Community

This tournament had only this one hand played at this table. In which case I think the "nearest dealer button" rule prevails? @Stubbe-Unibet ? ... View more

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. ... View more

The leaderboards are still on the website. Go to unibet>poker>poker promotions>UOS online series XI then you'll see the leaderboards lower down the page ... View more

I always thought that the reason that Omaha tournaments were "demoted" to the later slot was because the number of runners were lower. But it seems that the numbers for the later NLHE tournaments are about the same. Can we have just one Omaha tournament with a decent structure, one that isn't a shovefest around the bubble? While hold em players enjoy 12m, even 15m blinds, we have 6m, in a poker variant which needs to be deeper to play properly. Start at the earlier time, 10k chips, 10 min blinds. Or else 10 mins blinds but with rebuy or re-enter structure. It really isn't too much to ask to have ONE tournament out of a series of 145 that is a decent Omaha structure. ... View more

I tell you what, I won't be sad to see the back of some of these major challenges.  I've played 3000 hands on my current major challenge and only 6/10 of the way through. They're supposed to take 1000 hands I know I can skip it, but it's a bit late for that now! ... View more

@FreedoM wrote: Interestingly,ratholing confers no specific advantage to the ratholer and no disadvantage to the other players at the table. In other words, there is no decent reason why ratholing should be considered unethical.  Actually ratholing does confer an advantage to the ratholer. If we consider that there are two general ways of making a profit in poker 1) having value and betting it, 2) having a worse hand but bluffing it - the second of these is massively reduced when the opponent is short stacked. In fact, it's relatively straightforward to devise a strategy of "fold most things, but when you have enough equity, commit" which works for a short stack but for which there is too much jeopardy when deep stacked. Rolf Slotboom wrote an entire book on it for Omaha! It's basically an implied odds/reverse implied odds issue. So it's not just an ethical dimension, it's actually bad for the game to let shortstackers (consistently) get away with it. For sure, sites allow short stacks so that less-rolled players can take a shot, or play more comfortably at higher stakes at least. Taking steps to mitigate ratholing is a way to reduce money going out of the player pool to what is essentially a cookie-cutter way of making money for some types of player.   ... View more

wow - that came and went quickly. There was no lobby for that when I checked.  ... View more

@Stubbe-Unibet  Wise decision. This thread was beginning to become a waste of my life, but like most car crashes, it's difficult to drive past without rubber-necking. It was an interesting exercise in human psychology, I guess. What's interesting is how the "rigged" posts have evolved over the years. I've probably been reading rants like these for over fifteen years on various forums - Hendon Mob, 2+2, you name it, but back in the day when bots didn't exist, it wasn't bots that were to blame. RNGs did exist then of course, but oddly enough people didn't blame manipulation of the RNGs for their bad beats. I guess there's always something to blame. Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose . . . ... View more

Ditto - this is happening to me as well. I'm guessing lack of auto-rebuy is a policy decision? It would certainly be welcomed by me. ... View more

Welcome @Mr__D  I think the primary place is here, but there are also a few Twitch channels - Unibet's own, Ian Simpson's Twitch which runs on certain nights of the week. Plus a few other forum members do too.  There's a blog section to the community, and also Community Leagues run periodically - check out the forum post for that. Outside of the Pandemic, there is of course the live poker meets - for those lucky enough to get to the Unibet Open, there's a fair amount of socialising then  and there are also various national live circuit events - depends where you live. ... View more

well, I don't know - all I know is, I knew where it was on the old system and I can't find it now. I'm guessing it was with the update, because now there's no longer a tab on the history page where you can select for challenges.  Any sneak peek of what's in stall for the new loyalty system? I'm guessing challenges won't be involved then! ... View more

@Stubbe-Unibet for the record, it just did it again today in tournament ID22857569. Same scenario as last time - tournament started off on one table, then expanded to two. When it did, HfH kicked in. This time it stopped after around ten hands - when a player busted I think ... View more

Hi @Stubbe-Unibet , Well, the problem reported above - i.e. HfH kicking in early in a tournament before late reg has even finished and we're miles from the money - is actually quite rare. But while we're on the subject, do you know that the "hand for hand has ended" message quite often comes one bust *after* the money/final table bubble has burst? In that scenario, the software isn't enacting HfH any more, but the message "waiting for other tables to finish" still appears every hand (like, even in the case where there are no other tables ) That still happens quite a lot.   ... View more

@Stubbe-Unibet yes even though I was the beneficiary of this, I agree with @MicroBeard that the points system should be like before - counting up from min cash to winner in single points. That way you get more points if you win a bigger tournament, but you don't win too big from coming first, and don't win even bigger from coming first in a bigger tournament. The point is if you come first, you're already winning big, whereas the point of a leaderboard is to reward consistency over a series - and for that you need to recognise lots of small cashes. If it's any consolation @MicroBeard a had another cash which didn't count because I didn't have my community nick ... View more

Ooh that was close. 8th and 1st, but one flip away from being massive chip leader in the one I came 8th. ... View more

It's like a cross between a bot and a Sacha baron Cohen character  ... View more