FeelsBadMan

I don't mind the original rule of fastest poster, but I can see it getting messy. I kinda like the idea of a whole week deathmatch in the case of a same day tie breaker, 2 people fighting for their lives, for those 20 cent cashes in nano FTs the entire week 😁 obv with a 250€ consolation prize for whoever loses the tiebreaker 😜

2'nd Final table with the BAD BEAT style points lucky but also 0 lucky wombo combo

a tiny FT, infobox seems to be slow with the updates

85.66% of sadness and Trip Tens top hand for the most 0 lucky 🍀 baddest beat one can imagine

96.46% worth of sunday 0lucky

First submission to the 0 lucky club, top hand KKK44, not a screenshot cause the client doesn't know how to do replays:

Can confirm that he did win a 25€ ticket with the alias Pionrj ... Iany was just a bit distracted at the moment by chat and it slipped his mind to collect the alias 😄

one more

EDITED FOR PUBLIC SHAMING

Dark reader indeed looks pretty damn good

@Leo-Unibet You don't have to explain yourself to us, we're just giving feedback (even though one feedback was a bit aggressive and drunk 🤣 ) I like the 20 levels idea for day 1, indeed it's probably better to end far from the money and let it pop on day 2, that's mostly why we gave this feedback, not for the 2 people returning on day2, but more because of the unnecesarily long day 1 given the circumstances. And yeah I assumed it was because people complained about the bubble and their feedback focused more on lets just burst it already :D , understandable. As for having different setups for different buyins I understand where you're coming from, I have mixed feelings about this too, as low stakes players want to play good tournaments too, would definitly be against making them turbo, it just seems that the feedback is that thay're a bit too long for the very tiny prizes, and 10-12 for 1€ , 12-15 for 10€ with 15k chips still makes for a very well structured tournament compared to what else is available at their stakes (while very slow tournaments are more standard at the higher stakes), and it would also help making the total runtime more similar for the 4 tournaments despite the fact that the low ones have 3 to 4 times the entries, and then you can make custom day1/day2 splits where day 1 ends at the same-ish time, but the lower ones are further along. Just an idea, dunno what is better, completely up to you what you consider is better, it's not something that affects me as I don't play the 1 , and I don't mind the 10 lasting however long, just basing this on a few personal anecdotes I've heard and lack any real data on what people prefer. Overall I really liked these tournaments, quite enjoyable to play 👍

^ Just posting a short translation of the angry finnish message. We all probably agree that day 1 could have been shorter (less levels), ideally day 1 and day 2 would be roughly equal, so like for a 10 hour total runtime, 5 hour day 1 +5 hour day 2. This time the "new DSO" had half the stack size (great change IMO) and 2 extra levels of day 1, compared to the old DSO Personally, other than the weird day 1 day 2 split which seems like an honest mistake, and that doesn't really affect me, I quite enjoyed the structure. a bit too deep at the start but got past that by lateregging an hour in. Also it probably would make sense to have lower events a bit faster, like for the 1€ event, don't think almost anyone would complain if it were a 10 min day 1 12 min day 2, and for the 10€ maybe like 12min day 1 and 15 minute day 2. The prizes just aren't worth it for most, and these blind timers would still give a very good amount of play for the level of thournaments at those stakes, and it would make it easier to split day1s and day2s equally-ish across the board. I know I know, his angry message didn't seem like it said all this, but deep down it really did 🤣 @Leo-Unibet

I quite like the new proposed layout. big BIG fan of the color coded ladder stat in the infobox, and the implementation of it, just having a samll bubble with the number color coded rather than having the entire box background color coded like party did it which looks a bit ugly and harder to read. if there's payjumps I'd just keep the number in that color coded box instead of explicitly writing ITM and let the colors do the talking. then infobox as a whole is really nicely positioned here, and doesn't require different layouts that end up covering stuff so that's super nice. break icon under the clock at the top seems decent too, sets it apart from the others and if I'm not mistaken it's a layout other sites have chosen too, if possible I'd also add an icon there (to the left of the break icon, maybe with the R/A+ icon from the lobby) with the time in minutes till the end of rebuy / till the addon break starts, and that can be hidden after that period ends. IMO that is really nice and relevant information to have that is quite hard to discern currently, you have to look in the tournament lobby to see how many levels of rebuy, then you have to look at the blind levels, multiply and add breaks, it's a major hassle for such an important piece of info. The text is soooooo much clearer in the pinki version than in the live UI when resizing to the minimum table size, it's like wearing glasses for the first time and finally seeing right. Obv an image will scale down far better than programatic text so that's not really a fair critique of the current UI but Relax should REEEEALLLY look into some methods to make the scaling of text be much clearer at the minimum table size (on the major popular rezolutions hd, fhd, wqhd,4k), please. Would also be extra sweet if resizing would be dynamic in a way, where the most important elements like stack size for example get scaled down less than less important stuff like avatars, but I realize that's probably beyond the scope of this and probably not really worth the dev hours and the headache of managing the resizing across devices. One more comment of the scaling, it seems like the 3.0 UI scales down more aggresively than the previous client version, as in, when the table is big the elements are bigger / more visible than they used to be (which is used as a selling point of the new UI), but when you scale the table down to the minimum they are the same size or maybe even smaller than in the old version, which contradicts that selling point. Maybe there's a reason for this and maybe it wouldn't look great but I feel like having stuff be bigger at the minimum table size is even more important than when the table is in full screen (mostly interested in text elements with relevant info). If you could please look into this @Relax that would be great 😃 Personally I prefer the current timebank UI around the entire border rather than the new pinki design for it. I really like the bigger 1x 2x etc buttons, and the small spacing between the action buttons. The stack size numbers could be a bit bigger, current UI has them bigger and stars UI has them even bigger than the current one. It's the most important piece of info on the table aftert the bets/action. For the action labels, from the ones proposed I prefer the one where the FOLD has a gray background and red text rather than red background, as it's less of a call to action and makes the entire table less jarring. Generally the new action labels look nice, but worried about 2 things: 1. the fact that they cover the cards might be confusing, maybe it's something that one can adjust super quickly to. 2. some people might complain about all the color, which they have in the past (while others would like it), as the current version is more subtle, just the text being colored. Maybe having an option to switch between a more popping version and a more subtle version could be a fix for that, but then the fact that the cards aren't visible when the action label is shown can become a major problem in the subtle version as it would be harder to see who's still in the hand.

