Just wondering what peoples priorities are in regards to choosing which site to play?
I love FTP and only played there before shut down. The only bad thing now is the loss of Pokerstrategy tracking, thus no learning material :/ Don't know weather to play at a site i love with no learning resources (FTP) or play at a site i dislike but remain able to learn (Stars). Shame there is no middle ground.
what kinda games do you play? How many tables? Since IMO there is definetly a middleground(other pokersites) for nearly every poker variant.
But yeah I also love to play on ftp, but now can't due our country regulations.
For me choosing a site depends if I think it is the best EV for me considering my roll, skills and future plans for poker.
as of now stars is better in almost everything
the software may be the only thing but as far as traffic, fishiness, variety goes stars is better
So if you dont already have an account with stars i suggest you get a tracked PS account and you should be good to go
I think I will maintain a lower status (silver) at PS while mostly playing where I want to play (which is, well you can guess it). Learning material can be found elsewhere. I miss the "entertainment" part of it though (watching videos).
I was taught a lesson while playing on a well known network getting nice PS points. It's not worth a fraction of a percent extra in RB to play on unbearable software. Poker should be enjoyed whether you do it for living or as a hobby. The learning material is a problem, but I am not playing X hours per month at **** to be able to watch a gold video or two per month.
/Johan = 
sadly PS > FTP in every way, in rakeback, in rake, everything. FTP has too bad rake compared to stars therefor rakeback aswell.. and I played 2years on FTP I loved the soft, but you can't do anything about their rake. Especially the low limits <NL25 is killer, 7%++ rake.
Originally posted by abhi147
as of now stars is better in almost everything
the software may be the only thing but as far as traffic, fishiness, variety goes stars is better
So if you dont already have an account with stars i suggest you get a tracked PS account and you should be good to go
Are you for real? How the fuck the software is better? You cant change cards, you cant have other tables other than fucking green, the pot numbers in small tables are shit, the stack sizes with small tables and hud are hard to read, when a player eliminates and you have race table it is very difficult to count the number of people, when you have bet size fixed and you small the tables only the two are visible. Why the hell is fucking tilt better than stars? How idiot can you be and say this?
Now with 30% rakeback max full tilt sucks. Rake is more in full tilt etc etc It is better to close it again
Use your fucking brain homo
It is a matter of taste. There is good taste. Then there is bad taste. People can have either.
/Johan =
Originally posted by moneyback88
Originally posted by abhi147
as of now stars is better in almost everything
the software may be the only thing but as far as traffic, fishiness, variety goes stars is better
So if you dont already have an account with stars i suggest you get a tracked PS account and you should be good to goAre you for real? How the fuck the software is better? You cant change cards, you cant have other tables other than fucking green, the pot numbers in small tables are shit, the stack sizes with small tables and hud are hard to read, when a player eliminates and you have race table it is very difficult to count the number of people, when you have bet size fixed and you small the tables only the two are visible. Why the hell is fucking tilt better than stars? How idiot can you be and say this?
Now with 30% rakeback max full tilt sucks. Rake is more in full tilt etc etc It is better to close it again
Use your fucking brain homo
Err
I said the SOFTWARE MAY BE the only thing
I personally dont like it much i prefer stars software as its simpler but that mainly is because ive played mostly on stars and only tried FT few days back after its relaunch
But most people like the FT software
In anycase why are you screaming?
Originally posted by OZSA
sadly PS > FTP in every way, in rakeback, in rake, everything. FTP has too bad rake compared to stars therefor rakeback aswell...
Doesn't seem like I'd be paying more rake on FTP than on PS so far. Tho I've been playing a bit tighter.
Hi all,
@moneyback88:
We try to promote civility and friendliness on the forums and would appreciate you doing the same.
Flaming someone in such a manner is neither appreciated nor acceptable as per our forums rules:
Please refrain from using such a tone in future.
Have fun and regards all,
Mal.
Originally posted by NightFrostaSS
Originally posted by OZSA
sadly PS > FTP in every way, in rakeback, in rake, everything. FTP has too bad rake compared to stars therefor rakeback aswell...Doesn't seem like I'd be paying more rake on FTP than on PS so far. Tho I've been playing a bit tighter.
So far rake is equal for me too and I've played the same stakes on both sites.
