FCP Bob 1,321 Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 Good article on the trend towards sites trying to protect recreational players from the "sharks". The War on Winning Online Poker Players Success of skill-based segregation policies trends toward transparency. Link to post Share on other sites
David_Sklansky 1,903 Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 I think this is a really genius idea. In 2005. Given that almost everyone who still plays is at least sophisticated enough to read forums and shit, and the vast majority of break even and losing players think they are on the verge of going pro, I'm sure the copy and paste 2+2 geeks will enjoy playing on sites and posting hand histories that label them as losers who the house is locking in a stall like veal calves, protecting them from the wolves and save them for itself. I half hope I'm wrong, though, because it's a really good idea in principle. Link to post Share on other sites
AmScray 355 Posted May 15, 2014 Share Posted May 15, 2014 Just sent a telegram to the captain of the Titanic, warning him about an iceberg. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
DiamondDixie 12 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 Poker Host was banning winning players on Merge too. It's very likely Host policy as the blamed Merge and now they're blaming EPN. Since they did it on both networks I tend to believe it's a Host decision not network. If you use Bodog/Bovada as an example they are the only site who seems to have successfully protected the fish without losing the winning players. They are by far the biggest volume site that still services the US.since the anonymous player implementation they have ease on a few things but overall they put things in place and kept them that way. Merge has been a ridiculous example of one dumb decision after another. There are baboons in the zoo who have better business sense than the people running Merge. They try one dumb thing after another but it's all in an effort to protect rec players yet having unlimited reentry MTTs with long registration/reentry periodS only causes fish (and break even regs) to go broke fast. Thus they try something else instead of fixing the core problem. Winning Network, which isn't mentioned, should have been the network to grow instead of Bovada but they try to play on both teams. They try to satisfy the regs and protect the fish and do a terrible job of both. Bottom line seems only Calvin got it right and of course as usual PokerStars does what they always have, make good logical business decisions, provide great customer service, fast payouts and great games with no dumb gimmicks they own the lions share of the business. It's never ceased to amaze me that Stars provide a winng business model but no other site has the sense to copy it. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now