It is impossible for me to explain the extent of what I am presenting. Over the last year we have been creating a revolution for poker based on a manifesto posted under the title "ideal poker" https://www.scribd.com/doc/224948379/Ideal-Poker
Ideal Poker a piece of art created with John Nash's lecture "ideal money" that calls for a money printing revolution. Both revolutions are upon us, and we are just now waking up to it.
I cannot begin to describe the work that has gone behind this project, but instead all I can do is link you to a blog that explains it in it's entirety: http://thewealthofchips.wordpress.com/
The players have started screaming for a solution to the problems they have with the economics and regulations of the game, and unbeknownst to them the solution has been completed defined expanded and explained under the manifesto "ideal poker" and the blog "thewealthofchips".
Over the last year many communities have been unknowingly made aware of "ideal poker", and now it is being fully revealed what is "ideal poker"...please do some research into the articles interesting to you, ask questions, and join the revolution!
id rather pay large rake to play on a site with lots of casual fish depositors than pay no rake to play on a site that will never get off the ground because 1) nobody can be bothered to research your ideology or read the great walls of tldr, and 2), because (1) is true and nobody is going to start playing there (network effects in reverse)
I miss something like wgtour for brood war players that were run by players and not by investors. If any stuff came up that were bad for the games/players etc they would bann it or make some rules - in poker they never do nothing about any problems that dry up the games. Its really annoying. Pokerstars have thou done a lot of very good things for their players i must say, but more could be done. Other sites like Betfair, Full tilt poker etc just refuses to make any good change for real poker players and game died.
On November 08 2014 06:25 Romm3l wrote:
id rather pay large rake to play on a site with lots of casual fish depositors than pay no rake to play on a site that will never get off the ground because 1) nobody can be bothered to research your ideology or read the great walls of tldr, and 2), because (1) is true and nobody is going to start playing there (network effects in reverse)
facts of life
It is not my idea, I copied it from a higher source. Its not true nobody can be bothered. I am being contacted from different groups of players involved in protests on different poker forums. They are beginning now to rally behind the name: ideal poker. My writings, the thesis, and the solution I propose are indeed very dense and difficult to sift through. But there are people VERY interested and reading through it all as I post this. The difficulties with the network effect you allude to is real and exists, and it was written about and explained why what is proposed is our answer to it.
I realize not everyone will jump aboard and start researching, we are looking for those who are interested adn willing to understand "ideal poker", ask questions, and do a little digging
On November 08 2014 08:48 VanDerMeyde wrote:
I miss something like wgtour for brood war players that were run by players and not by investors. If any stuff came up that were bad for the games/players etc they would bann it or make some rules - in poker they never do nothing about any problems that dry up the games. Its really annoying. Pokerstars have thou done a lot of very good things for their players i must say, but more could be done. Other sites like Betfair, Full tilt poker etc just refuses to make any good change for real poker players and game died.
"Ideal poker" sounds so cheesy lol, reminds me of those small poker skins on a crappy poker network you see on the sidebar. Also, the only link I clicked on (the 2+2 thread) has been deleted...
On November 08 2014 10:46 Bobosaur wrote:
"Ideal poker" sounds so cheesy lol, reminds me of those small poker skins on a crappy poker network you see on the sidebar. Also, the only link I clicked on (the 2+2 thread) has been deleted...
The name comes as an extension of the lecture "ideal money" in which John Nash foretold the coming of an economic revolution based on a new technology that is going to create a universal currency network. In order for him to solve such an intense problem he had to first conceive of the "ideal" and then work his way towards his solution from there.
His solution then comes in the form of "asymptotically" ideal money or in other words: what are the steps towards ideal money?
The answer became to release a decentralized currency with a stable printing rate and is exchangeable universally on an exchange. This gives citizens the ability to move out of bad currencies and into good currency, putting pressure on governments to issue "good" currencies (stop printing money), creating an asymptotic slide money.
What we want to show you is "ideal poker", and "asymptotically ideal poker" but its a very big subject so we are looking for interested peoples first and early adopters.
edit: and yes it got deleted, the players are reporting "ideal poker" is a ban worthy offense.
Last edit: 08/11/2014 12:32
1
TalentedTom Canada. Nov 08 2014 12:59. Posts 20070
gl competeing with pokerstars advertising, every fish knows the name pokerstars, its the most popular poker brand in the world
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light not our darkness that most frightens us and as we let our own lights shine we unconsciously give other people permision to do the same
On November 08 2014 11:59 TalentedTom wrote:
gl competeing with pokerstars advertising, every fish knows the name pokerstars, its the most popular poker brand in the world
nothing you said here has anything to do with the OP in this thread or any of the articles linked here. I realize we are all frustrated with the monopoly however we have a well researched and documented "thesis" and we are simply looking for like minded peoples that are interested in initial adoption and learning about the entire scope of it.
On November 08 2014 08:48 VanDerMeyde wrote:
I miss something like wgtour for brood war players that were run by players and not by investors. If any stuff came up that were bad for the games/players etc they would bann it or make some rules - in poker they never do nothing about any problems that dry up the games. Its really annoying. Pokerstars have thou done a lot of very good things for their players i must say, but more could be done. Other sites like Betfair, Full tilt poker etc just refuses to make any good change for real poker players and game died.
On November 08 2014 06:25 Romm3l wrote:
id rather pay large rake to play on a site with lots of casual fish depositors than pay no rake to play on a site that will never get off the ground because 1) nobody can be bothered to research your ideology or read the great walls of tldr, and 2), because (1) is true and nobody is going to start playing there (network effects in reverse)
facts of life
It is not my idea, I copied it from a higher source. Its not true nobody can be bothered. I am being contacted from different groups of players involved in protests on different poker forums. They are beginning now to rally behind the name: ideal poker. My writings, the thesis, and the solution I propose are indeed very dense and difficult to sift through. But there are people VERY interested and reading through it all as I post this. The difficulties with the network effect you allude to is real and exists, and it was written about and explained why what is proposed is our answer to it.
I realize not everyone will jump aboard and start researching, we are looking for those who are interested adn willing to understand "ideal poker", ask questions, and do a little digging
thx
hope it works out but just saying it's hard to see anything good coming out of it if there are no fish. even if you eliminate rake and poker becomes zerosum instead of negativesum, superior players still act like a black hole sucking up all the money over time and you need a constant inflow of new depositors to sustain the system. the type of player supporting this on forums is strongly unlikely to fit the profile of a casual willing to lose and redeposit over and over for years (those people all belong to pokerstars). bitcoin and decentralised clever things are like online shopping in 1990, no normal person understands or trusts it nor is willing to spend any time looking into it.
On November 08 2014 16:29 Romm3l wrote:
hope it works out but just saying it's hard to see anything good coming out of it if there are no fish. even if you eliminate rake and poker becomes zerosum instead of negativesum, superior players still act like a black hole sucking up all the money over time and you need a constant inflow of new depositors to sustain the system. the type of player supporting this on forums is strongly unlikely to fit the profile of a casual willing to lose and redeposit over and over for years (those people all belong to pokerstars). bitcoin and decentralized clever things are like online shopping in 1990, no normal person understands or trusts it nor is willing to spend any time looking into it.
thank you for your uneducated option. I am not looking for guesses. We are looking for people who are interested in learning and doing their own research. We are not making "guesses". What you are suggesting is great for months and years ago but we are dealing with the reality today. Recs and regs are not happy, the game is getting worse, there is a players revolution in the midst.
