FeelsBadMan

@cameleonul from the first post "Final table not created right away; we've implemented Hand-for-hand pre final table + added more "checks" to hand-for-hand mode before ITM. Now there shouldn't be any scenarios where 1 table gets to play more hands vs other tables pre ITM & FT. " Might not be a great implementation , doesn't really make sense to do final table hand for hand 9 players from the money, maybe it should happen only if really close to the money or already itm

Unfortunately I don't think this structure would work too well for a seat only dso, because most steps other than the 50 would probably never start as it's not economically viable for a 50cent player to qualify to such an event. And relying purely on people that already won a package and also don't play higher stakes is not going to cut it in terms of liquidity. A seat + cash expenses could solve that problem, but there's also the promotion of the tour that you mentioned that is kinda lacking so that should also be amped up, made more obvious (maybe even on the banners) that they will have both events at UO stops, along with the other cool stops DSO has. It's such a cool tour that is way too unknown outside of France. I can see however each brand wanting to focus on promoting only their own brand. I think in it's current format 25€ re-entry is the sweet spot. And yeah the structure should be switched to the ante one, kinda weird that it still has the old structure. Don't think it will make a huge difference in the number of entries tho, and more extreme measures to encourage rebuying would probably just end up forcing people to max latereg.

Exactly what @Livertool said, log out and if it still doesn't work then clear cookies or try another browser. They can't stop you from viewing the page if they can't know that it's you viewing it.

I'm sorry @Teethgrinder , your initial message sounded like it was an MTT, but now that you clarified that it's a satellite then there very much is a reason to timebank, even while on a single table (there are reasons in mtt as well but they are way way less extreme and money generating as in satties), the math of the format works in the favor of the timebanker and many times (depending on the amount of people paid and people left and stack sizes), that person timebanking also works in your favor. It's pretty standard strategy at this point and telling people not to do it would be like issuing a warning cause someone went allin too many times and didn't let us see a flop. Technical solutions are to only way to improve the player experience in situations like this.

of course

bumpidy bump, freeroll starts in 10 minutes, silly league tournaments in 1 hour :popeye:

Have you tried being funny first :haha::laugh:

Just specifying that the Main Event and the DSO results (so the unibet branded events) are on hendonmob already, every other side event is not. Just so there isn't any confusion when looking into it.

Final results of the Saturday Stream league PositionAliasTotal Points1WINALOTO1102Zatruhan1003wateriswet954GothMoth915MonteCristo7856g00dJokeEhh807Delat1748Fizik777709NiAniJA6410Luigi5016111zwikkel6012Hotzonicu5713traart5714Petrica15415HensiePensie5416I_love_towin5217CreativeLe5018WonNowt4719FiveLayers4720Limitless__4621666anastasia4422emilem4423HristoOO4124Pellinho4125b18rto23etf24126MiNoEgg7774027KemsPezer3928-Kirederf-3929evaholdem3930YOGGIBOSS3831MaecTpo3732Untold20193733All_in_MaR3734larsn4n3535Pengja3536c4llmem4ybe3437PaleRider3038Turtleroar3039Aparatus3040beardmannan3041MathrimC2942supersputnik2943UareDeadSoon2744pianocat882545Sitout2546uniiiited2547JokerJames952448sommer_sonne2249DaVitsche2150ImDaNuts2151vasharang22052Hopcinu2053Bafomet1854raugas1855DAChampChamp1856evisceration1857oszk1758Imazebrah1659Karma__Super1460flota311461maestro19081362SCOBY1363NinjaLooter1264possunen31265_GNYSS_1166radge11167Moist_Flops1168nuaudi31069Girafcloner71070retroxx1071BUGSBUNNY81072trolollolo21073I_ninja1074Praysinner1075nightshopper1076DonnaMeinova877BarryMcBluff87809Duck779i__IiI__i780jjLFC781whoami78782bouncer187783cchh777684Giorgios1685lady-bird686Tabdi687Murfy19688Bladee30689Doncorleone9690Rooney13691DaynJAhRasta692t55tq693BruceFlea594DuckAces595PinderKingvi596Skiguna597Traverse598FaiDeaEmo599Fcbforever5100GER4SOUL5101bucur15155102Finger25103kykyry--zina5104mafiaboySAD1

Confusion and mayhem, can't wait

@mp When you try to register to a relevant tournament you can click the drop down menu in the ticket field (the little down arrow next to "Ticket: Whatever ticket is selected, down arrow") and choose which one of your tickets (scroll down), that are valid for that tournament, you want to use for that specific tournament. If that ticket won't appear in that list at all when you try to register then it might be mistagged and might need re-issuing or something.

Can someone please check if I have any UK Tour seats left over? I'm think I should have 0 at this point, but want to be sure Thanks.

