blonde poker forum

It's amazing how powerful Sharkscope is, & yet a goodly portion of the player-base has never even heard of it, does not know what it does, or how it does it.

9 months ago, 888 took the decision to forbid it's use on their site. Sharkscope weren't best pleased, but nobody died.

That decision is, broadly, explained here, in a piece dated June 2013.......

http://calvinayre.com/2013/06/28/poker/888-poker-blocks-sharkscope-tracking-site/


At around the same time, or maybe a little while earlier, 'Stars, who tend to get things right more often than not, changed their set up, & forced Sharkscope to adopt an Opt-In system, see.....



http://pokerfuse.com/news/poker-room-news/tourney-tracking-sites-go-to-full-opt-in-as-pokerstars-data-crackdown-continues/


More......

I was reminded of this a few days whilst playing Online, Next Door.

I was playing some small-ball PLO8 SNG's, & a kid made a bad call (it was bad) & got there. Billy Big-Gob - who, as you will have guessed, lost the hand -  then relentlessly abused the bloke, even copying his Stats into the chat box.  The hapless "fish" was on several Tables during the evening, & though Billy The Gob was no longer playing, he pursued him from table to table.

I wrote via PM to the lad who had been abused the next day, to give him a bit of moral support. He never replied, & he's not been seen on the Tables since.

Maybe he is too sensitive. Maybe he just does not feel comfortable, when he sits down each night for his bit of poker fun & relaxation, once the kids are in bed & the wife is watching Brookside, at the thought of being shown up & humiliated in front of other players. We are not all keyboard warriors, many of us play poker to get away from the woes of our daily lives.

Do you think he is an exception, or that this sort of thing has an effect - even if small - on the poker economy?

Online Poker needs to take a look at itself if it is to flourish. And that is in all our interests.   

On the "chat-box abuse" front, DTD have tried to do their bit, too, by monitoring the cash Games, & offering "real-name" play. I've no idea if it has been a success, but I hope it has.

The Sharkscope debate took place Next Door about 6 months ago, & what was most remarkable was the number of players who did not know how Sharkscope worked.

Most, from what I could see, were against it's use (the site forbids third party software which aids tracking), but many of them were openly hostile to the site for selling the info to Sharkscope, or providing Sharkscope with the data. 

In case anyone here thinks the same, sites do NOT sell the info to Sharkscope, nor do they provide the data. Sharkscope simply collect the info by data-mining, & then, after processing & collating it, sells it to Users. They do not seek the "approval" of the Site to do this, they just take it.

888 have now closed that door, & the mighty & magnificent 'Stars have made it opt-in ONLY.

Should other sites do the same, if so, which of the two options, the 888 route, or the 'Stars route?

I should add that I use Sharkscope every day, not for Table Selection purposes, but simply, when I see a player I don't recognize, I want a head start on knowing if he is profitable or not, as this assists me in deciding how best to play against him. If Sharkscope did not exist, it would not bother me though, as I'd not be at a disadvantage to anyone, we'd all be in the same boat.

I'm interested in your views on this matter generally.

I've no idea what the correct answer is, but I do think it behoves us all to remember that recreational poker players are far & away the biggest & most important segment of the poker economy. So the answer does matter - to them.

I don't like tracking software, mainly because I don't have the skills or the inclination to make good use of it.

I think the main effect of tracking software, especially HUDs, is to shift the balance of power in favour of those who are tech-savvy enough to use it well.

Is that good for poker? No. (imo)  

Hey mr tikay!

As I said on the post a while back, I really like sharkscope to track my own progress predominantly. It's also good to check out players I'm playing against in mtt.s or hu sit and gos.

Remember during the last topic people were saying it gives you an unfair advantage, can't say I agree with that in the slightest. At the end of the day it doesn't,to tell you how they play simply if they are profitable or not.

Abuse in  a chat box is the real issue. It just so happens in this instance sharkscope was being used to berate some one. I agree with the new rules brought into deal with those who insult others over sharkscope.

I doubt tit would make the player want 2 stop playing. I had it a month a ago, a reg called me down really light, started having a go at me in the chatbox which went onto him telling me his sharkscope was better than mine lol

It happens, the real issue is chat box warriors.

It clearly is an advantage, but it's almost impossible to have any interest in poker and do the tinniest bit of research to find out about all the software available, so if you don't know, you don't care.

I can't work out what you mean Mond.

As a guy who has played far too many relatively high stake stt's over the past 8 years for my own good i always wondered why sites ever allowed SS to record their info if it is that easy to block the ability for SS to record it like 888 seem to have done.  It adds nothing to the site's bottom line in the slightest it just allows 'pros' to win quicker and the sites 'churn' less rake out of every £100 deposited by 'rec's'.  Its massively in any site's interest to block SS use as pro's who gain the most from it will still play anyway.

I mean I'm sure I'm being levelled, but anyways.

Google software for poker, I'm sure sharkscope will soon pop up, so I don't feel bad for people who are unaware, there just lazy or don't care.

But as I said it's clearly an advantage.

In before page 28.

They care if they get abused because of it, Ray, even if they don't  understand where the info arose from.

too harsh. many recreational players aren't comfortable with software, downloading it, using it, analysing it

Its not they are lazy, don't care....the existence of it puts them off playing more


this is about growing the market, arresting the rate of decline of the market etc. Perception is everything to attracting those players

I see what you mean now.

I'm not lazy, and I do care. But I want to play poker for fun, not spend hours using electronic programmes to crunch numbers.

It should obv be banned, no doubt, as arbboy says it only benefits the pros and as he said they'd obv play anyways.

I care about not doing my bollocks this week at Cheltenham, I'm still going to punt tho coz it's fun, and I know who has the edge.

The information being on the website for people to search for is just the tip of iceberg unfortunately.

I mean, it's really not too harsh, and I'll tell you why. I'm the abs worst with software, I always ask someone to do it for me, but sharkscope is the easiest tool to work, it's just point and click, that is it.

There is nothing to download, it's just a website, it has filters were you have point and click to scroll, and type, am sorry if it sounds harsh but it couldn't be easier.

Thing is it does take hours, I play 12 hours then spend 2 hours on sharkscope searching and noteing on 200 people, I do it coz I don't think many others are doing it and I wanna be the better then them and I think it's worthwhile.