it is not so

@4kev tickets got rounded up, so anyone between 1 and 25 games got 1 full ticket, 95 games played got 4 tickets , not 3. and they gave away 1.5x the guarantee in adition to giving the guarantee a bit late (nvm I thought it actually popped eventually) so that seems pretty generous, not a big fan of doing it as a freeroll in general, but considering that they set it up within a day, with all the other stuff going on, is pretty cool.

@staneyyy read thy message again for thou answer cometh within

Well, with 1 ticket for every 25 games played, rounded up, the players that played the most have a major handicap compared to people that only played a couple of games already. The top player should have had 2000+ tickets if it were distributed evenly and fair, but they did think of giving the little guys a bit more of a chance already. Nobody is getting any free jackpot, probabilities are still probabilities and it's only fair that the ones that played and contributed the most have the highest chance to win. Single digit ticket gang here 😀

18'th in a low

Everyone: "The perfect stacksize does not exist" Me:

@P0kerM0nk nope, it's a fixed period, pretty sure it's 90 days from the moment it's "in use", but I might be wrong and it might be 60. I was getting pretty close to the expiration date on my last bonus.

All the bonus shop bonuses have 5 equal segments, so the 500€ one will have 5x 100€ segments with 90 days expiration on it, if after 90 days you didn't manage to release some of those segments you lose them, so only buy a bonus this big if you know you can generate that much rake (2500€ in rake, which for mtts would be more than 25k turnover, hexapro more than 36k, and sng more than 50k, over the span of 90 days)

@Karl google sheets is very very similar to microsoft excel, same formulas, same basic stuff, probably missing some of the very advanced things but I doubt you need those. For having the total in a specific cell, instead of "moving" the last cell , why don't you go to the target cell and type =SUM( and then select the entire profit column without the header, go as far down as you want, that should give you a fixed total cell that updates every time you add a new tournament. So in this case I guess it would be =SUM(F6:F1000) that you would put in the I6 cell

Another option for showing it on OBS without the crazy hackerman stuff is by using google sheets. Keep track in a googlesheets spreadheet, make sure to make it public (share button top right, change button bottom left, make sure it's set on "anyone with a link" , hit done) . Then on your spreadsheet, go to the cell that has your total bankroll, right click it, and "Get link to cell". Now that link should be in your clipboard. In OBS sources ADD > Browser > Name it excel or whatever and hit ok > at URL paste the link you just copied from google sheets and hit ok. Now you have your online excell sheet on your screen. Then just right click that Source that you just created in Sources > click Filters > bottom left click on the + > Crop/Pad > OK > and then just mess around with the Left Top Right Bottom cropping numbers until you have just your cell on screen. Now any time that total gets updated in your sheet it gets updated on your screen too. Yes this is pretty complex too, but if you follow the directions it shouldn't be too hard (assuming that you have OBS studio) LE: you can use this method to have anything on your stream, maybe graphs that update if you'll learn how to do that, for example, without the need to have it open on your other screen and captured, with this method you don't even need the spreadsheet open as it's all online.

I believe the rule you quoted is referring only to in play sharing. Like hey friend I have aces, or hey friend you should fold this hand cause I'll play, or hey friend I see you're thinking hard on this decision with your current hand, you should do this. These are all not allowed, and the first 2 are somewhat easy to detect if they happen a lot. Sharing databases has been a touchy subject on other sites but I don't see how stopping it could ever be enforced. I'm assuming since it has such a smaller impact on unibet due to non automated tools and changing aliases it wouldn't be much of a problem sharing some notes or info, but it would still be kinda rude to post a 5 page manifesto on the forum of how a certain player plays, unless it's @IanSimpson 🤣 An official answer would obviously clear things up more, but on the sharing notes things it seems like such a gray area to have an official statement, like ah this guy is a nit, or I've seen this guy fold this hand, or icm suicider and other throwaway comments are probably very acceptable, but sharing a repository of hundreds of hands and large amounts of notes and stats compiled to ave a clear image of his game quickly becomes somewhat unethical.

@theMachine Best party ever 🤣🤣🤣