@Hitchan13 you should read the first post here in it's entirety, otherwise you might lsoe that priviledge

@NeriPoker Kind of, Leo won't be there unfortunately, but the casino registration desk will have a list of qualifiers, just say your name, they tick off a package off the list and you're good to go. The should also be at least 1 unibet employee around as well, ask Iany and he will point you in their direction if there are any issues.

Here's an idea, how about we just make all levels pay out 30%/30%/30%, that way everybody gets a slice of the pie and nobody will ever be disappointed cause nobody will win more than them. On a more serious note, idk what to say, on one side the variance in hexapros is bonkers so I see why reducing variance could be attractive for both recs and regs, on the other side, the whole point of paying more positions for the big ones is that even coming 3'rd is a huge win and not just 2 buyins, so the first 2 steps actually do give some amount of pleasure of winning for the recs, and some amount of variance reduction for the regs, while 2 buyins does very little of both. Also raking 24% of the prizepool just to give it back to everyone participating is kinda ew to put it in negreanu's words, it's kinda like my hyperbolic example above with everyone getting paid 30%. But like, as a business, if you can get away with doing it for 6/100k tournaments and people don't mind it, then why not do it for 18 times more tournaments, right? All that being said, the effective rake increase is quite small due to the small probability of 25x's happening, so I wonder if it's actually a good tradeoff for the player, an acceptable amount to pay for this variance reduction (which is quite tiny as well). Haven't really given them a real shot to have a feel for it yet but it might actually be fine. If this change would also be accompanied by an overall rake reduction by the extra effective rake of the measure *wink wink* (which is really small actually so probably doesn't matter that much) then I guess there would be no downside, it would just be like a slight lowering of the stakes played and it would look less like a greedy company measure to make a tiny bit more money (it is a very small amount overall) and purely something for the benefit of the players. But again, from a companie's perspective, if most people don't even realize what's going on then why even do a good PR solution when you can just say you're doing something purely for the good of the people while omitting the pay a tiny bit more part, the latter is probably generally more +EV for companies. /end random rant about something that probably matters very little in the grand scheme of things :laugh:

@Zach I'm traveling from the other side of europe :laugh: , but yeah I understand wanting to have some piece of mind that you'll actually be able to play. I don't think this is usually an issue with these small tours, I hope you'll manage to get your seat reserved though.

@Zach Personally I've never seen a Unibet UK Tour where people could not be seated, there have been a few occasions of queues or waiting lists, but I've always ended up playing and often getting to fire an extra bullet regardless if I got there early or late on day 1A + there's a day 1B as well on Saturday, with 8 levels of latereg each I believe. That being said it is their first time in Newcastle so idk if the casino is particularly small there, from the pictures on google it looks pretty big.

I think it would be better if the number stayed to the last number you purchased last time. If someone started 3 tables at the same time he is likely to want to start 3 the next time he plays as well, if someone did 1 he is likely to want 1 again. Maybe reset it after you close the client if there's any value in that, but resetting after every buyin is too much IMO

IMO his suggestion for a stake restriction should be implemented as well as a loss limit. The loss limit doesn't stop someone from tilting off their money, just tilting off below a certain amount, and then when they are restricted from playing at all they'll just deposit on a site that cares less about protecting the players. Obviously a loss limit is a good option to have as well. A stake restriction if it were implemented needs to exclude any form of tickets from the exclusion like if you play satties to higher tournaments and win tickets for them or have a cash game ticket that would expire otherwise, but with no possibility to reload from outside the ticket on that table (or freeze the expiration date of the cash ticket)

@pinki Thanks for linking that article, it was really interesting. I knew that there were some massive, and really amateuristic coding issues in the infancy of online poker, when poker software wasn't much more thought through than a for fun flash game, and no regulations anywhere (2000ish) but I never knew the exact algorithms used and the methods to exploit them on the fly, super cool stuff.

I disagree with this statement. Anyone worth their salt would say that if the opponents range is only AA KK QQ then the GTO answer is to fold Queens, so your reasoning doesn't go against anything, it's good reasoning (IF (big if) his range is like that ). Yeah I know some people call GTO only situations where both players are in equilibrium, and the one where only you are in equilibrium vs a different specific range is maximally exploitative or something like that, but this is just pedantic terminology and ultimately it means the same thing, make the best decision that can't be exploited vs a range, and if you are to separate the 2 in "styles of play" you will need both to make the most profit, but they aren't really different styles since they're the same thing. My problem with your reasoning is if his range is truely that tight there, a confirmation on a sample size of 1 means nothing, he could easily have 90% opening range and you will still get this confirmation some times. That being said, a player that always does the same thing and suddenly does something different obviously does ring major alarm bells, like if for example a player always shoves a 10BB stack, and he suddenly limps, ding ding ding nut alert. That is definitely a factor that you have to account for and it could justify your fold. As for the book, just buy it right now, or tonight, don't think about it, just do it The mental part is so important.