Not with you DimTom, what is the rest of the iceberg. Ice excepted, obv.

think you should have sent a pm to Billy big Gob rather than to  to the lad who had been abused

yes i seen it many times its a familiar pattern player loses hand obviously he was entitled to win it so vent on victor
if there was no shark scope graphs he would still be venting who knows might be quoting Hud stats instead to go with the DIAGF

I use it but not often once a year collate my own stats and compare to previous year/ years as a sort of retrospective normally Decembers or January
Only very occasionally do i look up another player its mostly when i witness an off center line taken by a player on same table and then am curious  about there stats
other than that might look when on ft bubble to gauge how significant any pay jumps are to that player and or how experienced that player is

i think it does put new ( losing ) players off

think stars have it right should be you have to opt in for your stats to be shown

but then i also think all HUDS should be banned

Spending 45 minutes a day exercising is even more worthwhile. Do you do that Ray?

People blatantly cheating, people chatting on Skype, people data mining, people multi accounting, HEM/PT4, etc etc etc.

How many Gyms are open at 2am :P

That takes far more effort, and I don't care about being "healthy", and I don't get the comparison at all.

I know Sharkscope is easy, but what about the bloke who gets in from work, puts the kids to bed, and fires up two tables while the Mrs is watching Eastenders

I know 100% of guys like this are put off by feeling at a disadvantage, made to feel small in chat-boxes "(i can see you are a losing player" or worse) and have no desire to put this effort in

I know lots of pros/semi-pros, keen regs on here (the core of the posters) will decry that view, but it is  a deterrent to recreational pllayer numbers

Your rational for using tracking software was that it's worthwhile.

You don't want to exercise even though it's worthwhile.

I don't want to use tracking software even though it's worthwhile.

ultimately its massively profit draining from the site itself from my previous post.  If you add the above post in its even more draining to the sites volume/profit.  I don't think online poker will ever get close to the levels it did in the mid 2000's when i was raking in excess of £20k a month and i don't even play online now bar the dtd sat's for live events.  If people like me are not playing anymore because the games too hard god knows how hard casual guys think the game is/how quickly they lose their money.

I already said it should be banned ?

But your point has nothing to do with sharkscope, because it will happen either. I'm sure I've had every possible level of abuse from poker, from both recs and pros, lol pros.

Tikay, you have the power to chat ban him, so that is what you should do.  You should have had the power to stop him before he went to other tables.  Sky definitely has issues with the amount of personal abuse that goes on.  I can laugh it off, but definitely think you have issues there.

Once you sort that out, you can report the user to sharkscope where they have the power to ban him too.

FWIW, I rarely use Sharkscope for anything other than tracking myself.  

I went to the gym for two months, I got pneumonia...

I used sharkscope for two months, I got paranoia...

fair polint

Lets try this: The online industry/sites/networks are more set up to cater for the wishes of the" Pros" than they are the recreational players

It is in their power to block sharkscope/other software and be far harsher in chat abuse yet they don't

As the base of winners declines, and is not replaced by new blood (true now) then the rate of decline will intensify...

so the industry is helping itself eat itself

Call


A Geordie with pneumonia??? CALLLLL.

Does Stars care about pros ?

There is no competition, so they could do pretty much anything they want and I'd still play on Stars, they hold $1 tournaments to get 10k new customers, the site goes haywire and regs get screwed but none of them are going anywhere.

I posted in a thread the other day about having timers in live poker, I hate live poker coz it's far too slow, that didn't stop me giving an unbiased response. I've said it should be banned, yes it's unfair. But no I don't feel bad taking advantage of it when others don't know about it.

I'm pretty sure that Sharkscope terms of use specifically say that the data should not be used in this way. On iPad, playing poker and waiting for Jeeves so can't check (cba really)

Have you got me one of those T-shirts yet fool.

I am sure this is true. 

agree with the sky chat box abuse  comment  my perception is it much worse there than i poker i think its because sky nurtures newer players many of whom are striving to improve  and feel aggrieved when there hard work does not pay off  on every hand

Questions: do poker sites have the technical ability to  stop shark scope from data mining or is just the threat of legal action ?
  

I don't keep records anymore, so I I find it a useful tool to keep tabs on how much I'm losing lol.

I didn't make the run good t-shirt, but I will ask Tommy Bingham to get you one!!!

Sod all the debate. I am tilted by the title of the thread. Unless, of course it is a play on words and the scope does in deed belong to the shark that is scoping us.... So to speak.

Not it's correct.  Site belongs to Bruce:

(http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/mhellrin/finding-nemo1Shark.jpg)

I'm with you. I'm so annoyed, I've only read the title of the thread and your post.

Farce!

I am still shocked that the sites with exception of 888/stars haven't put the boot into sharkscope and gone all legal on their proverbial asses. It is absolutely terrible for the site/ every player to have a player abused in this way and it is way more profitable for the pros to not lose the abused player than seeing how much profit each individual player had.

The abuser should be under no illusion that if he continues with this behaviour that he will be no longer welcome on the site IMO. Maybe with castration to make sure they don't reproduce as an added extra.

From a personal point of view I rarely use sharkscope often have a quick glance through the leaderboards to see who is doing the winning and have a quick look at my tracking software to see what they are doing right/differently. Using HEM/ poker tracker is far more powerful way of studying your opponents, just because they are losing doesn't tell me why they are losing or how to adjust to them. Finding leaks/ exploitive play is a much more useful and damaging to the recreational players than the fact they are simply losing.

Even if the sites blocked it people would find a way around it. Just like  the under the radar pokertableratings that still exist. Better to keep it legal and open for everyone rather than giving it to a select few. Conversely the select few using these sites can't go about abusing people in chat, so i guess that is an added bonus. I don't really see the issue with sharkscope, if it wasn't there the arseholes would sitill find ways of being an arsehole. Opt in from stars is the best way around it. OPR is opt in too. I believe these changes occured way before last year but dont quote me on it.

How do sharks cope anyway?

I believe Rammstein can help you out here with their song on the matter:

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GP0_MNj8f1Q

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haifisch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haifisch)

Correct.

I've never seen evidence that they enforce it though.

Well they darned well should

Tikay, if this was me in the same situation, for starters I wouldn't be able to help but take the mickey out of the billy big gob, or whatever his name is. Undoubtedly, he himself is not doing too well in the game, or if he is, it's most likely due to a heater rather than being particularly good. Indeed, he is ruining the game for others. This, I feel, is the issue here, and not the use of sharkscope. I have no problem with tracking software, and personally don't like this negative stigma that is being created around it. It's not a holy grail to winning loads of money by any means, to some it can be the opposite, but this is not a tracking software debate. If sharkscope didn't exist, these chat box warriors would find another way to abuse the person that's just won a pot from them. These people will both exist and be detrimental to the game, until they are made aware that their behavior is unacceptable by the professional community. I'm 100% for these people being called out, at least by screen name, for this sort of thing.

For what it's worth, I have no problem with sharkscope. I don't actually use it at all, and haven't opted in to it, but I have no problem with other people using it on me or others at the table. If I see this sort of thing going on, then I will absolutely get involved and defend the guy being abused. After all, he's done nothing wrong but enjoy playing the game, and who the hell are we to detract from that.

