First of all, those are bad because I never win anything of them. Although I reg them only with free tickets or tickets from challenges etc.
Second of all, it's broken indeed. I won a 40cent ticket from Livertools freeroll. I was not surprised when I didn't win anything. But, I went to see hands which were dealt after I looked at the tournament lobby to see winners.
Can someone explain in any logical way, how in earth is SCOBY the one to get the last cash from there?
That's quite clear. And I'm not being salty here. I was not even close to having good enough hand. I just feel that having 5th best hand at the table is not really worth a price.
Unibet has tens or hundreds flip tournaments in a day. Some people register in those with their deposited money. Don't you think that this should be fair? If you loose to pair of fives with two pairs just because someone had a straight, it's kind of stupid.
And I brought this up only because I think it's clearly unfair. Not for me, because I don't loose anything to these tourneys.
I am registering to all possible flips with real money in last days, but I never check what is happening there
I was sure that the ranking on flips is made by who have the best hand in the end. It's strange if after 1st place winner everything is random.
How the hell the guy with two pairs didn't won?
Even tho these are based only on luck, I don't think that this is the right way to share tickets/prizes. There was 3 tables in that tournament so there could have been even a straightflush which didn't get a ticket if someone else had a bigger straightflush.
Waiting for @Stubbe-Unibet to give his opinion about this. I already know that he thinks this is all fine and no need to make any changes. I just want to hear the logic behind it.
Not sure but i think results are based on stack size before last hand rather than how good your hand was.
OK, so probably 1st place had bigger stack of chips than all others players and the ranking is made by the size of chips since the leader won that hand. This is fair.
If everybody was having 1 chip for example it wasn't fair the ranking.
Well, I don't know for sure what happened, but I'm guessing it is the following:
If more than one person busts in a hand, the order of payment in a tournament for the busted players is NOT how good their hands were, but how many chips they started the hand with, in other words it could go something like this:
Player A - 10k chips (wins with straight flush)
Player B 9k chips (Ace high)
Player c 8k chips (quads)
Player d 7k chips (full house)
If they all went in, player A wins the pot and therefore everyone else busts, but Player B cashes AHEAD of players C and D by virtue of starting the hand with more chips.
It may be a funky rule, but it's applied universally in tournaments around the world.