adytzoy

Hi Ben Sulsky

I don't know if I really understand GTO so I have 3 examples.

1. In BBvSB a GTO open range is ~43% and a GTO defending range is ~60%. If someone starts to raise 100% from SB and I, in BB, decide to defend the same, 60%, will I get exploited by him because I am not defending enough or will I exploit him because he opens too much?

2. Another extreme example: if I decide to open 100% from CO and no one notice this and they keep playing the same GTO strats as if I am raising only ~27%, I will exploit them or I will just exploit myself?

3. I open GTO from BU, but a villain in BB is 3betting just QQ+, AKs/o. Its a mistake if I 4bet like he is 3betting GTO or its not a problem because he is not GTO when he is not calling or 3betting enought versus my opens?

porshy , you are my hero! :)

have you ever thought it might be rigged somehow?

if so, how did you got rid of that thought?

Phil Galfond, how does RunItOncePoker looks like in your dream? :)

At what average number of simultaneous players you will be able to say to yourself "I've accomplished what I wanted the moment I decided to start a poker site" ? :) [L.E.: "... and from now on I am freerolling :) "]

Oh, so fast after the last update! Nice!

Good luck, Phil Galfond!
Good luck, Nick Steiner!

Good luck, RIO Poker! :)

Phil Galfond,

Lets say I play loose at one table, give action, make more rake and I lose all my money before having the chance to play a splash pot.
1. This will matter the next time I join a table?
2. Another player that joins that table will take advantage of the fact that in the previous, lets say, 50 hands the table made X$ rake?

Phil Galfond,

How often a splash pot will occur on average?

Mea culpa with the "false marketing" claim, Zeneka, WM2K and @RIOpoker

Was indeed said 51% rakeback to ALL players, not 51% rakeback to EVERY player.
I still don't like it because can easily be misinterpreted.

@zeneka,

Yes, these are the facts that you are missing:

1. pros dont need extra edge from the mass database analysis;

2. "51% rakeback for all players" is false marketing: not all players will have 51% in the long term and that's a FACT; recreationals will have less, pros will have more; when a lottery says "you can win 1 million dollars", even if we know that is bad to play the lottery in the long run, you can't say that they made false claims;

3. you can't make a healthy poker ecosystem favoring the best players; its like being a government and giving food stamps to the wealthiest because they, being better at life and business, deserve more those food stamps; its like favoring the lion not the antelope; its like favoring the antelope, not the grasses; thats not how you make a healthy ecosystem.

4. I think the fun factor is less important when someone decides to use his/her credit card and deposit on a poker site comparing to deciding to join a live poker table, because they can play poker without money at a tap of a finger; people go to the live tables also to enjoy the company, but join a poker site that have only real money games because they think they can make some money; what do you accomplish by favoring the best players?

"No they sign up because they love the game, like to gamble, they want to play cards."

Bingo 123,

No, they sign up because they want to win. Money.
If they just loved the game and wanted to play some cards they would have just joined any poker app with a tap and played some cards.
Why would someone take out his credit card, send documents to support, etc., if they just wanted to 'play some cards'. Because they think they can win some money.

That's online.

Live poker is a different animal. People go to play live poker also because they enjoy talking with people, socializing, etc. A thing that online is almost non-existent especially on a site that doesn't have a chat. Winning live is less of a reason to play poker than online.

I think that the reasons people sign up on a poker site are different from the reasons people play live poker.

Take bitcoin, for example: the crypto hype didn't happened because people, out of the blue, started to love bitcoin, electronic payment, blockchain, etc. It happened because people thought they can win money in crypto.

Same with poker: the poker boom didn't happened because people started, out of the blue, to love playing cards. Some played already poker, others had different passions. It happened because a lot of people started to think that they can win money playing cards.

Kitsune101 , 100% agree with what you said.

"Do not mistake interesting for fun."

and Do not mistake interesting with effective.

TruthS33ka, How can you, an user, spot a bot or someone who's using a real time solver by having a HH in an anonymous field? Whats the process?

Phil Galfond,

You can help achieving that (l.e.: bringing back a vibe of the pure art days of the past) by not giving people the chance of doing mass database analysis using the hand histories you plan to provide them after 24 hours. :)

Have you heard of mass database analysis?

Don't get too excited, Phil Galfond , you got positive answers only from those who are excited to stream. Its kind of a social bubble.

How do you think a poker enthusiast will feel when he will realise that RIOpoker offers a bigger reward to another player just because the other player is in front of a camera?

Its like forcing people to stream for money.
Might work for branding, but still... why would I play on a site that has this policy of rewarding streaming when I want to be rewarded for playing poker, not from streaming.

This is not a BETTER poker product.

This is the moment I realised that you are not really focusing on making a better product that will attract players, regulars and enthusiast alike.

This is just 'a move' (smart one, I guess) to brand your poker site. Might be a good one as players will want that extra % rakeback, but this is not making a poker product better for everyone. I don't think this will make poker great again.

L.E.: Until now I was very excited about the launch, but this is a bit of a turn off for me.