Moderators can be made aware of the guy's behavior, but I really don't think they will be that bothered to do anything about it. For the most part, it seems, sites haven't properly twigged that every time a player is upset by a situation by this, they lose their custom, their rake, and gradually their player base will diminish to a point where they will make considerably less money than before. Perhaps instead they should be called out by screen name. If he's looking at sharkscope, he probably at least views the forums, and by embarrassing him in this way I would hope he would see how bad his behavior is.

Is it necessarily bad for recreational customer? I agree you should be able to opt-out/in but pros and recs alike need to be able to track how theyre doing.

A losing player deserves to be able to see how much money he's done playing online.

It's bad for the rec customer and the site itself.  The big losing rec loses quicker as he can be bum hunted more easily and quickly by the site 'pros' who dont have to play him numerous games first to know he is a fish.  Secondly for the poker site itself its bad for them as they get far less churn from the 'rec's' deposit with him losing even quicker than he would without sharkscope.  I have been amazed for years why sites have allowed sharkscope to use their data like they have even though in the early days sharkscope assisted me massively in finding truely awful high stakes stt players from greece/cyprus/spain who had roi's of -30/40% at £200-£500 stts.

Agreed but over the years it has made the process much quicker and killed the online game so much quicker than most online pros would have imagined back in say 2008. (obviously not just sharkscope but training sites/data mining/collection) That's fact.  This has made rec's lose quicker and the sites make less rake for their marketing spend per pound deposited by losing players.  This is turn has made gaming companies less inclined to spend their marketing budgets recruiting poker players and more likely to try to attract casino/sports bettors who they get to keep their losses rather than the sites pro players.

Semi pros stop playing because the game is tougher.  This causes volume on sites to drop massively less games run which causes recs to play less as there are less games to sit in.  (It's all a knock on effect from sharkscope and associated products).  Training sites teaching rec's how to be pros has also been a massive factor.  The recession hasn't helped for obvious reasons as rec's have less disposable income and the credit cards have dried up from 5/10 years ago but i think its shoved a lot of smart kids into poker via the training sites who wouldn't have gone into poker from uni if it wasn't for the recession (record levels of youth unemployment) as they would have been more likely to enter the job market.

I think so many things have killed online poker sharkscope is obviously just one of them but the bottom line is online poker is dead and imo will never get anywhere close to the levels it did in 2004-9 ever again.  The game has killed itself and only has itself to blame for all the short term views the vast majority of players/sites took back in the early days.

(http://mrwgifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Joke-Goes-Over-Your-Head-Star-Trek-Gif.gif)

(http://a.fod4.com/images/GifGuide/DealWithIt/dealwithitcat.gif)

(http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/243/561/afc.gif)

(http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m1vtviM5LP1qihztbo1_250.gif)

I don't believe online poker is dead. It's not what it was, sure, but we have to remember that America is no longer involved (at least not to anywhere near the same degree), as was the case in 2004. I also don't think this software has the effect that many seem to think it does. Sharkscope tells you what, that the guy doesn't win over whatever sample it is? Recs don't put in a great deal of volume, so the sample will be relatively small. Guy could be a winning player, but sharkscope disagrees because over the 20k hands he's put in he's not winning. This site also doesn't tell you anything about their game, just gives you some results. The equipment, basically, is only as good as the person using it. Sharkscope, and all the other software being mentioned, does not make you win, but it is a tool that can help you to do so. It takes time, and effort, to learn to use. The fact is that nowhere near as many people actually win as would have you believe, and it is often these people that become the chatbox warriors, and the serial bumhunters. The problem is the attitudes. If everyone keeps saying poker is dead, then it will become so. For sure, there are things that can be done to mitigate the problems, but I do think the very small percentage of winners are realising that their games are drying up, and these intelligent, dedicated people are going to realise why sooner or later.

As I said in an earlier post, the people that are dishing out the abuse are the problem here, not the sites themselves. If they weren't there, these people would find some other way to belittle their opponents.

online poker is only 'dead' in that respect as america isnt involved. thats so clearly obvious. when it comes back online again, online poker will be hugeee! and imo it isnt even dead now

It's far from dead, in fact volume is growing on some sites, but it does have problems which need dealing with if it is to resume overall growth. For starters, everyone needs to recognize how important the recreational players are. Collectively, they contribute most of the liquidity. And most of them have never been near a poker forum or any of the tracking sites. They just want a few hours fun in the evening while the family watch TV or whatever.

I'm really not so sure that the tracking sites have a net negative effect

The main argument in favour is that the vast majority of information that comes out of these sites is who is winning, not who is losing. Every time a news article says x player won/lost y amount it comes from a tracking site. The leaderboards on these sites show players what can be achieved through hard work and dedication. From personal experience, the reason that I started playing heads up SNGs rather than 9mans where I started is because the profit leaderboards were jam packed with HUSNG players.

Players especially at small and micro stakes absolutely love tracking the high stakes action. The thread on 2p2 petitioning Pokerstars to bring back High Stakes Poker has huge support. When full tilt went down after black friday we heard a lot of noise from the pros that had their money in limbo, but the main concern for small stakes and recreational players was 'where are we going to rail high stakes action now?'

So while the information that tracking sites give us can be used in a negative way to berate losing players about their losses, I think the effect of people seeing what could be possible for them  and how their favourite players that they've seen on TV or read about on Pokernews is a great way to generate deposits and to get people trying the game.

i agree, i dont think its dead at all, i was disagreeing with arrboy, maybe in comparison to 8-9 years ago, but thats pretty much down to our friends over the pond being barred from it.

Indeed, and sharkscope isn't in the chatbox giving them grief.  It's the fucktard who's got not nothing better to do with his life than to abuse people online.  I wonder if banning the individual in question, then emailing the player who got abused explaining that sky poker were sorry about what happened at that steps had been taken to remove the person responsible from the game would have done more good than starting a thread saying that online poker was dead and that regs are bum hunting people through a website they never heard of?

surely then they just get a new email address and set up a new account anyway? but i agree with it totally.
however, if they did that, Rexas would be banned from everything under the sun! :D

I never said either of those things.

And maybe they did e-Mail the player & ban him, I never stated whether they did or did not.

The debate has been terrific though, very balanced imo, & some great points made for & against without any argy-bargy.

I like that Gif with the bloke & the chair though. Epic.


 (http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m1vtviM5LP1qihztbo1_250.gif)

Maybe just get rid of chat boxes, they seem to cause hassle on a number of fronts.

