Boylesports this is just wrong!!!!

carfax

robinblinds wrote: »

This is an insular view and one which has failed to evolve, particularly in the last two years. Basically its a crib.

NOT ONE IDEA WHATSOEVER has been put forward in Roy Brindleys Racing Post piece as an alternative way of pushing poker on in this country.

Business evolves. Poker evolves. Players style evolves. Games evolve. And when the game does eventually get regulated in this country (which the top businesses are constantly pushing for, in order to protect their position within the market), it will be the same horse bolting after the stable door has shut.

Some peoples thinking stands utterly still.

Pity that.

Post of the day by a long mile imho, fair play.

ROY BRINDLEY

Bejaysus, people get very emotional

DeVore

And private messages should remain private Mr Brindley.

DeV.

kakak1

DeVore wrote: »

And private messages should remain private Mr Brindley.

DeV.

me thinks no one should have to receive abuse by an anonymous sender, Roy is not revealing anything here because i would suspect this is a second account set up especially for the controversial Macau thread.

So Tom is it OK for someone to throw abuse when using a second account by way of a PM ????

KevIRL

Calm it everyone. Fruitfull is just DBC acting the tool as usual. IT was suspected but the PM confirmed it.

corkie123

jesus i get abused all the time but having no feelings helps me on here ;)

ps, a lot of people need to get a life and realize that in business they are all sorts of promotions wether it is 2 for one or cheap deals and this been a poker promotion then play on my site and get few chips more is boyles . paddy powers is quaifly on our site and be last man standing we give u loads . i was reading a article by todd brunson on a tourie hes running and he had early bird chip christ i say no one gave out about that like this . now BOPS your good enough to play 2k behind **** u keep telling me your the best from somewere .

kakak1

KevIRL wrote: »

Calm it everyone. Fruitfull is just DBC acting the tool as usual. IT was suspected but the PM confirmed it.

you might let DeVore know then

ROY BRINDLEY

Anyway, I'm done with posting for another six months or so. Sorry to have shaken up a hornets nest and opened a can of worms in one fell swoop.

I see Ladbrokes/Killarney keeps cropping up. My point was nothing to do with exclusive online qualification for events. That's becoming commonplace and does not affect what has to be a level playing field.

I maintain tournaments should be fair for all entrants meaning equal starting stacks for all and the side show of a last-longer race (which can both advantage and disadvantage all contestants) should not be part of a major and established European Ranking Tournament.

“The secret of success is to offend the greatest number of people!”

…George Bernard Shaw.

I’m guessing everyone is in agreement with that!

Slash/ED

I still fail to see how something that'll cause someone to make -ev decisions on your table can possibly be considered a disadvantage

Macspower

ROY BRINDLEY wrote: »

Anyway, I'm done with posting for another six months or so. Sorry to have shaken up a hornets nest and opened a can of worms in one fell swoop.

I see Ladbrokes/Killarney keeps cropping up. My point was nothing to do with exclusive online qualification for events. That's becoming commonplace and does not affect what has to be a level playing field.

I maintain tournaments should be fair for all entrants meaning equal starting stacks for all and the side show of a last-longer race (which can both advantage and disadvantage all contestants) should not be part of a major and established European Ranking Tournament.

“The secret of success is to offend the greatest number of people!”

…George Bernard Shaw.

I’m guessing everyone is in agreement with that!

the reason the Ladbrooks/Killarney keeps cropping up is something you should have a good look at and make your feelings known to the powers that be.....

I know it's hard to bite the hand that feeds you but you must know it's wrong

DeVore

kakak1 wrote: »

me thinks no one should have to receive abuse by an anonymous sender, Roy is not revealing anything here because i would suspect this is a second account set up especially for the controversial Macau thread.

So Tom is it OK for someone to throw abuse when using a second account by way of a PM ????

There is a report PM feature, just like a report post feature.

DeV.