If you don't want to help and educate yourself to understand Ideal Poker, it is fine, but it makes no sense to not read anything, and comment anyways without realizing how much effort was put in to prove that everything you just said is wrong.
Last edit: 09/11/2014 03:08
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Nov 09 2014 04:43. Posts 2227
people might be more receptive if you had explained anything at all rather than just link to other sites like a 2+2 thread that i guess got deleted and if you didn't use the phraseology of a pyramid scheme
i read this far
Definition “Effective Rake”:
A winning player might exchange 5USD on site A with an a roi of 5%.
The same player deposits 5USD on site B with an roi of 4%
We say that the “effective rake” on site B is higher than site A.
The profitability in terms of “effective rake” is hidden on every site by many contributing factors. The most significant are the make-up of the player field (winning players vs depositing players), and the winning distributions. These factors are not definable for the players community.
Problem:
Players cannot accurately assess the value of their money in exchange for chips on each given site (effective rake), and they do not have the ability to exercise their dissatisfaction so they are left with no “pull” in the industry.
Conjecture:
If players could accurately define the effective rake of each site AND have the option to transfer their bankrolls between sites, this would cause pressure on sites to offer a superior product.
and initially it looks like everything is wrong... i mean it falls to the player to understand their own ROI. the fact that x players don't know their edge in the games they are playing doesn't mean it's scientifically impossible to figure out?
furthermore no site is holding a gun to anybody's head you can take as much money as you want and take it off or put it on any site you want... it's an imaginary solution to an imaginary problem
On November 08 2014 01:20 diggerflopboat wrote:
It is impossible for me to explain the extent of what I am presenting.
also i have discovered a truly remarkable proof that your theorem is wrong which this post is too small to contain
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
and initially it looks like everything is wrong... i mean it falls to the player to understand their own ROI. the fact that x players don't know their edge in the games they are playing doesn't mean it's scientifically impossible to figure out?
You think I am saying because some player don't know their own ROI that is the reason its not possible? For the VAST majority of games calculating a winrate is not possible. I think what is happening here is you are too ignorant to realize that.
furthermore no site is holding a gun to anybody's head you can take as much money as you want and take it off or put it on any site you want... it's an imaginary solution to an imaginary problem
I don't know what world you live in but in reality the players are pissed, and around the world on different forums they are discussing moving in solidarity. Half the world is even not able to join the global player pool. A gun to someone head, are you four? Most transactions from sites to banks and banks to a different site take days and fees, if the player is allowed to transfer to a different site at all. It not an imaginary problem you are commenting on something you simple wish to argue and ignore, while many other players are fighting for the ability to have a profitable game.
And I don't know what world you live in, but the people of almost every country are pissed at politicians, yet they still let them govern them.
Good luck fighting with a well established monopoly in a sector most people don't give a fuck about and where people are driven by tons of factors.
I can tell you this now - you won't win this fight, you might shake up the monopoly somehow in a very optimistic situation, but you won't overthrow it simply because the resources they posses are pretty much infinite compared to yours
0
dogmeat Czech Republic. Nov 09 2014 19:55. Posts 6374
On November 09 2014 17:44 Spitfiree wrote:
And I don't know what world you live in, but the people of almost every country are pissed at politicians, yet they still let them govern them.
Good luck fighting with a well established monopoly in a sector most people don't give a fuck about and where people are driven by tons of factors.
I can tell you this now - you won't win this fight, you might shake up the monopoly somehow in a very optimistic situation, but you won't overthrow it simply because the resources they posses are pretty much infinite compared to yours
The manifest I posted is really a rip off from a lecture called "ideal money" it does in fact predict and economic revolution against the money printing banking system.
All of the world today every government and every major banking system is confused and helplessly discussing their reaction to the digital currency revolution. So in response to your "beliefs" there nothing can be done, we are already watching the change, it is well on its way, it has an incredible amount of steam and power.
I pm'd one of your members, I realize I am not the charismatic person who can explain all this, but we were simply looking for some community members that might help us learn about and spread the word of "ideal poker" which is the slogan behind the players solidarity movement.
1
Minsk United States. Nov 10 2014 17:05. Posts 1558
I wish you the best.
1
KeyleK_uk United Kingdom. Nov 22 2014 11:22. Posts 1687
On November 10 2014 16:05 Minsk wrote:
I wish you the best.
Ditto
poker is soooo much easier when you flop sets
1
Ryan Neilly United States. Nov 22 2014 11:39. Posts 1631
gooooodluckkkkkkkk
0
dogmeat Czech Republic. Nov 22 2014 16:58. Posts 6374
On November 08 2014 08:48 VanDerMeyde wrote:
I miss something like wgtour for brood war players that were run by players and not by investors. If any stuff came up that were bad for the games/players etc they would bann it or make some rules - in poker they never do nothing about any problems that dry up the games. Its really annoying. Pokerstars have thou done a lot of very good things for their players i must say, but more could be done. Other sites like Betfair, Full tilt poker etc just refuses to make any good change for real poker players and game died.
B- WGT highest i got :S
i was such a nit back then
There was no such thing as B- on WGT iirc. That came with PGTour, and later ICCup.
WGT ranks were from C6 to C0, then from B6 to B0, and A and an olympic rank above that I believe?
My favourite line is Bet/Fold. I bet, you fold.
1
blackjacki2 United States. Nov 23 2014 18:16. Posts 2581
On November 09 2014 15:17 hilly114 wrote:
hi people im just wandering if any1 can do me a massive favour and transfer me a dollar to my poker stars account as i need 1 more point to release £10 and ran out of money in bank.... il transfer you $2 back lol.... pm me if any1s willing
seriously? check your couch cushions for spare change
1
traxamillion United States. Nov 24 2014 12:34. Posts 10468
yea gl, sounds kinda like you are talking about bitcoin and seals with clubs.
problems at this time are.
1. decentralized currencies are too difficult for donks to obtain, store, and spend. large hurdle and some progress is being made.
2. you refer to a large disgruntled group of players and act like that is a majority. It may be a majority of winning players but even all the people you are talking to on all the forums is only a small part of the overall player pool. There are far more recs than regs, it just doesn't always seem that way because they play far less tables and far less frequently. They aren't even aware of rake changes; just what they see in commercials.
3. You would need a ton of money to get it off the ground; not just for building and operating a site but mainly for advertising. You need to show the donks this place even exists and then give them some compelling reason to switch or even just check it out. So without rake to pay off debt who will invest in this.
On November 24 2014 11:34 traxamillion wrote:
yea gl, sounds kinda like you are talking about bitcoin and seals with clubs.
problems at this time are.
1. decentralized currencies are too difficult for donks to obtain, store, and spend. large hurdle and some progress is being made.
2. you refer to a large disgruntled group of players and act like that is a majority. It may be a majority of winning players but even all the people you are talking to on all the forums is only a small part of the overall player pool. There are far more recs than regs, it just doesn't always seem that way because they play far less tables and far less frequently. They aren't even aware of rake changes; just what they see in commercials.
3. You would need a ton of money to get it off the ground; not just for building and operating a site but mainly for advertising. You need to show the donks this place even exists and then give them some compelling reason to switch or even just check it out. So without rake to pay off debt who will invest in this.