 ;iagree;

Just to clarify i said online poker was dead in comparison to the 2005-9 era.  Anyone that doesn't think it is is deluded beyond belief. Online poker will never get back to those levels of volume for numerous reasons and they are not just all related to poker. You have only had to read the financial results of gaming firms published in most of the poker mags found in poker rooms since 2010-11 to read constantly 'ladbrokes poker revenue down 12% yoy, betfair poker revenue down 17% yoy' etc etc.  The same applies for virtually every major poker site outside of the poker only skins of stars and tilt who are privately owned firms and don't publish their results.  The bottom line is the vast majority of these gaming firms honestly couldn't care less about poker revenue and spend virtually nothing recruiting specifically poker customers. its such a tiny % of the total income that if they could get rid of it totally without losing any of their customers in other areas then i am pretty certain they would.  It wouldn't surprise me at all if it's a loss leader for the vast majority of online gaming sites after all overheads/staff costs compared to the boom days when it was a big % of total revenue.

I am talking euro only sites here as well as i have never played on stars/tilt so the impact of the loss of american's doesn't make any difference as they were never there in the first place on the listed PLC gaming firms listed above since the 2005 USA legal issues.  You literally couldn't play the size of games i played (stt's) and volume of those games in 2013-4 because they simply don't exist to even play nowadays and if they did you would literally have virtually all winning reg's playing them against each other.  

Would be interesting to hear Dan Morgan's views on these volumes.  I bet he couldn't play heads up stt's in the size and/or volume he used to back in 2009?  I have no idea if he still plays them and how much he rakes a month now compared to in 2009 for example.

Maybe ladbrokes etc etc dont promote it as they know they cant compete with sites such as stars? they cant possibly offer the bonuses and chance to win so much for so little as these sites, so whats the point? Plus these sites are gambling sites, with poker as a feature of. Stars, FTP etc are primarily poker sites.
Dont see how you can use your examples, who barely deal in poker to use as evidence that online poker is on the decline.

I assume from your answer you were not playing poker online seriously before 2008.  They barely deal in poker in 2014 but 8/10 years ago poker was a much bigger part of their overall business.  The reason they don't invest in poker now is because relative to the 'boom' period online poker is dead.  Obviously stars and tilt are still operating but i would be amazed if stars volume is bigger than 7/8 years ago.

8/10 years ago ladbrokes had a stand alone site which was pretty big with just their players on it.  Betfair the same.  Neither of these exist anymore.  Crypto the same where hills and numerous other skins were located.  Now pretty much all of these firms operate purely on ipoker which is much smaller in volume than all of these sites were individually back in 2006/7. 

I don't see how having threads on poker sites pages and pages long about how "shit" the state of online poker is, is helping.  Who cares that pokers on the decline, everything is on the decline (or at least was).  When things recover, those who haven't played probably wont come back cause they are expecting to get robbed / bumhunted / chatbox abused by regs who already know everything about them.

You left out the almighty hud.

Apologies, the robbed part was alluding to HUD-Gate.

There hasn't been any decline in action between 2009 when I played exclusively on ipoker and now playing on stars. I just moved to where the jobs were.

Stars volume is almost certainly bigger than it was in 06-07. They have nearly quadrupled their market share in that time http://www.pokerscout.com/news/weekly-traffic-update.aspx?year=2013&week=28

And the overall cash player number of the whole market is slightly bigger than then as well http://www.pokerhistory.eu/poker-statistics

I mean online poker since black friday has taken a battering and there a lot of reasons to be concerned but there is lot of overestimating how big poker was in the glory days. We have seen a massive consolidation of the market, as people have migrated to the company with easily the best rep in the industry.

Ok fair enough.  One other question are your roi's the same as 2009 at the same buy in levels?

interesting stats thank you.

Countries like France, Spain, and Italy etc. segregating their players has also had a big negative effect coming directly after the US players absence.

Laddies stand-alone site and Betty's on Crypto were tremendous in their day.

Great to see arbboy back! True hero of blonde :-)

Needs banning...worse thing that ever happen to online poker..if people want to play poker for a living then they need to work for it and huds are making it Easyer for these types of players...
If you can't do it in a live game then you shouldn't be able to online..

After 4 years of playing poker for a living I've return back to work because its too hard to make enough money online now and I never used any HUD... I focus my time to live poker now in my spare time

There is hardly any fish that play online now its just shark eat shark

Wow.

Nailed it. Lock the thread.

if you cant make money at poker after making money for 4 years the simple fact is that youve probably been very lazy and not put any work in.

games such as 200nl are soft if you put work in and try to work on your game. if you win 4bb-100 at 100nl which is pretty easy to do, especially if you have played professionally for 4 years then you can easily make in excess of 50k-year.

HUDs are not the problem, Sharkscope is not the problem, self determination and hard work most likely is.

Sorry if I sound blunt btw.


this is just no limit btw, where HUDS are usually blamed.

Omaha, nobody really even knows how to play it properly, so definitely not dead.

Limit holdem, ok probably dead. but this is not because of huds.

Sngs, maybe, but this is not because of huds.

MTTs? Absolutely not.

Ban herbie mob as well then?

Herbiemob doesn't show losses so its a bit different. I wish the rail was still dead.

pads lol people really dont want to hear the truth rofl

STTs are the future, faster the better.

+1 to everything pleno says

 :goodpost: ;iagree;

And -1 to everything Vernon has said, is saying and will say, EVER.

Tikay this is going to be a ridiculous example, please excuse the ridiculousness and hopefully you see the point:

I play football every Wednesday (obviously I don't, fat lad etc) whilst the imaginary wife and kids are in bed/watching a TV program from the mid 90s.

I just like to jump in and play for a couple of hours and have some crack, and it costs me about £50 to play because I actually pay for the pitch along with a couple of other lads.

Problem is though, I've never heard of football boots and Wayne Rooney turns up every week wearing the latest boots which, even though he's a better player than me anyway, really do further his advantage.

Anyway, I fluked one last week, top bin from 18 yards. But Wayne went mental with me. Saying I shouldn't shoot from that far because I'm super bad at football etc and I felt real bad that I'd paid my money to take this shit from him and his fucking boots.


Now. Should we ban football boots or tell Wayne not to be a dick to the guy who funds the game?


-------

Yeah, you're right - the model of player valuation in the industry is absolutely bananas - I've been banging that drum for 3 or 4 years now -- but tracking and technology is such a small part of the overall picture for making poker fun for recs that ta significance is absolutely overstated. There are even positives (rail birds, hsdb etc that dan spoke about above)...and actually the net effect is probably quite hard to quantify.... You can't say the same about players being dicks. No possible upside there.

You say it causes big discussion next door on the forum (maybe you didn't say that, typing from memory...) and everyone says 'get rid!' -- well, only ~10% of sky players will have ever logged into the forum and maybe 2% have ever posted, so it's not a huge sample but it's easy to over play but I digress....