5starpool

What about 1 person staking loads of people into an event that they themselves are playing? Does this not potentially distort the way things might play out?

I personally have more of an issue with the ladbrokes model for Killarney than I do with any added money in the form of a last longest or extra chips for meeting a requirement, as long as such things are known before the person registers.

kakak1

DeVore wrote: »

There is a report PM feature, just like a report post feature.

DeV.

I like to think I'm the generous type so like "Mr Brindley" I'd like to share an unsolicited abusive PM with my fellow posters especially when you then find out it's DBC.................:pac:

Telling him off or banning him aint going to stop him...........;)

DeVore

kakak1 wrote: »

I like to think I'm the generous type so like "Mr Brindley" I'd like to share an unsolicited abusive PM with my fellow posters especially when you then find out it's DBC.................:pac:

Telling him off or banning him aint going to stop him...........;)

Who is who and how they act is not an excuse to conduct yourself poorly. There are ways of reporting these things. The rest of your post is rationalisation.

I also think there is a reasonable point to answer in the questions about Ladbrokes which would serve both he and they better if he answered them rather then deflecting with this PM nonsense and then "leaving" (read: lurking).


DeV.

Samoa Joe

Roy, I think may have been posted before in this thread ,I hope it answers your questions from our (Boylepoker) point of view.



Details have been announced of this year’s IPO extra chips incentive and unsurprisingly it hasn’t gone down well with everyone. It is a new (ish) idea and to that end I just wanted to answer a few questions that have popped up on various forums and also explain in a little more detail the thinking behind it.

The most common complaint is that the extra chips incentive is unfair. It’s unfair to those who don’t play on the internet and/or don’t play with Boylepoker and I guess it depends on which way you look at it.
Years ago I used to pop over to the Merrion casino for the Irish Open and on my first trip there Luke Ivory explained to me how he ran his monthly tournament for cash game players. The idea was the more you played in the club the more chips in a monthly freeroll tournament you would start with and I thought it a genius idea. You could play one hour in the club and still be eligible to play in the freeroll but obviously the more you played the more you were rewarded; this incentivised players to his club and rewarded loyalty. The extra chips incentive at the IPO is based on that principle. You do not have to play on the internet or on Boylepoker to play in the tournament but if you are a customer you are rewarded with extra chips and I don’t think that is unfair.
Is it fair to run a tournament where some players have more chips than others? Well its not the norm at the moment but the market is changing and again it’s down to one’s own perspective but as a live player whenever I see something I think is unfair I simply don’t play. Harrah’s who make the equivalent of 3rd place prize money in every tournament they ran at this years WSOP which I think is to much but I still played in one of the very well run events.
Ladbrokes recently announced details of their Killarney festival and only allowed you to play in it by qualifying online at their site. I didn’t think this was unfair, it’s their tournament and they want their customers there for the main event but I will still go for the side events and the craic as it’s such a superb event.
Pokerstars don’t run the EPT for anyone’s benefit other than their own, the tour makes huge money for them unlike the IPO which is a loss leader for us but again I don’t think that’s unfair, I think its sound business from the market leaders and its only the buy-in that prevents me from playing an EPT.
FullTilt recently took over sponsorship of the poker million and the first thing they did was to reduce the added money the previous sponsors put into the event. I have no issue with it as again it’s a premier tournament in Europe and with the amount of players FT sponsor they are already making a healthy contribution to the poker community.
The IPO is what it is because we pump so much time effort and money into it and I think it’s agreed that last year’s was a dramatic improvement on the previous year. The total cost last year was a decent 6 figure sum and will be again this year and personally I commend my superiors for allowing us to spend that kind of money in a recession without a guaranteed return.
Some have questioned how much we will make out of the players from the accrual of the necessary VIP points to get the extra chips and the honest truth is we cannot accurately predict. We set the bonus target very low based on the fact that all four of us in the team play online poker at small stakes and came up with a target that was reachable fairly quickly. We estimate that the most expensive way to get the points is to be on VIP level 1 and play MTT’s, effectively costing $16 in August and in September. We are adding €25,000 to the prizepool, divided by 1300 runners = €19. By clearing 250 ipoints each month players also release $5 of their first deposit bonus (if new customer obviously) and can enter into one of our many ipoint freerolls. We hope that customers get to see how easy it is to attain and maintain a level in the VIP scheme and see how much we are giving back in tournaments as well as experiencing other bonuses, promotions and our great service. No one was more cynical about this than our very own Matt Broughton, co-presenter of the poker show but as you can hear through the archive on show 32 he accumulated the points very quickly and realised we are only asking for a nominal amount of play to entitle you to the bonus.
People have asked how we can administer the additional chips properly and I can assure you we have planned for this more thoroughly than any other area of the event. As it’s our first time doing this we cannot say there will not be issues but as a betting man I’m massively betting against it.
To clarify you must play on the site to gain the extra points and there no exceptions to this, including VIP’s, Boyle Pro’s or anyone else. There is one group of players I feel this is grossly unfair on and that is the Dutch players. Last year they turned up in their droves and added a lot of fun and colour to the event. Due to laws out of our control we are unable to accept Dutch players. Last year we allowed them entry without having to register and this year we are again making an exception for those that played last year but unfortunately they are unable to accrue points to get the extra chips and this may well put them off attending, I really hope it doesn’t. For everyone else you do have to register online for the tournament but we can assist with that if you do not have access to the web either by registering through one of our many shops, phoning us or emailing us here.
We are a business and we have made a business decision. Last year we tried something new and it didn’t work; we added 20% of players rake net of bonuses to the prizepool and I thought it was an extraordinary generous offer but it didn’t succeed for whatever reason (if it had we might have added 100k to the prizepool!)
We want to look after our regular players as well as encourage players to try our service but did not want to exclude anyone from playing the event. I do understand that it’s not for everyone’s tastes but how about coming and just play the side events where all the chip stacks will start level, I will even promise to buy you a beer and discuss how we can make the IPO 2010 even better.
As Stephen McLean succinctly put it the tournament isn’t viable without the sponsorship and backing of an online poker room and the IPO is sponsored by Boylepoker. More than anything we want to make this event a championship poker tournament available to every player in Europe. We have added money and are trying new ideas to make the venture more viable for us so we can constantly improve on it, I personally don’t think that’s unfair.