1) 10 seconds you will have a wallet https://counterwallet.io/# copy/paste your wallet address to me and you will get your coin. "bitcoin" was hard only in 2010, it is 4 years later now...
2) The recreational players follow the pros, and there is a bonus that people that receive the universal poker coin first gain the most.
3) its not a site, it is already off the ground and it costed zero $. there are 21 million naj coins, and if you want some lemme know...once enough players have them we will use our coalition to build our network of trusted poker sites by getting EXISTING sites to accept our coin.
shake your head and think about it for a moment...start giving examples...
edit: also while you are at it, since its faster and takes 10 secs...sign up for a wallet, post me your public address from it, and ill send you some coin then you can tell me what is up ...
I am well studied and prepared, you are laughing at what you don't understand but in 10 seconds you could.
shake your head and think about it for a moment...start giving examples...
edit: also while you are at it, since its faster and takes 10 secs...sign up for a wallet, post me your public address from it, and ill send you some coin then you can tell me what is up ...
I am well studied and prepared, you are laughing at what you don't understand but in 10 seconds you could.
The centralized poker industry....
its over..
I laugh because you are oblivious to something anybody in the poker world knows, and for somebody trying to start a poker room bussiness not knowing it its insane.
Do you want examples?
Dwan, Ivey, Antonius, Robl, Juanda not only changed casinos chasing fish.. they moved to another country that has a language thei dont speak ffs.
From negreanus blog:
Back when I was just starting out I used to play at a private club in Toronto called Check N' Raise. It was a really nice club, good food, clean, no smoking, high ceilings, and always good action with an extremely fair rake- there wasn't one. Instead, players were encouraged to tip, and most did tip $2.50 a hand, but it wasn't required. That was one way around the law that you can't take a rake. Food was free and so was the poker. It was a pretty good deal, and most people really appreciated the system and didn't take advantage of it.
The room started to really boom for a while with weekly tournaments that were well attended. The Likes of Howard Goldfarb, our hometown hero after finishing runner up to Dan Harrington in the 1995 WSOP main event used to frequent the place as did plenty of other professional gamblers. Of course, we had a Tommy "The Greek" and we also happened to have a Jimmy "The Greek." It was always a treat when Woody the Vegas bookie would come to town and regale us with stories from the desert. It was a good atmosphere, lots of fun, and friendly people.
There was also a guy who used to come and play named Moshe. Moshe was really bad! He virtually never won, and didn't care much for folding. He lost for a few months and everyone profited from it. At some point, Moshe came up with the idea to run his own club. It was in a dingy basement, reeked of cigarette smoke, was hot, stuffy, the tables were dirty and cramped together, and the food offered wasn't like what players were accustomed to at Check N' Raise. Moshe had friends, and they were no better than he was so he invited them to play at his club too.
Guess what happened? All the pros chose to play at Moshe's instead of the much nicer Check N' Raise because... well, that's where Moshe played. Winning poker players will always put profit over comfort! If the game is good enough, they will play in a train station toilet. They may complain, but they will play.
Of course, all the pros would prefer to play at Check N' Raise, but as long as Moshe was playing at Moshe's place, that's where they would be. Pros will flock to where the games are. It's their job and it only makes sense. They come to you, they will fill seats as long as there is something in it for them. Typically that something is money.
Check N' Raise had our hero Howie, but that didn't trump the value of playing with Moshe. This is how the poker economy worked when I started, and it remains the same today. If you like Commerce better than the Bike, but the games at the Bike are better action, it's a no-brainer for a pro to play at the Bike.
Why do you think so many pros have been traveling to Macau? For the scenery? For the VIP bonuses? For the hospitality? No, they go there because it makes financial sense to them and that's where a lot of recreational players with big bankrolls are playing.
The most important ingredient to any poker game is always going to be VALUE. Not fancy chairs, designer water, or big screen TVs. If you can attract the right clientele you automatically get the rest to flock to your games. You don't need to pander to the pros, or convince them to come- they will be there happily.
If you run poker games you know this. It's a given, but many people don't get that the focus needs to be aimed towards the recreational players first and foremost. If you are a pro, you should look at it like a partnership. The guy running the game provides the rec players, and you profit from it, while he makes some money off the games running. In private games, that requires a pro to be gracious and thankful for the opportunity.
Imagine if you were running a private game and Moshe said, "I don't like this Negreanu kid, I don't want to play with him. If he plays I quit." What would be in your best interest? Letting Moshe leave, or telling me I can't play cause Moshe doesn't want me to? You'd be foolish to let me play. I'm not the main draw for the game, Moshe is.
Get 1,000 Regs in your site and nobody will play a single hand, they will be sitting out till a fish sits, and then the games will run.
Winning a big pot vs some known pro is every recreational players dream....... I hear this kind of babble all the time @ live poker
Yeah ofcourse somebody with 200 bucks wants to play a pot vs Ivey.
But sit Ivey on a 500/1k table and see how much action he gets.... or sit Guy Laliberte in a 500/1k and see how many action he generates.
Ofcourse I undestand the marketing value of key pros, I am a small one myself and in a broad scale after heavy marketing and branding we have some pull but thats after being paid to promote the site and we are lilke what, 0.1% of pros?
Its beyond me im discussing these things to people who should know better -_-
Winning a big pot vs some known pro is every recreational players dream....... I hear this kind of babble all the time @ live poker
Exactly and how ironic is it when you have stars "pros" telling players the opposite is true...
SOOO many levels!
Again, its amazing that somebody starting a poker business knows so little about the poker world, when you say pros you mean a handful of extremely known people who need to be paid big amounts to promote your site, when we hear pros we think of the thousands and thousands of unknown people who play poker for a living
Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online
1
Silver_nz New Zealand. Dec 01 2014 05:46. Posts 5647
It would be interesting to see some hard data on what exactly it is that motivates your average fish to play poker
-dreams of a big tourney score
-playing with pros
-other friends are doing it
-competitive drive
-memories of playing with old ma n pa around the kitchen table
each would have its own weight, but one would be more important than the others
On December 01 2014 01:58 Baalim wrote:
I laugh because you are oblivious to something anybody in the poker world knows, and for somebody trying to start a poker room bussiness not knowing it its insane.
Do you want examples?
Dwan, Ivey, Antonius, Robl, Juanda not only changed casinos chasing fish.. they moved to another country that has a language thei dont speak ffs.
Get 1,000 Regs in your site and nobody will play a single hand, they will be sitting out till a fish sits, and then the games will run.
I am not trying to start a business or a poker room. I am simply pointing out the simple and obvious game theoretical option available to use, a player created/adopted coupon. The coupon gains value over time from its usefulness in the industry that you might not see because you have never used this "technology". Its the next "email".
The whole point is that its the opposite of a business.
I don't think that pointing out pros that move from casino resort location to other resort destinations is really making an argument against my point. You are a sponsored pro, why do you think that is? Part of pokers allure is that the recreational fan/player can join in and play with the top players often for a comparatively reasonable price. And unlike many sports/competition there is a chance they will win as well.
You are arguing yourself out of a job, while remaining living proof of what I am saying. If the pros decide that X site is no longer the site for the general poker community because its shady then that site will soon become and remain barren.
Sir, what I offer is something so much simpler than you and others realize, but we fear what we don't know and there is always the mental barrier of adopting something new.
