!!!
      FT has max of 16 tables, so forget about 24 tabling cash games.
      But for some weird reason i like FT software more. ALthough overall stars is much better than FT
    • laimonas123
      laimonas123
      Bronze
      Joined: 24.03.2009 Posts: 26
      I like FTP icon :D
    • Waiboy
      Waiboy
      Bronze
      Joined: 18.09.2008 Posts: 4,877
      Originally posted by laimonas123
      I like FTP icon :D
      +1 And it is an important consideration often missed.
    • MikeyH
      MikeyH
      Bronze
      Joined: 08.10.2008 Posts: 181
      Originally posted by Waiboy
      Originally posted by laimonas123
      I like FTP icon :D
      +1 And it is an important consideration often missed.
      The Icon is good, but I prefer PokerStars positioning on the start menu.
    • shurshka
      shurshka
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.11.2009 Posts: 22
      Can anyone please explain, why is rakeback at PS Supernova acceptable? How do you calculate it? It's still not $$$ rakeback...or is it?

      Thx
    • advola
      advola
      Bronze
      Joined: 24.06.2009 Posts: 361
      I hate stars mainly becouse of the blind stracture!!
      From 25/50 to 50/100 100% raise changes the game alot
      and i realy dont like it
      they have more time for blind but the blinds raises are just just
      put you on push fold when a blind ago you had 20bb!

      And second is it to slow!! and that even make the blinds higher
      becouse less hands per hour (in SNG) are played and blinds go up
      100% . yak!
    • davidgod
      davidgod
      Bronze
      Joined: 20.12.2008 Posts: 1,675
      for me I choose ft
      because firstly my country block ps website because it is gambling site.

      but ft is running smooth maybe because ft focus on poker sport and learning from pro lol :D


      and it is very hard to take the money out from ps. but ft is ok.
      so i just play ft
    • RjD4poker
      RjD4poker
      Basic
      Joined: 02.05.2007 Posts: 7
      Originally posted by davidgod
      for me I choose ft
      because firstly my country block ps website because it is gambling site.
      Maybe your country block PS because it doesn't pay the leaders enough to get the licence !?! :rolleyes:

      Why else would they allow one site and not the other? All those sites are the same, they all promote gambling by people who can't afford it.
    • Justin37
      Justin37
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.07.2009 Posts: 445
      I played them both

      Cash game on FTP and tourney on PStars

      FTP >
      Countless disconnection while playing 0.10/0.25,
      i stay there coz of more fish during HHours and rakeback.
      Customer service, wow need twice email and 2 weeks to get what i want


      Pokerstars>
      Play micro tournament so many fish :)
      Software was great
      Customer service was oveer the top

      SO? Play both if u can :)
    • 1
    • 2