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

Sorry Roy but your fos

newbie2

jebus lads,

this is a $250 tourney - not the WSOP main event. If you want to play it - log on th SpoilPoker and buy in. If you want extra chips (LOL-they will last, I promise) then play a very small amount on boyle and you'll get them. If you have an "issue", then don't play on boyle. personally, i don't think that 2k will give the donks an edge over me?

if i'm going out - i'm going out early.....

Mellor

Fruitfull wrote: »

Ladbrokes

Con's

• nearly everyone has to register through their site
• 50 euro 'handling' fee for booking packages
• Not one bit of added money or anything from them that is good for player

Ive left the pro's for ladbrokes blank as there is not one thing i can think of. They give their name and thats about it. The paddy power team and boyles team work so hard for their festivals.

Yeah, Laddies could of done something, anything for last years tourney.
even a small gesture, like guaranteeing 250k or something.
Or perhaps organising the softest qualifying sats in the history of poker.
Or at the very least, they could of paid for my buy-in and a room with 3 beds, when I clearly only need 1.
Pokersites, pfft, who needs 'em

AdMMM

Mellor wrote: »

Yeah, Laddies could of done something, anything for last years tourney.
even a small gesture, like guaranteeing 250k or something.
Or perhaps organising the softest qualifying sats in the history of poker.
Or at the very least, they could of paid for my buy-in and a room with 3 beds, when I clearly only need 1.
Pokersites, pfft, who needs 'em

Y'mean you had to supply your own coke and hookers?