Its very simple (https://counterwallet.io/#), you sign up for an account by clicking "generate password", save the password, and then you are logged into your wallet, copy/paste the wallet address, and then pm/post the address to receive the coin. I did not create this system of wallets and coins, bitcoin did, this is the next generation of the technology bitcoin 2.0.
It is not my business I 'own' nothing here, the point is simple to set up a network connected by "email 2.0" or "naj-coin", something we don't yet understand but we will. People want to argue their own misconceptions on these issues, but I am suggesting that once everyone shuts up and gets a wallet/naj-coin, the issues in the industry will dissolve over night-I am saying you cannot understand until you receive najcoin.
its like not being able to understand email in 1995 until someone signed you up and sent you one!
Last edit: 01/12/2014 11:48
1
bigredhoss Cook Islands. Dec 01 2014 13:01. Posts 8648
um i didnt read the rest of your posts but obviously baal is right about pros chasing fish
Truck-Crash Life
0
dogmeat Czech Republic. Dec 01 2014 13:51. Posts 6374
i m gonna quit playing on pokerstars coz i feel hunted by all them fishes
On December 01 2014 12:01 bigredhoss wrote:
um i didnt read the rest of your posts but obviously baal is right about pros chasing fish
its not obvious, its not logical, and it doesn't reflect reality.
If you read my post I pointed out baal and other pros get paid by sites, why? To attract recreational players!
Baal points out that live pros move to the best casinos and of course those pros get immense benefits from those casinos to play there.
You can market the game both ways and perceive it either way but you cannot tell me that the "pros" are doomed to play where the recs play. Old school pros simply fail to explain to the recs why lower rake is important for both the rec and the pro. Having Baal and Dneg argue vs this just supports my point.
Winning a big pot vs some known pro is every recreational players dream....... I hear this kind of babble all the time @ live poker
Yeah ofcourse somebody with 200 bucks wants to play a pot vs Ivey.
But sit Ivey on a 500/1k table and see how much action he gets.... or sit Guy Laliberte in a 500/1k and see how many action he generates.
Ofcourse I undestand the marketing value of key pros, I am a small one myself and in a broad scale after heavy marketing and branding we have some pull but thats after being paid to promote the site and we are lilke what, 0.1% of pros?
Its beyond me im discussing these things to people who should know better -_-
From what I heard Guy Laliberte didnt attract a lot of recreational players... he attract all the sharks and some weaker regs that got owned really hard by Durrr/Galfond etc...
By "big pot" it can be 1000$ double up at 2000nl and then leave the table vs someone they have seen on "high stakes poker". Almost all the recreational guys in my live game has acctually seen high stakes poker. "Have you played starcraft vs Raszi?" "WOOOOOOW" And some of them have gambled up a decent stack online and taken shots vs some really well known pro's at HU tables/ring games. My friend got 1 story that he gambled up a bankroll to 5000$ on sports betting and then sat down vs some smaller sites pro at 5000nl and doubled up, cashed out and left the network. The reason he sat down was because he recognized the guy from their homepage.
:D
Last edit: 01/12/2014 17:58
1
bigredhoss Cook Islands. Dec 01 2014 23:50. Posts 8648
On December 01 2014 12:01 bigredhoss wrote:
um i didnt read the rest of your posts but obviously baal is right about pros chasing fish
its not obvious, its not logical, and it doesn't reflect reality.
If you read my post I pointed out baal and other pros get paid by sites, why? To attract recreational players!
Baal points out that live pros move to the best casinos and of course those pros get immense benefits from those casinos to play there.
You can market the game both ways and perceive it either way but you cannot tell me that the "pros" are doomed to play where the recs play. Old school pros simply fail to explain to the recs why lower rake is important for both the rec and the pro. Having Baal and Dneg argue vs this just supports my point.
it's not uncommon to find games with stars pros running 2-5 handed for hours without filling up. if one fish sits, the game fills in seconds and soon has a 20-person waitlist. the reverse never happens.
the fact that a small % of pros are paid to attract players is not an argument that fish generally follow pros. in some cases the "pros" attract players simply because the pros themselves are fish, i.e. when negreanu sits in highstakes cash games.
it's not uncommon to find games with stars pros running 2-5 handed for hours without filling up. if one fish sits, the game fills in seconds and soon has a 20-person waitlist. the reverse never happens.
the fact that a small % of pros are paid to attract players is not an argument that fish generally follow pros. in some cases the "pros" attract players simply because the pros themselves are fish, i.e. when negreanu sits in highstakes cash games.
The purpose of this point is that if all the pros packed up and left stars the recs would leave too. There is a prevailing argument that games would get softer and so pros or "new pros" would come back and nothing would change but its a circle and nonlogical argument.
If all these pros like limon Negraneau all the names starting going around saying that *'s is not the site to play on then nobody would play there. And the whole point of this conversation is the over raking of games and if games are over raked it doesn't matter if Negraneau is a fish at some stakes.
If it isn't try that pros attract and maintain recreational depositors then why do we give them rake as stars pro contracts that we could use keep in the prizepools and buyins for the games?
I believe limon and I ultimately agree, but I think it would take shots and shots of hard liquor to finally arrive at our conclusion.
I propose something never brought before the poker community and we clearly have not thought in this line before.
1
bigredhoss Cook Islands. Dec 02 2014 12:46. Posts 8648
On December 02 2014 00:25 diggerflopboat wrote:
If all these pros like limon Negraneau all the names starting going around saying that *'s is not the site to play on then nobody would play there. And the whole point of this conversation is the over raking of games and if games are over raked it doesn't matter if Negraneau is a fish at some stakes.
If it isn't try that pros attract and maintain recreational depositors then why do we give them rake as stars pro contracts that we could use keep in the prizepools and buyins for the games?
I believe limon and I ultimately agree, but I think it would take shots and shots of hard liquor to finally arrive at our conclusion.
I propose something never brought before the poker community and we clearly have not thought in this line before.
before they pulled out of the US market due to UIGEA, PartyPoker was the #1 poker site, and also had the most fish.
who were their pros that attracted everyone and gave them the biggest player base?
if recreational players chase pros, Full Tilt should have completely dominated the market prior to their scandal unfolding, since they had by far and away the biggest number of recognizable pros. instead they were behind or even with Stars.
my point isn't that pros don't matter, but they're just one way of marketing a site.
also i didn't read the thread so i'm not responding to this in whatever broader context you're talking about (i guess it's about making a new poker site), i'm just responding to the assertion that fish follow pros rather than the reverse.
before they pulled out of the US market due to UIGEA, PartyPoker was the #1 poker site, and also had the most fish.
who were their pros that attracted everyone and gave them the biggest player base?
You aren't addressing the context of the argument. And one could argue there were pros on party, and that the recs were destined to leave to sites with "better pros". Keep in mind the phenomenon I describe gets stronger in the future when "recs" are generally smarter compared to today (ie they look for lower raked games).
if recreational players chase pros, Full Tilt should have completely dominated the market prior to their scandal unfolding, since they had by far and away the biggest number of recognizable pros. instead they were behind or even with Stars.
my point isn't that pros don't matter, but they're just one way of marketing a site.
also i didn't read the thread so i'm not responding to this in whatever broader context you're talking about (i guess it's about making a new poker site), i'm just responding to the assertion that fish follow pros rather than the reverse.
What you point out seemingly reflects the reality, and is the general thesis or point of mine, Full Tilt was a growing competitor until the US gov turned PS/FT into an industry monopoly.
