Well I dont know about you guys, but I am voting with my feet. I can't stand CEREUS and it really is the straw that broke the camel's back.
My other (long standing) issue is UB's shuffle. It is nothing like a live game. The number of high cards in each hand is not real poker. It seems to me that whatever shuffle system UB use causes the high cards from the previous hand to remain at the top of the deck and they then get dealt into the next hand. The number of high cards in each hand is disproportunate to 'real poker' and I have never liked it, as it makes a mockery of calculating odds. You cannot play live the same way you play on UB as you won't hit your A, K, two pair, set, straight, etc, nearly as ofton. Hence, I have to make a big adjustment whenever I play live or play on most other online poker sites. It is also the cause of many 'Bad Beats'.
I can understand UB not wishing to change this as it encourages more action which is obviously good for their business model. Big pots result in more players getting eliminated and that generates more rake. But for me it is a very unreal poker experience and one which I no longer wish to subscribe to.
I have e-mailed both UB and AP to request closing my account. Whilst it saddens me to leave UB, I am sure there will be many others who feel the same way.
1 comment:
I will add something to this post and I don't want to sound like a UB hater, because im not. After 4 great years on UB, I just don't feel that UB is the right place me me to "stack my chips" any more.
As far as complaining to UB or making suggestions for improving the site goes, I believe you are wasting your time. The bottom line is that experienced players are worth much less to UB than newbies. This is because newbies get knocked out quicker and immediately buy into another tourney thus producing more rake per hour than a skilled player.
UB's profit is derived from rake & volume, and a high player churn produces more profit than catering for the needs of regulars. In addition, the suggestions that good players make cost money to implement but then result in less profit - if this was incorrect, UB would act on out suggestions. Unfortunatly for us, newbies sign up and because they don't know any better, they think the platform/schedual/etc is brilliant - giving UB even less reason to change anything. UB recognises all these things and has decided to take the newbie route: small buyins, cheap sats, rebuys and snipers. The needs of skilled regulars just isn't part of the plan, and I dont think UB is unique in this approach. Unfortunately, because UB is relatively small, they are less able to accomodate the needs of skilled players to the same degree that the larger sites can. As long as UB can replace those that walk, they will continue to make money.
These are the hard facts of running a poker site and because regular, skilled players produce considerably less revenue than newbies, UB is not going to change much for us. At the end of the day, UB's purpose is to make money and catering for the needs of a minority just isn't as viable. Clearly, UB feel they have found the most profitable balance. If I am wrong, why then has UB always disregarded our suggestions for improvement?
One other thing that may interest you. At 09:15 AM on Saturday 29 November 2008, the main lobby indicated that 23,000 players were logged in and 4,100 tables were in play. This seemed like an incredibly high number for such an early hour of the day so I did a quick count of all the lobby's and came up with the following numbers:
Players on cash tables: 2670
Players in tourneys: 2400
Players in a freeroll: 2350
Players registered & waiting for a tourney to start: 800
Total number: 8220
This total did not include SNG's because the lobby jumps about so much it was impossible to count. I realise that the numbers include AP players (exact same number of players logged in and tables in play was given in AP main lobby. Yes, I did check!) and after the recent changes, the same lobby's are now shared by both sites, but it does seem strange that so many are logged at such an early hour but only a third are actually playing, so I suspect that the figure of 23,000 players logged in may be false. Perhaps 10,000 has been added? Hmmmm, it sure makes me wonder.......
Post a Comment