Scouser in Dub

My own take on this is somewhat confused but whatever.

Firstly I have played a number of Poker Ireland tournaments and have always been impressed with the dealers the structures and the tournament management. I am a fan I like playing their tournaments and will continue to do so.

I also think that the 25k added should be enough to compensate those that feel their edge is somewhat compromised if they feel bound to play with 80% of the starting stack of those that have accumulated the points neccessary fore the 2k in chips.

However I will not be playing this tournament because I am not interested in moving money to a new site and having to play tournaments outside of my normal schedule in order to get a starting stack equivalent to those that are going to find it easy to accomodate the games necessary to achieve the points required. I do not play cash and in order to play enough low buyin tournaments to accumulate the points would be a drag over August / September.

I have no issue with Poker Ireland / Boyles doing this and I will continue to play PI tournaments including the two DC tournaments in PLO and RoE. I am not however prepared to handicap myself with a 8k stack in the IPO

5starpool

I don't know why the extra 2k is such an issue, it will be a pushfest well before the end of day 1 anyhow.

Luckycharms_74

Boylepoker are no different to all the other pokersites, PPP, Stars, FT, Lad's, etc. From their point of view its a perfect way to generate revenue from existing players and the new players who will sign up hoping to acquire the required points for the 2k bonus chips.

I also agree with the point that it does not offer a fair playing field, online vs live players, but thats just they way today's game has evolved. Online players outweigh live players. I don't play on Boyle's and would not even contemplate buying in to a tourny against some players who will have a 25% chip advantage over me.

People have two choices play or don't play

One final point regarding Roy Brindleys "biased" article against PPP and Boyle's but no mention of Ladbrokes. He obviously wants to keep his retainer with them

Onsberg

Ciaran_Corbett wrote: »

We estimate that the most expensive way to get the points is to be on VIP level 1 and play MTT’s, effectively costing $16 in August and in September. We are adding €25,000 to the prizepool, divided by 1300 runners = €19. By clearing 250 ipoints each month players also release $5 of their first deposit bonus (if new customer obviously) and can enter into one of our many ipoint freerolls.

I did the calculation to find the price of the 1,000+1,000 extra chips on the lowest VIP level (bronze). On the bronze level you get 18 points per $1 spent in tournament fees (im only looking at accumulating points through tournaments/sngs). This means you need to spend $13.89 in fees to achieve the 250 points. Assuming the site fee is 10% per tournament buyin, the total you will have to put in without winning any money is $13.89+$138.89 = $152.78.

That is currently €108.40. This way you will pay 10.84 cent per chip. Compare this to the initial buyin where you pay €275 for 8,000 chips = 3.44 cent per chip.

In total you will pay €491.80 for 10,000 chips compared to €275 for 8,000. In other words you will pay 4.92 cent per chip compared to 3.44 if you go and earn the 2x250 points through tournament play.

Of course this does not take any winnings or other site bonuses into account. So in order to get the chips "for free" you will obviously need a 0% ROI. In order to pay the same amount per chip of the extra 2,000 as you would the 8,000 you will need a ROI of -31.68%.

Now it is up to you to decide if the extra cost per chip is worth it or trying to beat the ROI in order to get the chips at the same price/cheaper then the original 8,000.

I'm not 100% sure on the math but it looks solid to me. Please feel free to check the validity of it.

Lurker1977

Onsberg wrote: »

So in order to get the chips "for free" you will obviously need a 100% ROI. In order to pay the same amount per chip of the extra 2,000 as you would the 8,000 you will need a ROI of 68.32%.

Pretty sure you only need a 0% ROI to make it free.

Onsberg

Lurker1977 wrote: »

Pretty sure you only need a 0% ROI to make it free.

Hehe, yes. 100% is not break even - 0% is

changed the % in the above post.

dannydiamond

New players can get 100% sign up bonus and existing players can avail of reload bonus' so to be fair it's costing you nothing but your time.