You see its the government interference and monopoly that has everyone confused about the way poker economics works. But we have an anti monopoly strategy available that we didn't before because of new math and new technology. I wish to present and explain it to anyone that think they might understand (and be useful).
There are now some threads started in the nvg section of the global players forum it would be helpful to eventually start the discussion on what is "ideal poker"
On December 01 2014 12:01 bigredhoss wrote:
um i didnt read the rest of your posts but obviously baal is right about pros chasing fish
its not obvious, its not logical, and it doesn't reflect reality.
If you read my post I pointed out baal and other pros get paid by sites, why? To attract recreational players!
Baal points out that live pros move to the best casinos and of course those pros get immense benefits from those casinos to play there.
You can market the game both ways and perceive it either way but you cannot tell me that the "pros" are doomed to play where the recs play. Old school pros simply fail to explain to the recs why lower rake is important for both the rec and the pro. Having Baal and Dneg argue vs this just supports my point.
it's not uncommon to find games with stars pros running 2-5 handed for hours without filling up. if one fish sits, the game fills in seconds and soon has a 20-person waitlist. the reverse never happens.
the fact that a small % of pros are paid to attract players is not an argument that fish generally follow pros. in some cases the "pros" attract players simply because the pros themselves are fish, i.e. when negreanu sits in highstakes cash games.
If those pro's were Sammy Farha and Daniel Negreanu etc instead of "Nanonoko" it would be different. Most of the team online and the guys acctually playing a lot online most recs never heard about
*Everybody gets behind bitcoin poker
*Site gets lots of regs that quit pokerstars
*Pokerstars feels the pressure and lowers the rake
*Goes on massive campaign and goes back to 2005 perks and traffic
*We then ditch buttcoin and go back to Lee Jones loving arms
*LPers start quitting jobs/uni to go back to playing and ball like Rekrul again
*Profit?
- All pros follow fish
- 99% of poker profesionals are not famous
- some fish follow 1% famous pros
So again, I obviously understand the marketable value of personalities in poker and fish will join tot poker for that, but poker professionals will always try to find edges and game selecting (following fish) is a big edge.
friends a worldwide movement among poker players is happening right now (except on 2p2, the only credible poker forum in existence, where i get insta banned). let us ask ourselves, what is "ideal bullshit", or "asymptotic trolling forums and trying to coin inane phrases with double quotes"? well it all goes back to a lecture by well known mathematician and schizophrenic Russel Crowe who prophesied that one day the masses would become free of PSFTBBJWTFBBQLOLLMAO by all following well known pros such as Baalim to adopt a dodgy bitcoin variant and mass migrate their play from pokerstars. The revolution is happening right now, you better believe it because i have some super complicated math i keep alluding to which is too hard for you to understand, but trust me it is the next e-mail + Show Spoiler +
On December 02 2014 21:26 whamm! wrote:
I feel like this is a good plan:
*Everybody gets behind bitcoin poker
*Site gets lots of regs that quit pokerstars
*Pokerstars feels the pressure and lowers the rake
*Goes on massive campaign and goes back to 2005 perks and traffic
*We then ditch bitcoin and go back to Lee Jones loving arms
*LPers start quitting jobs/uni to go back to playing and ball like Rekrul again
*Profit?
Yes this is the plan, there is more too it, and its barely a plan but more of an economic outlook of what will happen. I have been trying to explain for the last year that bitcoin has destroyed the centralized site model (ie PS/FT). Crypto-currency creates a liquid market. Stars isn't a monopoly because it is the best product, its a monopoly because of regulatory controls laid down on black friday. Bitcoin changes this landscape dramatically. And btw you won't be "ditching" bitcoin, we will be ditching government fiat currencies within a year.
On December 03 2014 00:07 Baalim wrote:
Here are a few facts:
- All pros follow fish
- 99% of poker profesionals are not famous
- some fish follow 1% famous pros
So again, I obviously understand the marketable value of personalities in poker and fish will join tot poker for that, but poker professionals will always try to find edges and game selecting (following fish) is a big edge.
I don't mean to argue you in this context. I have read some of your writing around on the game and I respect it, you don't have the traditional view. I do believe we agree on much of it put approach it from a different perspective (this is something I can't say to many people). I mean to say on a large economic scale, the gravity follows the mass of pros. And also I have written a paper to re define the word pro to the most skilled players or those that consider poker regular income (ie not likely raph nadel). If all stars pros left stars because it had a reputation for being not profitable not friendly to its customer then the site would become barren. It would NOT because soft and so then the pros would come back because all the recreational players remained.
But please keep it in context, because I DO agree with much that you point out, but my point is that the players have an intricate network amongst the global population and the top tier of "regs" and "pros" on all of the forums can in fact reach down to nearly the entire field of players amongst the world. So then is it so far to suggest that if we had our only universal crypto coin (which we do) that pays out to early adopters, that we could "naturally" create a crypto network based on the incentive.
Let us be reminded, bitcoin did exactly that, and when it was proposed nobody would have done anything but ridicule it...and that poker is going through an incredible transition period right now.
I'd really like to send you some Universal Player Coin so that you can argue against it from the other side of "understanding" it by actually doing it. It takes 10 seconds to sign for a wallet, anyone can do it....its a well establish company in the bitcoin world, click the link, save your wallet password (you can't recover a lost wallet password), and copy/paste me your wallet address...
On December 03 2014 06:44 Romm3l wrote:
friends a worldwide movement among poker players is happening right now (except on 2p2, the only credible poker forum in existence, where i get insta banned). let us ask ourselves, what is "ideal bullshit", or "asymptotic trolling forums and trying to coin inane phrases with double quotes"? well it all goes back to a lecture by well known mathematician and schizophrenic Russel Crowe who prophesied that one day the masses would become free of PSFTBBJWTFBBQLOLLMAO by all following well known pros such as Baalim to adopt a dodgy bitcoin variant and mass migrate their play from pokerstars. The revolution is happening right now, you better believe it because i have some super complicated math i keep alluding to which is too hard for you to understand, but trust me it is the next e-mail + Show Spoiler +
I am not a dumb dumb head because you cannot understand. It's ok dude grownups are talking.
On December 03 2014 00:07 Baalim wrote:
Here are a few facts:
- All pros follow fish
- 99% of poker profesionals are not famous
- some fish follow 1% famous pros
So again, I obviously understand the marketable value of personalities in poker and fish will join tot poker for that, but poker professionals will always try to find edges and game selecting (following fish) is a big edge.
Did you not attract a ton of mexican recreationals ?
On December 03 2014 00:07 Baalim wrote:
Here are a few facts:
- All pros follow fish
- 99% of poker profesionals are not famous
- some fish follow 1% famous pros
So again, I obviously understand the marketable value of personalities in poker and fish will join tot poker for that, but poker professionals will always try to find edges and game selecting (following fish) is a big edge.
Did you not attract a ton of mexican recreationals ?
Not sure if you are trolling but I already said it, we are a very small minority of sponsored pros who actively are paid to promote poker and attract new players to poker, but I play every day with thousands of other pros who arent known and dont attract any new players, they just live from poker.
So thinking a big name pro will dump a big contract to switch to this bitcoin site makes no sense.
All the regs wont touch that site unless it has enough recreational players, so... back to my main point, recreational players are the ones who drive the poker economy and the games.
Recreational players are way less likely to use bitcoin and they care less about rake than regs, so I dont see this working easily.