Hope at least 10% of that made sense.

 ;snoopy'sguns; i will end you Pompom
 ;reallyamsorry;

Also, whilst I'm at it, someone mentioned how real name play might help....

That's short-termist at best and at worst is absolutely neutral. This is what studies in S Korea have shown when looking at anonymity online. You may get a small short-medium term improvement but previous norms in social groups (in this case the chat box) soon return once participants get used to the idea of being unmasked.

I'd be surprised if dtd cash games had difference experiences which weren't IKEA effected.

If I may say so Patrick, that's a bit of a sweeping statement, is it not? NOBODY knows how to play it properly?

Sure, plenty have no idea, & the gulf between good & bad is huge. I'd say that was probably the case in NLH too, though.

I'd also disagree as to SNG's, which still command quite a significant slice of the total Online poker action - in most cases, approx equal or slightly larger than MTT action as a % of the whole. 

I've never suggested Sharkscope is the cause of all ills, but the majority of the recreationals dislike it, for whatever reason. We must not forget that the poker economy rests on the recreational guys. They might not Post on poker Forums, but they are still important, very important. Most of them will never make money, either. And they'll happily keep depositing. We ought to give their views, & them, some respect, in my personal view.

John,

You seriously believe that NOBODY can play Omaha to a reasonable standard?

I meant more generally as in its probably similar in terms of no limit 2009 where there is ofc good players but in general a lot if people just trying to work out what's going on.


In the games on stars that should have all regulars in certain Omaha games there will often be 5 recreational players and one pro. When I say nobody you knew what I meant ofc. John just meant more work hard and don't blame others.

The best car salesman are still selling cars in recessions the lazy ones go to another job.

I think there are plenty of folks who play Omaha well. We'll never be able to prove that, one way or the other, though. Everything is relative though, & if many play it badly, (& they/we do) then some must play it (relatively) well. Incidentally, Online Omaha volumes are picking up.

I do agree, 100%, that is it easy to just point fingers of blame because they are net losers, when the truth is, we get out of poker - or anything - what we put into it, & there is no substitute for hard work. You are proof of that. So yes, I agree. But that does not mean we should not keep looking at the game, & see if we can improve some things.

Some replies seem to suggest this is a BAD thread. Well if we want to retain the staqus quo, & just cross our fingers & hope everything turns out fine & dandy, then yes, they may be right.

It's a very odd thing when trying to look at ways to make our great game better are poo-poo'd.

edit: not got time, save it for later when i can check.

Lol was just going to quote so you couldn't delete, it was a very very good post, agreed with it all.

it was a good post

paragraphs!  :-)

fair policing of games is happening. i do it every night. i accept that chat box abuse/policing is an issue the industry is way behind on, and is a big issue for recreational players. more so than sharkscope

Felt a bit aggro in spots and im not in the mood to fight. Its in a word document. I've managed about 20 hours sleep since sunday so pretty nervous of coming across like a douche

Yeah, understood Pleno was getting at the fact that there are many more people with a strong understanding of NLHE than there is in regards to Omaha. Think more recs like to play this game (percentage wise) because it seems like a fun punt.

Main thing I agree with is putting the work in. Whilst there are plenty more regs out there (not sure if true but will presume there is), alot of them are struggling to keep up just through being a little lackadaisical. You may say it's shark eat shark but a huge amount of the so called sharks have gotten a little fat and fallen behind the game. It's all about mindset and being prepared to move on as the game moves on.

I feel pretty strongly about this because I pretty much run myself into the ground work wise, studying my game and reviewing hands/tourneys (in b4 get a life, exercise more etc. etc.). I don't regret a moment of it because I know it's improving my game considerably and gives me enough of an edge in general to justify playing for profit. It's probably harder to make a profit in the game now compared to a few years back or whatever, but in no way is it unachievable, definitely not if you treat it as a profession, purely because of the amount of people who treat it as a hobby.

Agreed.

That does not mean we should ignore the lesser problems though. We should look at everything, positively & critically. Why would we not?

Sounds good, lets segregate the players into ability by division, premiership poker players only play each other and so on and so forth. Be nice if I could only play conference north players when I do play.  ;)

I agree with you, as you know. I know I speak to players who don't visit forums regularly, face to face, at DTD. Chat box problems come up constantly. Sharkscope and HUDs never

obviously some don't know about Sharkscope and HUDs, and everyone knows if they have suffered in a chat box.

You get my point though

Too many people trying to sell cars ITT, not enough that sell aeroplanes.  But as Pleno says only lazy people learn about aeroplanes.

Tighty is right on the chat abuse, and I genuinely believe Sky has it worse than any other site I play on.  I think a lot of that is down to demographics.  Very experienced players and newbies don't usually get involved.  It is those in that phase where they think they know it all.  Sure most of us went through that phase too.

Agreed best advice i got was of people saying dont think you know it all etc. I always wondered why the winners were often the quietest yet the load ones often seem to get alll the bad beats coolers etc. Then i realised.

+1 quintillion

I get called a 'cu*t' multiple times a session, maybe a valid name calling but it's meant to be propa nawty yet no one ever loses their chat.

However you can lose your chat for essentially pointing out the sites flaws and doing your utmost to improve it.


Really fun to have someone from that site telling us all these things that need to be looked at by those running poker sites whilst Sky is the epitome of everything wrong.

Poker was Candy Crush before Candy Crush.

Now we have Candy Crush.

Make poker more like Candy Crush.

Why say that last bit, there isn't any need.  You can't put Sky below Lock, Old Tilt and UB for instance.  Numerous other skins have stolen funds from punters, and I'd happily put Ipoker below Sky for general experience.  And profit is pretty important to my poker experience too, and lovd their TV shows, just wish Tilat would stop wishing me out of tournaments.

Thinking they have a problem with chat abuse is hardly the same thing.  They should definitely do something about it.  I sat down the other day after my first post, and somebody was calling somebody else a fish before I'd played a hand.  As someone else said, if he didn't have sharkscope, he'd still have followed him round abusing him. 

because i've spent hours and hours and hours and hours and hours shall I keep saying hours? for nothing helping them and in return got shat on by people who cant even spell shat who are paid for their incompetence.


I detest ipokers overall idiotic short sighted strategy, I detest Annie BJ and Coward Folderer but I have much less exposure to that and it's not what's being discussed nor is anyone involved with that involved in this discussion.


This sort of discussion cant go on next door because of the idiocy and unwillingness to improve/do anything other than plod along rofling about.

this is probably because you were impossibly rude to them on their forum, is it not?

they banned you, so you hold a grudge?

 

impossibly?

I mean come on.


