HyricanDR

Boss
  • Content count

    509
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

140 The Beast

1 Follower

About HyricanDR

  • Rank
    Killer Hand: Royal Flush

Community Information

  • Affiliation Hearts > Clubs > Spades
  • Gamertag, PSN, or Steam ID HyricanDR, PSN

Recent Profile Visitors

550 profile views
  1. Dont get me wrong but... Kings arent strong, and you dang sure wouldnt CBET a 10 4 2 board after leading out? Because the other must have 2 pair? So he called a leadout with 10 4, 10 2, or 4 2? Or a straight draw? I hope u mean A 3 suited, not 3 5 os. Trips are the only thing you should expect to beat you there, and 10 10 would be a very tight limp leaving the realistic hands down to 2 2 or 4 4 . Which wouldve been a very good trap playing it the way villain does. Sorry that input doesnt sound like good poker, unless you play doyle brunson where you should instafold that flop. "on prominence" Seems the right thing to add. You might have to fold the riverbet if too large thats true. But until then placing bigger bets to either close it or doublecheck villains got you make sense, and they really shouldve closed it
  2. There is a greater reward oO you get the reward every month whereas the dude who "lucked" gets it only once if they updated the titles and items each season he would have own to show off while you have plenty to choose from.
  3. What would I know. But they patch all 1-3 months or so and you never know what they do (like those broken things... Didnt get attention last two patches so im not counting on the next to do it either). Point is, askin several times within just days doesnt make sense, they dont patch that frequently. So I bring it up every 1-2 months
  4. Relax. The display of ranked payouts is wrong ever since they introduced it. These trophis are broken ever since introduction. A lot of the challenges make no sense (Play 50 hands in MILLION BUYIN to get 500 chips. Get a royal flush for 200 rep). A bunch of people are capped out level 610 all affiliations at 4.99 and diamonds are still missing. The butchers venue is killing consoles performancewise. Hightier ranked is hard to get games for, and people all have suggestions how to improve the system. A bug here, glitch there. They add things like quickplay because they too have ideas. They made a thread asking what ppl want. Most dont say any of the above, but ask for omaha and multitable. Theres a lot to do (Not sure trophies are a priority)... and they arent fast
  5. *pat pat* Sometimes you are, sometimes you arent. Enjoy it
  6. True. We established your oppinion is many sit cuz they care for ratin and therefore want tiertables . In my oppinion a few (No youre not the only one, never said that) do so , ->but many do it because the risk is simply not worth it when you reach your peak at plat or diamond, downtiered o r p u r e tables<- Im one of those and im surely not the only one we agree on a lot to be fair, just not this paragraph right here id stop as a diamond (Just for a few days, until payday. And not completely, just ranked. Id play casual to satisfy the urge) regardless of what tables there are, UNLESS i get either peakreward or incentive to keep going. Better, both. Hey you know what? Im of the oppinion the tableitems and titles should change / be new. Because you are totally right
  7. IF they care for their bankroll, yes. I dont. Every 1 who plays ranked does so because he cares for his rating. Not everyone who plays PP cares for bankroll. Its Mainly ringgamers who do, as freechips are given out enough to pay T buyins even if you mostly lose
  8. A very simple way to populate the hightiers more? Just making seasons (A bit) longer oO A bit harder? Moving the tiers based on data, so they will end up offering exactly the population you want them too, regardless of what the playerbase is (and its rather small, which causes problems). You could have dynamic tiers for example. Top 5 percent get diamond on payday, top 10 plat, 20 gold and so on. That way people wont sit either. Not only can they lose rstanding by losing, but also by the guy behind them winning. If they wanna prevent it, they need to keep winning too. The devs are/were experimenting with both which brought a 2 month season and different tiers
  9. 2. Ill be straight out. I WANT those points taken from the "I made diamond. Its too easy" people. Its not that I cared for their standing, reward or anything. -> BUT rating only has a meaning if those guys have to back it up<- Doing something that involves luck ONCE doesnt mean you can do it will. Yes many people do it at will. A good player is a good player. Not ALL do it at will, a lucker may go of luck. A good player should have no issues backing it up. Also 2. First of all, thank you. So can we have peak reward that make playing at the boarders "worth it"? Second, (removing) reset has nothing do with those tierboarder games? Only the PAYDAY/TIMING has. There is a reason reset hits after the payday. Its so they dont interfere with each other. You can remove reset if you want, but if 1st of month is paying rewards (And you said we dont have to get rid of them/ still give them each month or two) based on your standing, players at the bottom of a tier have incentive to not play before the 1st