I really dont have anything more to say about this, I dont want to throw any more dirt in his idea, good luck in this and any future endeavors.
Not sure if you are trolling but I already said it, we are a very small minority of sponsored pros who actively are paid to promote poker and attract new players to poker, but I play every day with thousands of other pros who arent known and dont attract any new players, they just live from poker.
So thinking a big name pro will dump a big contract to switch to this bitcoin site makes no sense.
All the regs wont touch that site unless it has enough recreational players, so... back to my main point, recreational players are the ones who drive the poker economy and the games.
Recreational players are way less likely to use bitcoin and they care less about rake than regs, so I dont see this working easily.
I really dont have anything more to say about this, I dont want to throw any more dirt in his idea, good luck in this and any future endeavors.
I wish you would not make your own conception of what the "idea" is. It is not a site. It is a "coin", and you spend and receive it. There is no new site needed. Its a universal poker coin and it gains value from the efficient cryto network it creates.
This is the new technology, learn it today or learn it in a year...it will happen...'
We just fear the unknown so we make ridiculous derails addressing what is not the topic.
AndrewSong United States. Dec 06 2014 05:09. Posts 2355
I've played on Seals for over a year and I've lost money because of BTC falling. I still keep the site up incase HSNL runs but it has been a complete waste of time and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone.
On December 06 2014 04:09 AndrewSong wrote:
I've played on Seals for over a year and I've lost money because of BTC falling. I still keep the site up incase HSNL runs but it has been a complete waste of time and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone.
Today yes, what is your future recommendation?
What I propose is a linking currency between all sites, all players, all poker related services, and even live venues. You already use bitcoin, do you have a counterwallet? https://counterwallet.io/#
Will you get one so you can explain to the members what it is?
1
AndrewSong United States. Dec 06 2014 18:36. Posts 2355
I don't see a future in BTC as a replacement for currency. I would not recommend playing on BTC site for a living nor storing considerable portion of your cash in crypto-currency. There is everything wrong with a BTC poker site. The structure it self promotes bots, colluding, cheating and your forced to keep a bankroll in the most volatile currency. All of operating BTC sites have no regulations and show lack of transparency. Seals is undoubtedly the best BTC poker site but it's shady at best and I would trust my money in Bodog over Seals.
On December 06 2014 17:36 AndrewSong wrote:
I don't see a future in BTC as a replacement for currency. I would not recommend playing on BTC site for a living nor storing considerable portion of your cash in crypto-currency. There is everything wrong with a BTC poker site. The structure it self promotes bots, colluding, cheating and your forced to keep a bankroll in the most volatile currency. All of operating BTC sites have no regulations and show lack of transparency. Seals is undoubtedly the best BTC poker site but it's shady at best and I would trust my money in Bodog over Seals.
Yes but admittedly you don't know anything about btc, so what would cause you to comment?
1
AndrewSong United States. Dec 06 2014 20:18. Posts 2355
What could I not know about BTC that you know? Judging from your posts, it seems that you are blind sided to reality by your love of crypto currency.
On December 06 2014 19:18 AndrewSong wrote:
What could I not know about BTC that you know? Judging from your posts, it seems that you are blind sided to reality by your love of crypto currency.
keep walking, grown ups are talking.
1
bigredhoss Cook Islands. Dec 06 2014 22:46. Posts 8648
op: can you get a couple of the players who you've been in contact with to come here and corroborate some of the things you're saying?
what exactly do you hope to come of the people who are 'interested and willing to understand ideal poker'?
On November 08 2014 09:28 diggerflopboat wrote:
I am being contacted from different groups of players involved in protests on different poker forums. They are beginning now to rally behind the name: ideal poker.
[...]
I realize not everyone will jump aboard and start researching, we are looking for those who are interested adn willing to understand "ideal poker", ask questions, and do a little digging
Truck-Crash Life
Last edit: 06/12/2014 22:48
1
Silver_nz New Zealand. Dec 07 2014 05:08. Posts 5647
On December 06 2014 19:18 AndrewSong wrote:
What could I not know about BTC that you know? Judging from your posts, it seems that you are blind sided to reality by your love of crypto currency.
keep walking, grown ups are talking.
Andrewsong making reasonable points, there is no reason to blow him off like that. Your reputation: tatters
On December 06 2014 21:46 bigredhoss wrote:
op: can you get a couple of the players who you've been in contact with to come here and corroborate some of the things you're saying?
what exactly do you hope to come of the people who are 'interested and willing to understand ideal poker'?
I bring to the community "email 2.0" I simply ask that someone creates an account and receives and email from me...but instead the "account" is called a "wallet" and the email msg is a coin.
It takes 10 seconds to sign up, its open source software, no personal info blah blah...
the fact that there can be 4 pages and multiple pm, of people that have no idea what they are talking about, arguing about something they haven't taken the time to understand is just asinine.
You asked, take 10 seconds....
I'm not looking for people to judge from a distance. Simply for someone here to sign up for a wallet, pm me their wallet address, and receive some coin. That person can ask/understand the proper questions https://counterwallet.io/#
Last edit: 07/12/2014 13:12
1
bigredhoss Cook Islands. Dec 07 2014 13:51. Posts 8648
why does someone have to sign up for that wallet and receive coin from you to understand what you are talking about?
if you want to inform us about your ideas the best way is to explain them here, there's no logical reason anyone would have to sign up for that wallet just to understand whatever your message is.
On December 07 2014 12:51 bigredhoss wrote:
why does someone have to sign up for that wallet and receive coin from you to understand what you are talking about?
if you want to inform us about your ideas the best way is to explain them here, there's no logical reason anyone would have to sign up for that wallet just to understand whatever your message is.
There is 5 pages of discussion, and pages and pages of explanation...Don't be an idiot the best way to understand something is to try it. Why do people continoulsy take their time to show how stupid they are?
Is this seriously what you are going to do with your time today?
How many more "intelligent" poker players will come to this thread just to say something completely dismissive.
Simple, 10 seconds, wallet, coin, discussion, end of stupidity and ignorance.
I did not create the site, its multi million dollar open software...
we are just creating and account and using it, thus harnessing the technology and ending our ignorance of it.
The optimal strategy would be for the players to align with Adelson and force sites to stricter blockchain based security under the slogan that law enforcement will have a better tool to fight crime. By cross-promoting online gaming with live venues a venture could be designed to create and fund decentralize Nakamoto consensus id's, using efficiency and security gained as the value to fuel the project leaving Adelson with a legacy that will dramatically raise the standard of living for humanity all while giving each independent state control off their own choices with respect to online gaming laws and giving previous opponents an out (ie Nakamoto consensus solves the previously unsolved problem of underage gambling).
Basically your online gaming profile will follow you globally from venue to venue. Based on secure, private, auditable block chain based identification system.
The ad: Online gaming is insecure because credit cards lack cheap ulta-secure interest free payment systems, pins, two factor authentication, and multi-sig.
Problem is we don't know what a Nakamoto Concensus Id is...
and so therefore we don't care.
The players are in fact begging for the answer, and largely oblivious to the fact that they are unable to discuss it.
Last edit: 07/12/2014 17:41
1
AndrewSong United States. Dec 07 2014 20:04. Posts 2355
This thread is cancer. Do a better job at illustrating your thoughts. Your sounding like an idiot who's explaining an idea you have no understanding of.