I used the word idiot, in response to someone asking why I seemed peeved. IN A PRIVATE MESSAGE therefore I lose all table chat/forum privileges on the same site where i'm constantly called a ***** but their superior security department cant even auto scan the chat windows lolz.
 



cliffs.

site offers awful RB promotions to current players, advertises as stand alone site, on the sly offers affiliate deals to automatically get the highest RB level to ANY new account. the affiliate they use are so shady as to advertise to multi account using a family members details if you already have a non affiliated account. Said site gets deluged by their players both regs/recs saying how can this be real on the forum, response is to delete all threads refuse to talk about it because they have no defence other than fk off and play elsewhere if you don't like us skanking you relentlessly.

I point out this is literally insane, sky ask in a PM why i'm being arsey, I respond with 'because you're idiots' gg account.

It's ok though I hold such a grudge I still use the direct contact I have above the poker department to continue to strive to improve the dismal software. Because obviously that's what grudge holders do, relentlessly help said site. ya ofc. obv this is the same site I provided better unpaid technical support than their own paid employees on the forum to the extent that people assumed I was being paid by them.....

right, but just look at the language you use (and you used to do on here quite a bit)

"in return got shat on by people who cant even spell shat who are paid for their incompetence."

" idiocy and unwillingness to improve/do anything other than plod along rofling about. "

etc etc

Its really no wonder you don't win friends and influence people as you wish when its such unconstructive stuff is it?

Sky are unprofessional why should I act a level above?


in our chats together live/pm wherever am I cunty or even impolite?

Ask the product developers whether when someone is treating me normally and professionally whether i'm cunty.  (remembering that cunty is a word constantly used by people on sky rails who don't lose their chat privileges so clearly it's a more than acceptable word).

oh wait no it's arsey messages from people who know they haven't got a leg to stand on yet just plod along happily surrounding themselves with incompetence that rile me and surprise surprise I point it out.


Should I just be a yes man?


I could walk down the street and watch someone just 'do excrement' on the floor, sky would want me to say OH WELL DONE GREAT SKILLS or you could be like WTF YOU DOING BRAH like any normal sane person.



You know you are specifically picking up on me saying a swear word or enjoying a nice hilarious phrase because you know you cant defend sky for love nor money because they consistently make APPALLING INCONCEIVABLY STUPID decisions then defend them with the blanket methods of delete negativity, patronise and the old ignorance is bliss method.



Was it a superb idea to create a 'feedback forum' (you know the one I basically provided all the feedback for,on my own unpaid; to help the devs whilst those paid by the company provided less than nothing) but then delete all negative feedback?? Or to just say well it's your problem, not ours, have you turned it on and off lol. They even went to the lengths of deleting my posts that contained the ways around a problem so as to let them tell people there was no problem....


My favourite is still the old

customer  "I got disconnected but my internet was still working"
 
SUPREME KNOWLEDGE CENTER
"well our servers always work so it's your isp buddy go take it up with them we couldn't give two shits..."

customer "I'm with Sky broadband"



TUMBLEWEED BRAH TUMBLEWEED.

This appears to be playing the man not the ball.

Not really

just look at the post above

Makes me wince

Maybe am just out of touch, but he's an intelligent guy and it quite seriously makes me wince to see him post with that language/style

I'll leave you all to it

The language was entirely wrong, but one could form the opinion that you and TK would make fantastic politicians, in that you have an amazing ability to never answer some of the questions actually asked.

Tighty as I stated you're picking up on swear words whilst glossing over the grand canyon of problems that sky create.


None of my polite and helpful posts/discussion has got anywhere, so why should I bother continuing to be polite, it's inane. The response from them is always poor and ignorant of the actual business they are in.


As I asked in the last post inbetween bits of swearing and phrases that made me giggle, do you think of me actually as someone vile or reprehensible, do I act untoward to people in person or even online if approached in any non being patronised by sky way?

I've made valid points pollitely for years on sky, it's not even like I bang MY head into the wall, the wall bloody moves and twats me over the head relentlessly then tells me I should be grateful.

It's really petty for you to say I hold a grudge whilst all my grievances are ridiculously fair and understandable.


If you were to actually write down a set of short lines as to why I am banned on sky it'd be farcical.

'provided lots of help to both staff and customers'
'worked tirelessly'
'went above and beyond'
'pointed out APPALLING decisions'
'used word idiots in private to describe moderators decisions'


it's just a fact of business and management that incompetent people get promoted and then screw it up for everybody. As I've stated i'm not going to congratulate them on that.

what haven't I answered that was asked?

I answer every question on here, if I can...

I have nothing against tighty too it's so frustrating.

he's not even directly in the middle either he's just lobbing in jabs from a way out to the side, totally validly about my potential to be childish with my language, but at the same time with an unwillingness to address any actual issue ever. If I was less of a weird math geek and had some skill with wordyness then I could maybe make my point better, as it is I sit there write some of these phrases down and they make me giggle rather alot and I just go with them. Maybe next time I should go through Tal or someone wordy and get them to completely rephrase every single thing I said.

Either way it'd get a terrible and unhelpful reaction. hence I long ago gave up trying to do things the text book right way.

"I'm with Sky broadband". Incred.

Titbean's way of expressing himself might well be tilting and make himself look a bit of a ***** but he's a single human person and entitled to do what he likes.

Sky's media/community team are straight up punters though. Absolutely shocking approach to community and customer service. They are acting like companies did in the bad old days. I'd be fucking embarrassed if I ran their forums.  The behaviour their in moderating issues is absolutely petulant and defensive and just not how the internet works.

Titbean has a poiint regardless of how he chooses to express it.

It's a question of resource management. Why deal with sharkscope which has some unknown net effect until you've dealt with chat abuse which has a clear negative effect.

fwiw I was polite for the first roughly 4 years, I just quickly lost respect for them for how they treat myself and other customers.

Might have taken you 4 years. Took me about 4 minutes when I found out they decided to just delete (not lock...) threads which contained criticism. Absolute punters.

I could post some pictures of the software when I first played there, people think the current software is bad, they JUST DONT KNOW.


once you've answered hundreds of technical query threads fixing customers problems for a company you don't work for then essentially being told to F off and that i'm out of line. i'm pretty sure i'm allowed to be much ruder than I actually am to them.

do still play on there ?

Massive +1. The chat boxes on Sky are the nut worst. When the new software came out, I was like "Yay, I can chat to the recreational players while grinding, this is fun for me and good for the game". Now as soon as someone chats, I usually end up turning chat off because 99% of the time, it's not worth reading (Fortunately I got banned before that inane forum ban = chat ban rule happened).