Sirtoyou

I gained the first 250 points at my leisure last night playing 0.50/1$ omaha h/l full ring at a single table so to be fair to Boyles it is not asking a whole lot of anybody.That was also at the lowest vip level.(covered most of the IPO buy in too so well pleased as I wouldn't have bothered only for the promotion)

Kimsang

Onsberg wrote: »

I did the calculation to find the price of the 1,000+1,000 extra chips on the lowest VIP level (bronze). On the bronze level you get 18 points per $1 spent in tournament fees (im only looking at accumulating points through tournaments/sngs). This means you need to spend $13.89 in fees to achieve the 250 points. Assuming the site fee is 10% per tournament buyin, the total you will have to put in without winning any money is $13.89+$138.89 = $152.78.

That is currently €108.40. This way you will pay 10.84 cent per chip. Compare this to the initial buyin where you pay €275 for 8,000 chips = 3.44 cent per chip.

In total you will pay €491.80 for 10,000 chips compared to €275 for 8,000. In other words you will pay 4.92 cent per chip compared to 3.44 if you go and earn the 2x250 points through tournament play.

Of course this does not take any winnings or other site bonuses into account. So in order to get the chips "for free" you will obviously need a 0% ROI. In order to pay the same amount per chip of the extra 2,000 as you would the 8,000 you will need a ROI of -31.68%.

Now it is up to you to decide if the extra cost per chip is worth it or trying to beat the ROI in order to get the chips at the same price/cheaper then the original 8,000.

I'm not 100% sure on the math but it looks solid to me. Please feel free to check the validity of it.

Haven't checked your math, but i'm sure it's correct. Although your logic is flawed... You're not just paying 10.83c / chip. You get the added value of playing in tournaments on boylessports.

This issue came up alot with players in tournaments I held, especially satellites. e.g. buy in for a satellite will be 50+5. If you win you win a 500+50 ticket. Complaints were made sometimes that why should they be double reg'ed... but you're actually getting 2 tournaments of dealers, director, overheads etc... just like the reg fee @ boyles for server space, advertizing etc...

corkie123

Sirtoyou wrote: »

I gained the first 250 points at my leisure last night playing 0.50/1$ omaha h/l full ring at a single table so to be fair to Boyles it is not asking a whole lot of anybody.That was also at the lowest vip level.(covered most of the IPO buy in too so well pleased as I wouldn't have bothered only for the promotion)

how did u get that lucky ?

signed POOR CORKIE:D:D:D

gorrrr72

Onsberg wrote: »

I did the calculation to find the price of the 1,000+1,000 extra chips on the lowest VIP level (bronze). On the bronze level you get 18 points per $1 spent in tournament fees (im only looking at accumulating points through tournaments/sngs). This means you need to spend $13.89 in fees to achieve the 250 points. Assuming the site fee is 10% per tournament buyin, the total you will have to put in without winning any money is $13.89+$138.89 = $152.78.

That is currently €108.40. This way you will pay 10.84 cent per chip. Compare this to the initial buyin where you pay €275 for 8,000 chips = 3.44 cent per chip.

In total you will pay €491.80 for 10,000 chips compared to €275 for 8,000. In other words you will pay 4.92 cent per chip compared to 3.44 if you go and earn the 2x250 points through tournament play.

Of course this does not take any winnings or other site bonuses into account. So in order to get the chips "for free" you will obviously need a 0% ROI. In order to pay the same amount per chip of the extra 2,000 as you would the 8,000 you will need a ROI of -31.68%.

Now it is up to you to decide if the extra cost per chip is worth it or trying to beat the ROI in order to get the chips at the same price/cheaper then the original 8,000.

I'm not 100% sure on the math but it looks solid to me. Please feel free to check the validity of it.

I agree with your logic. I played 15 x $10 sng's. Finished $18 up and took about 2 hours. What's the freakin problem. Even if you were a terrible player or if you just had a terrible run you could only loose $50.