I suggest you stop posting random links with no connection and start by posting your own idea. It's very painful to read your words because theres no context. }
On December 07 2014 19:04 AndrewSong wrote:
This thread is cancer. Do a better job at illustrating your thoughts. Your sounding like an idiot who's explaining an idea you have no understanding of.
I suggest you stop posting random links with no connection and start by posting your own idea. It's very painful to read your words because theres no context. }
The idea is too big and too abstract, just like bitcoin was-hence no one knows who created it.
This "idea" is really me telling you that we can skip a years worth of education and you can sign up for a wallet and I will send you the players universal poker coin https://counterwallet.io/#
It's like email in 1990, and you are like "I don't get it", so the only way to explain is for you to sign up and receive an email.
Thats a simple explanation, you just struggle to think for 2 steps.
and I already said I would answer any sincere questions but if someone refuses to spend 5 minutes reading up on what we are talking about then what is the point of me writing up an explanation of the exact same answers?
Last edit: 07/12/2014 23:06
1
TimDawg United States. Dec 08 2014 05:47. Posts 10197
Can someone please just ban this idiot ffs
online bob is actually a pretty smart person, not at all like the creepy fucker that sits in the sofa telling me he does nasty shit to me when im asleep - pinball
1
TimDawg United States. Dec 08 2014 07:03. Posts 10197
If you don't like Song, WE DONT LIKE YOU
online bob is actually a pretty smart person, not at all like the creepy fucker that sits in the sofa telling me he does nasty shit to me when im asleep - pinball
On December 08 2014 14:57 bigredhoss wrote:
lol i guess i have a soft spot for him
he has like 4+ banned accounts on 2+2 and seems to be convinced that john nash was the creator of bitcoin.
nono, lets not misquote, I am saying he has been touring the world for the last 20 years talking about the coming advent of bitcoin in a lecture called ideal money..
I can't explain something as a whole, in parts, to multiple separate people. Collectively we'd remain dumb.
On December 08 2014 13:26 Sadbob wrote:
Theres not gonna be any revolution lol. I rather just play on pokerstars with real money than some ideal coin website run by hackers.
the revolution is a "hoax", the reality is natural law explains the direction we are are headed and it has been outlined.
But we should point out, for example if you browse two plus two, the players global forum is filled with threads of players complaining and demanding and crying out for change.
They are asking for a solution, and the is how a 10+ year old lecture could predict this a year ago
Thanks for putting some life into this website digger! You're a champ!
Here's a fun one. Its called a "private message", but I can't say that even though its a private message I didn't consider that it might not be private and in be public on many different accounts. In other words...right?
1
TimDawg United States. Dec 08 2014 23:44. Posts 10197
online bob is actually a pretty smart person, not at all like the creepy fucker that sits in the sofa telling me he does nasty shit to me when im asleep - pinball
On December 08 2014 14:57 bigredhoss wrote:
lol i guess i have a soft spot for him
he has like 4+ banned accounts on 2+2 and seems to be convinced that john nash was the creator of bitcoin.
nono, lets not misquote, I am saying he has been touring the world for the last 20 years talking about the coming advent of bitcoin in a lecture called ideal money..
I can't explain something as a whole, in parts, to multiple separate people. Collectively we'd remain dumb.
'Maybe you should read it and then comment. You know how I know you haven't? Because its obviously john nash. Its not a question, its a matter of you stopping your laughing long enough to realize how ignorant you are being.'
Ok listen, what we want to ask is, why is John Nash predicting a poker revolution, and how did a 10 year old lecture predict a poker revolution 1 year ago....
There perhaps will always be “rake", like also “death and taxes". But it is sometimes remarkable how poker strategies can evolve. And in relation to that I think that it is possible that “PSFTCIAFBIDOJ " are like a political faction that will become less influential as a result of poker revolution. The “PSFTCIAFBIDOJ” view of things did not come into existence until after the time when what we can call “Black Friday" had become established in the US. And by this label we wish to differentiate between any theoretical or ideal concept of justice and the actual form of governing regime structure that came to exercise state power on the poker community. (All over the world varieties of sites make claims to have systems very properly or even ideally devoted to the interests of the professional or recreational players of those sites and always an externally located critic can argue that the site is actually a sort of despotism.)
PSFTCIAFBIDOJ implicitly always have the argument that some good managers can do things of beneficial value, operating with the skins, and that it is not needed or appropriate for the players or the “customers" of the chips supplied by the site to actually understand, while the managers are managing, what exactly they are doing and how it will affect the “ROI" circumstances of these players.
I see this as analogous to how the PSFTCIAFBIDOJ were claiming to provide something much better than Ponzi schemes that they could not deny existed in all other sites. But in the end the “dictatorship of the proletariat” seemed to become rather exposed as simply the dictatorship of the regime. So there may be an analogy to this as regards those called “PSFTCIAFBIDOJ” in that while they have claimed to be operating for high and noble objectives of general poker welfare what is clearly true is that they have made it easier for their sites to “print money".
So I see the entire privately raked community as in a weak sense comparable to the “PSFTCIAFBIDOJ " because of the support of both parties for a certain “lack of transparency" relating to the functions of poker sites as seen by the players. And for both of them it can be said that they tend to think in terms of sites operating in a benevolent fashion that is, however, beyond the comprehension of the player of the raked sites. And this parallel makes it seem not implausible that a process of poker revolution might lead to the expectation on the part of players in the “great game types" that they should be better situated to be able to understand whatever will be the rake policies which, indeed, are typically of great importance to players who may have alternative options for where to place their “deposits".
I will try and smoke weed before addressing these kids, but its amazing how many of you spend time in your day commenting without giving 2 seconds or 2 thoughts about what you are commenting on. Bigredhoss quotes old realtime thoughts, they are a year old. We have a plan now and a new technology "counterparty".
Its about creating a decentralized game run by the players, the problem is too many of you will comment without realize that your complaints and remarks have already been solved.
If anyone truly cares about the cliffs in this thread, the pseduo lecture "ideal poker" spells out a solution by which the players create their own crypto network of counterparty wallets linked by a universal poker coin. Think of it like sieging a castle except the castle is an industry monopoly the armies are the players and any allies and the crypto-network is the moat we are now diverting through all the underground tunnelways taking away any hope of survival or escape.
It's free and it's self perpetuating because early adopters gain the most. The crypto network allows the players to organize and do things they could not before such as monitor the games collusion, create a union, and create single unique identifiers.
How is he able to spell out our perfect strategy:
Of course when a poker currency, for a time, does have a specification of its value beyond the local fiat of administrators in its national home, like the money of PS and FT had a peg to the U.S. dollar a few years ago, then international observers can wisely distrust the reliability of such a stabilization of its rake. Such forms of value definition are not necessarily unsound, particularly when a small poker economy, like that of Merge, links its currency to that of a larger area like that of the USA. But it is obvious that this sort of thing puts a burden on the foundation of the rake that is used as a reference basis.
For example, if all sorts of non-US countries decided to define the values of their rake as less than with the US sites, without actually joining into any system of cooperative regulations associated with that, then the effect of that would seem likely to destabilize the stability of the US sites if it would otherwise be highly stable and of high rake.
As well as keeping up with the latest industry trends, Bitcoin is also being touted as a way for online poker sites to remain operational in both regulated and unregulated markets.
Because the currency isn’t overseen by a government and doesn’t exist outside of the internet, it would, technically, be legal for operators to use it as a real money gaming option.