There's a DYM reg who I've reported to Sharkscope and Sky on multiple occasions for using Sharkscope to berate weaker players in chat. Last time I played him he was still being a **** able to chat to people, and still using Sharkscope to berate players, so obv nobody did a thing rofl. There's also that OAP wannabe gangsta reg who has been on the site for YEARS abusing people in chat, offering to meet people at SPTs for fights, and even tried to fight a woman at an SPT, who still had chat and forum privileges last time I played him.

Same thing applies to multi-accounting bans. There's been people who have posted on the forum saying "I'm also using account X" who didn't get banned. There's also a DYM reg who I've personally reported before, telling me in chat that he's got another account, which was also a high stakes DYM reg that no longer plays.

Obv no bans. HOW?! I don't even bother reporting it any more, because there's no point when I'll get spoken to condescendingly by Customer DontCare and nothing will happen anyway.



Most ridiculous rule ever. Someone tilts in chat and gets banned (Ofc this doesn't actually happen irl because nobody cares, but lets assume someone actually gets banned for chat abuse on Sky). There's a HUGE difference between someone tilting in chat after losing a big pot, and someone being an arse over a prolonged period on the forum and doing something ban worthy.

Conversely, someone can do something which breaks forum rules, such as spamming Poker Chat with bad beat posts which belong in BBV. That doesn't mean they deserve a chat ban too. There's just no reason for such a dumb rule to exist, you can always ban someone from both if necessary anyway.



Beaneh has done more for Sky Poker for absolutely nothing then a lot of the people on Sky's payroll. He has a pretty damn good reason to hold a grudge, IMO.



Couldn't agree more. The "Sky_Poker" account needs to be ditched, and Sky need to have individual accounts for mods. That way, individual mods can be held accountable for their actions. I've been saying that since the day that account was created.

Treat a customer like shit on the "Sky_Poker" account - Meh, no big deal, happens all the time atm from what I've seen and heard. Treat a customer like shit on your own mod account - GG Job.

Again, the best mod by far on there by a million miles is TommyD, and again, he's doing a better job for £0.00 than the Sky community staff are doing for more money than they deserve.

there are no games the bulk of the time now.

rake races, incompetence, terrible short sighted decision after terrible short sighted decision have destroyed the games. if there is a nl50 or nl100 game running in the day ITS MAD BUSY YO.  v frustrating as I finally got tournament structures to not be a complete joke, and finally got the software to be vaguely useable.

Fwiw I don't think that sky being punters when it comes to communication and community precludes them from wanting to improve the games.

I just think that you might consider their thoughts with a certain perspective as if they wanted to really improve their games they could start by fixing internal issues which they have 100% control over.

Im one of the few people who provide advice specifically based as if I was a business wanting a bottom line and to have a plan for the future whatever that may hold.

Regs on sky just post things that are stupid, benefit literally 1 or 2 regs on the site that's it, then complain that my ideas which would benefit the community are 'selfish'.  They aren't even intelligent enough to realise that things that benefit them a little benefit me alot. I got in hot water previously for calling out these regs as selfish even though they have 14 posts on the forum all of which are ridiculous demands for themselves, whilst I had thousands the high marjority of which provided excellent unbiased help for free.

Invoice them for your time, £50 an hour seems fair (http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh74/MissKayasha/Smileys/REGamblMoney01HL2.gif) (http://media.photobucket.com/user/MissKayasha/media/Smileys/REGamblMoney01HL2.gif.html)

They wouldn't let me do it for free, million they'd pay.

Ill set the line at 19 pages.

We haven't had demonics repost yet!

Fwiw I'm not allowed to play from budapest on a VPN even though I heard all the regs played regularly in Vegas last year and many continue to play throughout non uk ips but my only real experience is the UKPCwhere everything was ran to perfection and especially Tikay did a fantastic job. I hope this doesn't necessarily turn into a super anti sky thread, although I guess it has but from the outside at least speaking to Tikay at ukpc he was pretty switched on but understood the limitations of a non poker background team.

Saying that all the sites that have been ran by poker players have failed big time and the biggest and most successful, stars is mainly non poker players fr, what I can see and pokerstrategy who were also and still are one of the biggest and most successful is 95% non poker background employees.

Main thing is to understand that sky will always have problems because of their staff but they will do plenty good things too such as ukpc. I think sky ascially needs 3 tikays, probably 2 younger guys, even apprentices who want to work I'm gaming and an internship would be a really mutually beneficial agreement where they could help sky a lot from the grinder pov.

Dtd are perfect actually. Lots of poker background and then really good non poker people such as nicola and Alex making a really good team.

Dear Soapytitwank,

You claim your advice & help was excellent. Could you rate how excellent it was do you think. I mean, was it most excellent ?

totally dude xxx

And as for the main debate - all this shiz about poker will eat itself, must look after recs and noobs etc. I just find it pretty patronising and disingenuous.

Y'all are tying to get their money one way or another - there aint a nice or right way to do it - unbridled greed and self interest is the essence of poker and might as well call it what it is - ok, that's all for now pooftahs

Chuh, thought so, party on x

DTD online were better in many ways when they were on Boss.

DTD live are as close to perfect as is possible, although they'd be so much better if they were in Middlesbrough.

God no, Ipoker aren't perfect but I'll take them over boss any day.

I don't recall there being anywhere near as many problems with tournaments just having to be abandoned on Boss, and that's ignoring the issues where the problems of being frozen out only affects a few players who just have to suck it up and accept the loss of their entry fee and their EV.

Hopefully, that's answered the question.

Probably not, but the software was so crap I didn't want to play on it, at least ipoker is ok for that. I haven't had too many issues with them really two or three times maybe, which isn't that bad.

paddy it's not that sky don't understand poker. it's that they don't understand customer service and community. PS was so successful because Korn/Lutz/et al completely got community. Not because they weren't/are poker players. Similar stories at other successful gigs.

Re:  The Sky debate; the irony in this thread is that:

No player has helped the development of site and the players than Andy
No people have worked harder for the site and their events than Tikay or Tighty.

And they're all on the same page, just reading different languages.

So I'm going to try to translate for both sides:

To Andy.  I obviously know how frustrating it can be.  But sometimes the effectiveness of the truth is all in the presentation.  Especially if you're saying something which the recipient doesn't want to hear (I'm talking about Andy's posts and communications referenced in this thread on the Sky Forum/PMs, not anything in this thread).  People can just latch on to your frustration, your language and use that as an out.  Yes the fifteenth time you get stonewalled is annoying.  You just have to be all nice and patient again for the sixteenth time.  And so on.  You do go too offensive at times and you can't always fall back on to the fact you had valid and constructive comment at the beginning when the end game is just so chaotic.  It ruins the excellent points and thoughts that are under the loud and rude ones.  Would it be a better world if you didn't have to dress things up and be nice constantly?  Or if people snap listened?  Obviously it would.  Not the way the world works though and you have to accept that.