  10. No nobody else gets more points by having yours reduced. What does happen however is a potential gap being narrowed down, aka leveling the playing field. Larry has 1400 points now, harry only discovered the game and starts at 1000. He is better than larry, but having the rating display that takes quite a while since he has 400 points to catch up. If larry doesnt play at the moment, that means harry has to win 20+ tables straight. In 3 days there will be a reset however, making it more fair for these to compete. What it also does is nullify extreme swings. Larry isnt even that good a player, he usually plays somewhere 900-1100 but man has he been lucky lately. He knows that, which is why he doesnt play anymore sitting on his peak rating. Reset hits soon, so if he wants to keep that great rating, he will actually have to back it up. Harry while being a good player has been forced into a lot of coinflips by his opponents. Unlucky as he was this reduced his rating and widened the gap even more. Reset gives him the second wind. And exploring the potential? Tammy is new and never played before. Instead of chokin on pokerbooks, she takes an approach of trial n error. The first 20 tables it doesnt go well at all. The rating went into the negative, lets say 820. She does learn relatively fast though, wont do the bad stuff she did anymore and makes more of the good ones. Reset hits and next season she makes it to 1152. It would have taken her a lot of TIME getting there from the pit 820 and a very long STREAK/RUN , reset obviously made it easier for her. Reset isnt there just to take your points, while everybody else is uneffected... A lot of us lose points, some others win them. And gaps narrow. If you are that much better as someone who tries competeing... As u said, it will show again and again anyway! its not like reset gave others an unfair advantage. It only resets, as the name suggests. Rating isnt a bankroll. You cant buy it unlike chips, you dont need to spend it unlike chips, it is pubicly displayed unlike chips, and serves the purpose of comparing players fair and direct. Swings are displayed a lot heavier through rating than through a constant bankroll! How does bankroll do that unless everybody is forced to play for bankroll? I have 300k because I buy everything from the store knowing I have enough left to play anyway. Murat has 30 million. He didnt win a lot, he just put in some dollars. GL makin a comparison. A nice run of 10-30 tables doesnt mean someone is automatically a superior player.Im not considering somebody a toptierplayer because he peaked 1301 ONCE then stopped playing ranked. Reset will show if he can keep it up, or is average joe usually playing around 1150. Those guys who make it consistantly? They are proving its skill, not a lucky streak. And the more skilled they are, the less problems they should have being asked for proof. They get rewarded every month for showing up so they might as well put in the work. Oo
  11. You do not want to go there on this forum. I dont think he was necessarily cheating , it happens (How many hands we talkin about? 10/10 or so happens an awful lot round here, or 22/30 if he didnt literally win every one )
  12. Haha shocking observation. Never change a winning team/ Classic formular Except I want it on console not pc and for free. Only problem with that is it might end up too casual and low populated to make things like manfolds of gamevariants Plo h/l stud draw mtt etc happen
  13. 1. Exactly. I thought that was clear, and am pretty sure ive wrote this word for word before 2. Yes. And both is good. However, we do not want ONLY a higher "fake"population, but an "active one". If you have 20 people now and dont get games because 15 say "Ill play casual till I get my reward secured" and only 5 really try (in different timezones too) its bad. If u get 50 but 45 dont play - its actually no different, still 5 trying. If you get all 20 of the 20 to play its better and with peak rewards they have NO reason not to play. If u get 50 of 50 iI guess itd be perfect. But you underestimate the risk/reward aspect of potentially dropping when u r already at the peak, and overestimate the incentive the skillrating number ALONE gives. IMHO. Sure you can try to drive it higher to show others on the leaderboards whos boss and have fun games n all but end of the day you are playing a table where a win nets -I dunno actually, 300k or so? whereas a loss costs 1.5 mio+ title+ unique item. 3. I cant look it up, but then again what for. I have no problem whatsoever to agree that a higher population generally tends to get more games. Removing reset however is different to comparing those histories u do as those offer the same frame: with resets, provs and short seasons. IF you remove resets and/or make seasons extremely long, that population will be inflated by people who have no desire to play whatsoever. Like taking a break for 3 months or having quit altogether. Which is one thing. Of the rest, a certain percentage will still apply risk/reward logic when drawing close to a payday. Comparing season 1 gold and season 3 plat is way off btw if thats what you mean by "few months back". Season 1 gold translates to season 3 diamond as those are the highest tier. its probably not much easier to get diamond games "rustled up". Peak players just sit and why wouldnt they. They cannot go up, but down 4. Well thats the point. I disagree because of 3. Also, your comparison does in no way deal with the possible activity boost peak reward could bring. If it was simple math/statistics/facts I wouldnt say a word, but as you say its a "This suggests to me" "I think" "Maybe" "probably" thing 5. It would up the activity of your already existing population, therefore more games/ higher chance to get a game. THATs the point. 6. Same as 5. If you remove reset, I (and others) will be a happy casual T and/or ringgamer once we sit at a nice rewardlevel. Sure u have +1 population at higher tiers with me in there, but your qeue wont fill any faster because im not gonna join anyways -> Activity 7. TLDR you want two things higher population, more activity. Peak reward is "likely" to bring more activity to existing population as it removes the risk of playing at tierboarders. Downside? I cant see much, at least its not gonna magically reduce population. I think Removing reset is "likely" to increase hightierpopulation. -> Downside? It doesnt seem to allow peakrewards so we cant up activity of tierborder players (Its GOOD to have "only" more people bouncing back and forth. This means more games are being played doesnt it oO) <-You COULD get +100% population -100% activity ending up right where u started. But yeah, specific numbers are made up and we are just speculating. I still have to hear an argument against peak rewards