Jump to content


Group: 72
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Elukka12

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Elukka12's Achievements



  1. Thanks @Stubbe-Unibet Thanks in advance for updating things in this thread. One question for clarity: Is there a chance I cannot open an Unibet NL account in January? That I will have to wait until the regulation takes place?
  2. Thank you @nightshopper @Stubbe-Unibet - what is the status of Unibet / Online poker in between? Can I go to the Netherlands and open Unibet account in January and play normally until the reregulation takes effect in September?
  3. This topic is coming relevant to me again now that the end of the year is approaching. Does anybody know something about the new Dutch regulation next year? PS: Thank you @wwaanneess PPS Unfortunately easterdamn has not been active lately. Hopefully not broke!
  4. I understand that Unibet Poker needs to make money, but some tourney rakes are simply outrageous and probably not good for the business either. Example: I wanna qualify for 50EUR UOS Freezeout so I play a 10 EUR (9+1) satelite (4min level crapshot). If I am a breakeven player I will have to play that qualifier 50/9=5.556 times in order to qualify, on average. Thus, the ticket will cost 55.56EUR. Now, the 50EUR target tournament itself is raked at 45+5 EUR, so I will only get 45 EUR value for my ticket. Thus, as a result, I will pay 55.56/45 = 1.23 i.e. 23% rake for the whole thing! Previously this didn't bother me because there were number of overlay satelites across the board for UOS. Now that they are mostly gone, it is simply not feasible to play these events. Tournament rake structures also seem rather random. For example 3 min level Gargle Blaster is raked at 22.5+2.5 whereas some longer structure re-entry tournaments are more modestly raked. I also find Supernova's 90+10 rather outrageous. Like I said I am here not to complain 'rake is too high'. It just doesn't make sense how you rake things. A few things to consider: 1) more modestly raked qualifier paths would lead to more success for many new players - to get them excited 2) there should be a correlation between the required skill level and rake (crapshots are raked less) 3) the money you burn for overlays could be more evenly distributed as lower rake if you managed to avoid those overlays. Like I said overlays are already disappearing from the regular schedule so this combined with high initial rake just means that players will pay more.
  5. Thanks @GR1ZZL3R It is OK when you know it, but something so closely related to gameplay cannot be hidden like that. Escpecially behind an X that universally means leaving indeed. People are hesitant to press because they think it will close the table in an instant.
  6. First off, congrats for releasing 3.0 in schedule. Indeed, as @Stubbe-Unibet promised, the 3.0 came out before Euro 2020 was played. This version is definitely an improvement. I have a few questions and comments (possible assessed before, do not have time to go through 33 page thread) 1) where is the sitout button for cashgames? 2) I would appereciated knowing the late reg ending time even before the tournament starts (know when to come home for games in advance) 3) the range of font sizes used is too wide imo. I know they are meant to imply hierarcy/importance but the difference is too much. 4) if you attempt to make the lobby narrower it does not scale properly (does not make Starts or Tournament columns narrower (which are too wide for what they contain) but instead makes everything in the lobby smaller and just adds some more rows). Anyways, quite happy with this new version.
  7. ^ Very well understood. Anybody outside Unibet any idea on the matter?
  8. Thank you @ReCorpH for informative and quick reply! Regarding 3) meant that countries such as Belgium and Sweden do not have any promotions anymore. I assume this is because those countries require their own country based licenses(?) that have gotten extremely strict. So basically my question is is there anything in sight that the NL is following the same path - making life increasingly complicated for both operators and players.
  9. As we all know the situation for online poker is miserable in Belgium right now. Since it is a sizable side income for me, and since my other pursuits are treated friendlier there too, I am seriously contemplating the option of moving to the Netherlands. Have a few questions regarding Unibet in the Netherlands. Maybe @Stubbe-Unibet or somebody else from the team can comment these things. 1) Is Unibet poker available in the NL (I assume so but you can never be too careful) 2) Are all promotion available for NL residents? 3) Are there some Belgian/Swedish type of restrictions in sight for the NL? 4) What is the policy of using Unibet NL account occasionally from Belgium? I also have some questions regarding poker in the Netherlands at large - in case somebody knows 5) To my knowledge all major poker sites offer their services in the NL. Is this indeed true? 6) Is it true that winnings from EU-based poker operators are considered tax free income - compared to winnings from Holland Casino tax-wise? Any help with these questions is greatly apperciated!
  10. Played a lot with him and unfortunately the above is true indeed.
  11. @Dinutz999 I am not sure if all pokersites should follow the bounty frenzy. Since bounty-pros have a massive edge, recreational players lose their money faster in bounty tournaments than in regular tournaments. This in turn creates less healhty poker economics and worse user experiences for those who actually pay everything.
  12. Special bounty and a rebuy format? Speechless
  13. @Stubbe-Unibet Regarding the bounty size error I agree with everything you say. From the practical point of view that is. It should not be a big deal. From the juridical perspective, I am not sure. Unibet must have the responsibility to inform the player about all the aspects of the gambling event he or she is about to enter. Thus all the stakes should be off if the gambling event is any different. I would assume that your regulator also requires that. The player is and should be over-protected, compared to what is feasible from the practical point of view. Back in the old days when I was poor and new to poker I always asked for a refund simply with the reason "the tournament did not run as advertized". Sometimes it was as little as 6max instead of 9max. Nearly always did I receive the buyin back. These days I do not bother doing this anymore. But this over-compensation is simply a smart business strategy because if players in large numbers dismiss the site or start contacting the regulator the site is in much bigger financial problems than the initial over-compensation would cost. PS: Did not even play the event so no vested interest in the matter
  14. Could not act in the 25EUR Deep Impact (or whatever it was today called). Lost connection with chips slightly above the starting stack and got back at around 20:26 CET with 4bb.
  • Create New...