I don't see how you could have played this hand any differently, 5 handed, the guy is a big stack in a bounty so he should be opening pretty wide. What was your read? Did he not open a single hand in an hour, at a 5 handed table? Was he minopening everything and raising bigger with premiums? I guess if you have a lot of confirmation of those reads you could fold, I gueeeess, but I'd have a very hard time folding this hand (and if I don't fold I shove) without playing with this guy in quite a few tournaments before this situation happened, since dynamics over a single tournament shift quite often. As for the mental game part, have you ever read The Mental Game of poker by Jared Tendler? I haven't myself but most people liked it a lot, although it clearly hasn't completely fixed everyone's mental game issues it's still probably way worth the 12$ price tag (on amazon, kindle version). You make that money back in a single tournament where maybe you feel better, if you haven't gotten it already.

You know what would be cool, if we could change the background on a specific table, like right click on it and change background just for that one (not change the default one at the table the way alias changing works). Maybe also have a way to set a default for final tables or different tournament formats in "My Profile" , like bounties having a some sort of knockout theme, satties some satellite theme with maybe a bunch of moons or something etc, a lot of cool stuff could be done, but yeah requires some development which is not a priority. Also yeah some sort of Queens Rule themed background would be neat since you guys did do that initiative.

@WuDu you really don't need as many buyins as you're suggesting, of course it's nice to have them, you can fire like a maniac no problem when you do, but take some shots man, you probably would have been way further along this quest if you would have taken more shots. That's the real beauty of this system, that it enables shottaking and moving up in stakes faster than any other promotion by removing the monetary risk. As for the forcing, meh, I guess these kind of limitations are fine-ish. I really don't like expiration date based forcing tho, since tickets are essentially money, and being very aggro with removing said money leaves a sour taste in people's mouths, particularly the ones that aren't hardcore grinders. Party used to do that, and it got soooo much negative feedback.

About the sattie BRM @MoreTBC your idea of BRM makes no sense, that's not how BRM works @psrquack the whole point of having a contained ticket exchanger for the Unibet opens is that you will not need to have 100 buyins anymore to ensure that you won't go broke IRL, to ensure that you don't damage your monthly earnings or monthly budget or whatever. If you were to follow strict BRM in playing satties then you wouldn't only need 100 buyins for that level of satties, but 100 buyins for the target event so like 100k to even start playing the satties. But of course you can still take shots with a much smaller bankroll, and the exchanger system allows you to take shots way way more aggressively than you could while constantly pumping money into it, cause there's almost no risk involved, you can not cash out the UO bankroll, playing higher from those tickets does not affect your real life roll, it's pretty great. I would a agree that slightly more bankroll would probably be better, as people having to drop down often and be stuck at that level for a couple of weeks until they can get back, then drop down again doesn't benefit anyone (hensie is a prime example of this, where he used to play all the 50's and 250's but because he was too aggro he torched it all in the finals and got stuck at the <5€ level) , but with the fact that we could exchange daily now that risk is minimized cause you can make your moves between levels much faster than when we had a weekly exchanger, and being aggro with your bankroll benefits you too in this case. @ people not playing higher / not playing finals ... first of all who are these people not playing the finals, I keep seeing people that went though this system and getting to the live events quite regularly, how are they getting there if they don't play the finals ... the ones that don't are probably exceptions or overly cautious, or have a small amount anyway. Of course I might be wrong, and there might be 100 players that have 5k+ in tickets and refuse to play a final which would be pretty silly, mainly silly for them. But if some person is playing a low level (that maybe is their normal level or even higher because of this system) and they will never reach the final step for whatever reason, why is that a problem? They can't take out money out of the system, they are generating liquidity, turnover, rake, decrease overlay, start games (some don't, do your job :haha: ), they are getting some amount of enjoyment out of playing online tournaments (particularly in an interesting format that is usually a massive money sink), why are we demonizing them? The point is to get to the live event, sure, if they don't then someone else will get there in their place, what's the problem? That being said I do agree that some limitations to encourage people to move up faster is good for everyone including themselves. @Stubbe-Unibet "With the ticket exchanges" in conjunction with other factors like not announcing destinations mid way though the qualifying period, changing destinations from something really popular to something much less popular, having repeat destinations even 6 months apart, reducing the number of feeder tournaments and the turnover in them, removing a final and then reintroducing it after a few months of people being used to it not existing anymore and not the best lobby to keep track of them, and reducing the turnover of people that did exchange because of weekly restrictions "we consistently had overlay in the finals (significant overlay)" Fixed that for you . I know everyone likes to create a narrative that fits their story, and I'm not saying exchanges didn't play a part, but context is important. And yes I know you're on our side this time, it just triggers me okay :laugh: .