Soft games
Once again, coming at you from Buenos Aires, where all the women are beautiful but not a poker game in sight...
A few of my friends that I talk with about poker always want to debate what the softest site is. Some say Paradise Poker, some say Ultimate Bet, others claim the Party Poker network of sites.
My preference? None of the above.
My thinking is that all the sites are pretty fishy -- so much so that it's hard to tell the difference. I had a hell of a time at Ultimate Bet in late January, but now it's one of my best sites.
I lost a little money at Poker Room (Sucky Room) because of their sucky software, but then I made it back quickly against the sucky players.
When I was a newbie, I told everyone who would listen how much I hated Party Poker, but now it's probably my favorite site.
My feeling is that among the larger sites, there are going to plenty of fish in the pond. Any negative downswings a player has at these sites is just that: a short-term decline that will even out in the long run.
Sure, some of the smaller sites may have tougher games. But if you play at any of the major ones, there are so many players, such a large mix of good and bad players, that the games aren't that tough overall.
1 Comments:
I understand what you are saying, Mark. IMO the fishiest site I've seen so far is Party Poker (and family/friend sites), although my best record was playing at Paradise Poker. And I want to stress this point a little. I read at PokerListings.com that this was a tough site to play. After a few days I realized that it was filled with fish. Of course, some players were quite good too, and good indeed. Maybe I chose the better battles (finally).
So far, it seems that PokerStars is a tough place overall, but Ultimate Bet was my nemesis. I loved the software, but I don't know if I just got a couple of cold decks or what, but it was a disaster. I'll be going to claim my bonus sometime, hopefully with a better bankroll and with my sharpest game.
glasbead@hotmail.com
Post a Comment
<< Home