To Tighty.  Yes Andy's language can go coarse and offensive.  I don't particularly enjoy reading some of his more acute tirades.  However he never starts there.  And a lot of time one part of one his posts, some bad language, some offensive term, some minor flippant point, were blown up as the whole issue by the replier and everything else was negates.  I love playing on Sky, I still love the community and think it's a very good site for the niche it is aiming for.  However constant batting bat of valid questions breeds discontent.  Getting well put, intelligent and inoffensive posts deleted because they ask a hard question is annoying.  I'm not saying you or Tikay do any of this, in fact I'm sure neither of you do.  But when a poster, a player, a member plays exactly by the rules and then get's zero respect anyway, that is when frustration that leads to the attitude Andy and others now have is born.  It's particularly head scratching when I, among others, make valid and I hope well thought out points, am told I have never run a poker site so what do I know.  Then I see new 'Quids in' tables.

Re:  The chatbox.  It's no worse than any other site.  However as it's like a 95% UK player pool, people have a lot more ammunition and feel like they can be more offensive.  I mean, after the first few lines how many ways are you actually able to offend a Russian who doesn't speak much English?  In smaller, UK based sites, things get more personal because they can.  I currently have a 1k bounty for someone to stab me in the neck from a charming gentleman from Scotland.  If I downswing hard I might attempt to collect that myself.

tl;dr cliffs.

Vinegar = no flies
Sugar = flies
Getting ignored and evaded makes people angry.

TitBean, you mad bro?

thank you

for reference i have nothing to do with how the sky forum runs, or how Sky poker operates, as you know. I post on there as "SPT" re tour stuff and organise the events

Tommy, this is how I do it :)


(https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/6974743296/h237C52E0/)

Did someone call the blonde HR department? I am sensing a multi disciplinary outcome

No this is a blokey site, only girls work in HR  ;whistle;

I don't particularly like Tittwatbean and disagree with 99% of what he says on here. However, I do think he is 100% correct in everything he has said in this thread.

I had an issue with Sky and posted it on this forum.


I did not receive a reply from the guy who plugs Sky Poker wherever possible. I got one saying post over on their forum and then a far more detailed one from Tittwatbean. I know for a fact that it was not down to one of the reasons he mentioned and I closed the browser down and re-opened it again and that did not work. Moreover, the sng was £20 buyin. If Sky are not willing to refund me for a sng after me talking to them over the internet while the sng is happening, and me showing screenshots of all the other tables I am playing, then why should I bother? There reply of telling me I should of downloaded the client is a joke, but to be honest, nothing less then I expected after hearing about the service they offer. Rather then sign up to numerous forums, make phone calls, send emails over £20, I will just close my account and never play there again

I think trying to force sites to improve their rake structure and promotions is much more important than banning sharkscope. As you say the recreational players that have heard of sharkscope don't like it, but I imagine they also don't like bumhunting, or people mass tabling and playing slowly. Rewarding players for playing as many hands as possible as quickly as possible is an extremely flawed system for the long term health of the game. However, this thread isn't about that. Its about banning sharkscope. This would be a poor idea in my opinion. I believe people should be allowed to check their results. I'd also say pokerstars opt-in system is better than other sites that allow peoples results to go up without permission. It has been seen in many aspects of life that forcing something underground rarely fixes the problem in anyway shape or form.
 I think sites promoting a healthy gaming environment is much more important than preventing someone to see their own or other peoples results. In the example you cite, as stated previously, I have absolutely no clue how that can be sharkscopes fault. Blaming a website for how users use the data they present is pretty flawed argument in my opinion. I think overall the chatbox is a positive in online poker but it can be used negatively and sites should guard against this. I don't see what that has got to do with sharkscope. It is extremely annoying as a professional poker player to constantly be derided by people with flawed arguments. We are constantly told what we are doing wrong. How this hurts the game, how that hurts the game whilst sites continue to rake games that are unbeatable, provide in general terrible support. In the last few months I've been told my hud is killing the game, sharkscope is killing the game and god knows what else. I've spent the last week taking nigh on anyone on at the plo8 games. No bumhunting, no swearing in chat, no being a massive douche. Honestly for people to continue grouping every single professional player in one big group is unfair. I'm going to have to start talking about all poker sites as one big horrible group. If I did that you would say I was being unfair, and I would be being unfair.
 Can we stop being told that the game is dying, can we stop being told that recreational players need protection, or this or that. If i was a punter I'd hate to see people talking about me a) Like I was an idiot, and b) like I'm a cow that needs to be plumped up for slaughter. I have absolutely no idea how you can possibly think banning sharkscope is going to fix poker. Perhaps next door should look at policing its chat properly and not putting on rake races every month? But it won't. You will continue to look after your own profits while deriding professional players for trying to look after theirs. That is why people poo poo threads like this. I deleted one of my early responses in this thread because I didn't want to get involved but unfortunately arbboy ended up quoting it but unfortunately I just can't help myself. I typed this up extremely quickly and it still feels like I'm shouting into the wind. Even now giving this a quick read through feels pretty mind numbing as people are rarely open minded.

Banning sharkscope would do nothing to change billy big gobs attitude. This is ultimately the problem. I'd imagine he is also a recreational player and he is probably enjoying giving a bit of abuse having lost. If you banned sharkscope he would still be giving some jip when he took the bad beat. It's like your playing a game of "Improving Online Poker Bingo" where the majority of words and phrases such as "software" "huds" and "professionals" are the buzzwords and things like "rake" "promotions" and "fairly policed games" are not on the board at all. It is very boring.

Sorry I didn't leave this up earlier but I wanted to make sure I didn't offend anyone too badly. I do think your a good guy Tikay, I just strongly disagree on this issue and my debating style has got me in trouble on this forum before so I wanted to check there was no smoking gun (lol glass of watergate)

tbf, Mr Unpronounceable, Tikay's job is to be all cooey wooey I think, man of/voice of the people etc.

Much as I like him as an individual, he has a job to do - which is to be faux nice in this context and get people to part with as much cash as possible... to Sky. It's not even thinly veiled..it's just what it is

great post Adam, agree 100%

Think the most shocking thing about all this, is that tommyd is a mod on the sky forum. Next they'll be getting scotty77 as an analyst on there.

I remember when I first started playing on a site called pokerschoolonline (now part of pokerstars) we had a play money bankroll yet after giving someone a bad beat you could still be followed for hours days even being called all the names under the sun and your stats brought out to try and humiliate you

I like sharkscope and  opr but mainly only follow my own results being a hobbist I don't keep perfect record keeping apart from money in and money out of poker sites

don't quite agree 100 but it's a v good post.