AMaA: The Good Life
:diamond:Follow me on Twitter @emanuelc16
The Education of a Modern Poker Player by TwiceT, jbpatzer & EmanuelC16
And now, back to topic!
Ah!
Came to think of this: Not even Poker Stars prefer Stars software over Full Tilt's. The next version of Stars is not even an update. It's new from scratch. The Full Tilt software will, on the other hand, be kept. ♦
(I think Stars is ok software though.)
/Johan =
guys, its math
No limit holdem only
Stars rake
Rake % Cap (6max-9max)
NL2 3.5% 0.3$
NL5 4.15% 1$
NL10 4.5% 1.5$
NL25 4.5% 2$
NL50 4.5% 2.5$
FTP
Rake % Cap (6max-9max)
NL2 6.6% 2$
NL5 6.6% 2$
NL10 6.6% 2$
NL25 5% 3$
NL50 5% 3$
Not only the cap is higher on FTP, but they take 1cent rake of each 15cent pot at NL2, NL5, NL10, and they take 1cent rake of each 20cent pot at NL25 and higher.
I loved FTP, but there is no way, anyone could say that FTP and Stars are "somewhat" equal, they are far from equal because of the rake.
Originally posted by OZSA
guys, its math
No limit holdem only
Stars rake
Rake % Cap (6max-9max)
NL2 3.5% 0.3$
NL5 4.15% 1$
NL10 4.5% 1.5$
NL25 4.5% 2$
NL50 4.5% 2.5$FTP
Rake % Cap (6max-9max)
NL2 6.6% 2$
NL5 6.6% 2$
NL10 6.6% 2$
NL25 5% 3$
NL50 5% 3$Not only the cap is higher on FTP, but they take 1cent rake of each 15cent pot at NL2, NL5, NL10, and they take 1cent rake of each 20cent pot at NL25 and higher.
I loved FTP, but there is no way, anyone could say that FTP and Stars are "somewhat" equal, they are far from equal because of the rake.
Incremental vs full pot rake makes a difference as well. You are saying it's different and we are saying it's close, not that it's the exact same. We weren't comparing all stakes either. We said for the stakes we've played on both sites.
AMaA: The Good Life
:diamond:Follow me on Twitter @emanuelc16
The Education of a Modern Poker Player by TwiceT, jbpatzer & EmanuelC16
Originally posted by moneyback88
Originally posted by abhi147
as of now stars is better in almost everything
the software may be the only thing but as far as traffic, fishiness, variety goes stars is better
So if you dont already have an account with stars i suggest you get a tracked PS account and you should be good to goAre you for real? How the fuck the software is better? You cant change cards, you cant have other tables other than fucking green, the pot numbers in small tables are shit, the stack sizes with small tables and hud are hard to read, when a player eliminates and you have race table it is very difficult to count the number of people, when you have bet size fixed and you small the tables only the two are visible. Why the hell is fucking tilt better than stars? How idiot can you be and say this?
Now with 30% rakeback max full tilt sucks. Rake is more in full tilt etc etc It is better to close it again
Use your fucking brain homo
This is my favorite post ever on Pokerstrategy
Thanks for sharing
Originally posted by EmanuelC16
Originally posted by OZSA
guys, its math
No limit holdem only
Stars rake
Rake % Cap (6max-9max)
NL2 3.5% 0.3$
NL5 4.15% 1$
NL10 4.5% 1.5$
NL25 4.5% 2$
NL50 4.5% 2.5$FTP
Rake % Cap (6max-9max)
NL2 6.6% 2$
NL5 6.6% 2$
NL10 6.6% 2$
NL25 5% 3$
NL50 5% 3$Not only the cap is higher on FTP, but they take 1cent rake of each 15cent pot at NL2, NL5, NL10, and they take 1cent rake of each 20cent pot at NL25 and higher.
I loved FTP, but there is no way, anyone could say that FTP and Stars are "somewhat" equal, they are far from equal because of the rake.Incremental vs full pot rake makes a difference as well. You are saying it's different and we are saying it's close, not that it's the exact same. We weren't comparing all stakes either. We said for the stakes we've played on both sites.
Even if you play NL10000 stars has less rake 
if you guys dont believe me, see their official page. and no, NL2 stars 3.5% is not a typo
http://www.pokerstars.eu/poker/room/rake/
http://www.fulltiltpoker.com/rake.php