as well. What I heard was it could make people play bad. I still think it wouldnt do that to decent/hightier players because why would it really? and while it might encourage the horribads to keep going which is what u basically made your argument if I got that rite ... Well the horribads are gonna horribad eitherway. Its not like the outlook of a silver reward made a bronze player play decent for example is it? what does it matter really, if we arent looking at gold-diamond then im simply not interested. Lowtiers are why I play ranked to begin with, I want them filtered out for better quality matches and among themselves they can do whatever. PS: what john said. Reset levels the playing field. I maybe 80 points behind warp now, but I was ahead 2 weeks ago or so and will likely be again sometime. A newcomer to PP but with pokerexperience elsewhere might be impossible to catch next season. Without reset? He would have to chase the topdog sitting at 1600 starting from 1000. If past achievements were weighed as heavy as current ones england would be a force in football (Muricanski: Soccer). Its a scary thought given how bad they are
  14. I didnt say you said that explicitly. I said i come up with that conclusion because of the "PEAK REWARD" bridge in between. Peak reward is pretty unimportant if we are talking about not hightier players, like someone who bounces between gold/silver or silver/bronze. First of all its 100k chips max we are talking about then which isnt much is it. Second, there will be no titles and tableitems on the line, which to many weigh more than the chips. Third, people whose PEAK is bouncing between LOWTIERS are playing like donkeys anyway!!!?I dont care whats goin on in the lowtiers at all, I want nothing to do with the slums lol so whats the point throwing peak reward as a negative into the debate for NOT hightiers? That, to me, is meaningless for the issue at hand of hightiers having no incentive to continue playing, but risks., which is what im talking about. If you want to talk about something entirely different related to lowtiers... Uhm not with me D: Next, you said they werent sitting because dropping would deal them a huge blow ->IN GENERAL<-, -> no matter who its against<-, but mainly because theyd have to play one league lower and that full diamond tables would get them playing: I repeat and encourage you to look at the leader boards, and what people actually tell you. In the other thread warp said hes sittin because he wont get anything for playing at 1301 rating but might lose a lot ok? I told you rite here im sitting at 1220 because I could drop to 1199 or less as 6th. EVEN on a pure plat table. Or at least im not sure the biggest loss would be within the range on FULL PLAT. Back to the leaderboard: People sit with 1300-less than 1320 rating (Or 1200-1220)!!!! Even if they got a full diamond/plat table, it doesnt change jack about 100% risk 0% reward. Peak does. Nobody would sit at 1240-50 or 1340-50. If THAT were the case, THEN i could follow your thought assuming they could drop in one "downtiered" game which means risk, but not on a full plat/diamond. THEN yea, people might be sitting because they cant get tiergames only lower. In other words, the "Scenario" I "created" is simply what the facts seem to suggest. Im not "ignoring" the potential pointgain per se. That is where we simply disagree. Im saying that IMHO the m a j o r i t y doesnt give a crap about advancing to "higher numbers" when there is nothing to be gained from these numbers besides patting your own ego and competing for competitions sake. Else we could do away with not just the resets and provs, but also tiers and rewards (Since ratingnumbers are what people play for). We could remove ranked, and make it so that the casual tournaments move a neat little SkillRating number up and down which everybody has next to their playernames. Really simple, but a lot worse than what we have. It isnt math we are talking about at all. Most if not all of the diamonds lands on a 1300-1320 rating after the last plat match and thats mere coincedence depending on what you went in with (1275-1299) and how you finished. At that point its down to the risk/reward question. I say: Risk going diamond->plat, 2200000 or so chips -> 720 000, 3 titles depending on which you already have -> 2 max, 1 tableitem -> 0 Reward basically? Nothing. Well, competition You say: Risk more minus points and less plus points if playing a tier lower Reward more plus if playing diamonds instead of plats And the question was how people actually weigh this. Not math, psychology. Its obviously both true, but I think your putting too much importance on JUST the rating/number. I didnt ignore that number argument either. I said the difference is minor, so how did I possibly ignore it? I said I played a bunch of golds as plat and was totally fine with the points I received (They were high enough) or lost (low enough) in them, because it wasnt horribly off compared to sametier play. The difference wouldve maybe been 3 points i get more or lose less. You say you get like 30 for a tierwin and 10 for downtiered. I say i get 28 for a tierwin and 24 for a downtier. I say you make something a problem that really isnt one If I was diamond and decided to play, I would play platinum np. But you know what? If i was diamond I wouldnt play ranked anymore without having the reward secured as i am already at peak! Id play casual till reset hits a week or two later then return to do it again. Which is what most seem to do?
Terms of Use & Privacy Policy
Copyright 2016 © Prominence Poker | All Rights Reserved
505 Games and the 505 Games logo are registered trademarks of 505 Games s.r.l. All rights reserved. Prominence Poker is intended for players ages 18 and over. This site and game does not offer “real money gambling” or an opportunity to win real money or prizes. Any and all in-game winnings are virtual currency only, not be converted to real money. Any success in Prominence Poker does not imply future success at “real money gambling