Of course, this theory hasn’t yet been tested and would likely raise other legal issues. However, it’s certainly an option that both players and online poker sites are looking to explore in the coming months.
In response to the recent speculation, members of the community have been asking what it would mean for rake costs. Because Bitcoin would be a cheaper currency option (for now) than traditional methods, it could mean the savings would be passed onto players in the form of reduced charges and rake.
This is lecture written by John Nash 10+ years ago...
Illustrating the principle of these optional choices, the people of Sweden recently had the opportunity of voting in a referendum on whether or not Sweden should join the Eurocurrency bloc and replace the kronor by the euro and thus use the same currency as Finland. The people voted against that, for various reasons. But it cannot be irrelevant whether or not the future quality of a rake is really assured or whether instead that it depends on the shifting sands of poker site decisions or the possibly arbitrary actions of a bureaucracy of officials (PSFTCIAFBIDOJ).
The voters in the U.K. are expecting to have the opportunity to vote in a referendum relating to the adoption, for the U.K., of the euro (which is already adopted in Ireland). Here they have a dramatic conflict, since the pound was the original currency of “the gold standard", with its value pegged to gold in 1717 by Isaac Newton who was then Master of the Mint. (Of course it was not irrelevant that George II, the king then, was an early Hanoverian and also ruled territory in Germany.)
In recent years the rake has had a comparatively good rating with regard to inflation, inferior to the rating of the Swiss franc but superior to most currencies of the world. So the British have the alternatives of accepting adoption of the euro when first voting, or after a delay, or never.
We can legitimately wonder how the speediness of its adoption or delays in its adoption might affect the policies operating to control the actual exchange value of poker deposits. The constitutional structure of the authority behind rake is of the “chips" character in that nothing is really guaranteed as far as the value of the chips is concerned. But this is typical of all currencies used in the world nowadays.
Have we figured out what "ideal poker" is yet?
Last edit: 09/12/2014 19:15
1
AndrewSong United States. Dec 09 2014 19:06. Posts 2355
Ugh.. Don't see why your posting in such belittling manner. You seemed to forget to address any realistic outlook or progress it needs to have a direction. You also seem to have no experience dealing with crypto currency and banking institutions. There's already a problem ahead even before we get into impossibility of running a 'ideal poker site/network regulated by the players'. Not many people will want to deal with holding funny unstable currency when we already have options to play in a regulated site with world standard currency(USD and EUR).
Cashing in/out with crypto is not an easy task and you'll most likely have to go back to BTC ->USD unless you're willing to pay premium vig to the exchange. No other crypto is respected at the moment besides bitcoins and all coins reverts back to bitcoins paying premium. I've done over 100k+ transaction in just bitcoins alone and let me tell you cashing in/out can be long and painful task. It may be easy when youre dealing with couple thousand dollars but when you start moving real money, the time it takes to cash out, vig you pay, verifications from exchange/bank and the currency swings are worse than paying high rake. Coinbase recently banned us from doing transaction with Seals and more exchanges will follow suit when regulations get closer.
So how will you get this done when Bitcoin poker isn't even respected by its own Bitcoin exchange?
Andrew see post #87 and figure out what "Ideal poker" is. I don't mean figure the concept out, I mean, what is the significance.
Don't bring up a whole bunch of problems that have solutions that you refuse to learn about and read before you comment. I have asked you and others many times to sign up for a wallet and receive a coin before arguing, until then you are just monkey to me barking about things you don't understand or know anything about...
am I supposed to respect that?
In before you and others still refuse to discuss the topic and continue to attack my persona.
Coinbase recently banned us from doing transaction with Seals and more exchanges will follow suit when regulations get closer.
So how will you get this done when Bitcoin poker isn't even respected by its own Bitcoin exchange?
This, now I understand that you have experience with bitcoin. This is helpful, however I also realize that you have certainly not understood my "plan". I'll address your questions, if you'll be sincere.
Coinbase banned you because of the US regulations and fear, but coin-base is not a decentralized exchange, tell me the law vs a decentralized exchange?
In other words every single idea you have heard of has a privatized interest to it, essentially a 3rd party taking a profit from its service in one way or another. You are not considering a Universal Poker Coin until you understand that is there no 3rd party. Universal Poker Coin creates a network that BECOMES the law. Because it exists regulation must adjust. This is what bitcoin is doing, it is exactly what Nash explains in "ideal money", and "ideal poker" tells the players how to create their own community uprising using their own community coin.
Once players start to discuss ideal poker, ideal money, bitcoin, the industry monopoly is going to start to dissolve over night. This is why almost daily now there is dramatic regulation change all over the world in regards to igaming. Everyone is trying to adjust, but only the players have access to the "ideal" strategy.
Last edit: 09/12/2014 19:54
1
AndrewSong United States. Dec 09 2014 19:59. Posts 2355
On December 09 2014 18:22 diggerflopboat wrote:
Don't bring up a whole bunch of problems that have solutions that you refuse to learn about and read before you comment.
In before you and others still refuse to discuss the topic and continue to attack my persona.
Because the currency isn’t overseen by a government and doesn’t exist outside of the internet, it would, technically, be legal for operators to use it as a real money gaming option. Of course, this theory hasn’t yet been tested and would likely raise other legal issues
What solutions? I haven't seen you write anything meaningful besides linking us to a 3rd tier affiliate site with articles written for SEO. Are you reading these articles yourself? because if you agree with any of these no name authors, you clearly shouldn't be posting on a subject you have no understanding of.
The last thing we need is another gray area. In business where there's lot of money involved, gray means black over time.
On December 09 2014 18:59 AndrewSong wrote:
[i]Because the currency isn’t overseen by a government and doesn’t exist outside of the internet, it would, technically, be legal for operators to use it as a real money gaming option. Of course, this theory hasn’t yet been tested and would likely raise other legal issues/[i]
What solutions? I haven't seen you write anything meaningful besides linking us to a 3rd tier affiliate site with articles written for SEO. Are you reading these articles yourself? because if you agree with any of these no name authors, you clearly shouldn't be posting on a subject you have no understanding of.
The last thing we need is another gray area. In business where there's lot of money involved, gray means black over time.
Can we change the tone because I know you are worth my explaining now...
Counterparty is the link I just sent you. It is widely known in the bitcoin world but not the public that counterparty is effectively bitcoin 2.0. It is not bitcoin 2....it is a platform which allows any group to create there own coin at zero cost, think bitcoin X. This is important because bitcoin took millions to bootstrap. Universal Poker Coin costs zero. Generally no community has realized the true power of counterparty and poker players naturally might be the first to harness its power.
I and others have already been all around the laws of this, its already been analyzed, documented and discussed right down to the constitution. None of this is a secret in the bitcoin world among, say, developers, its just not yet public knowledge. We are going to spread this knowledge through the adoption of our coin.
thank you. more comments and questions please?
Last edit: 09/12/2014 20:07
0
dogmeat Czech Republic. Dec 09 2014 20:12. Posts 6374
On December 09 2014 18:22 diggerflopboat wrote:
Don't bring up a whole bunch of problems that have solutions that you refuse to learn about and read before you comment.
In before you and others still refuse to discuss the topic and continue to attack my persona.
Because the currency isn’t overseen by a government and doesn’t exist outside of the internet, it would, technically, be legal for operators to use it as a real money gaming option. Of course, this theory hasn’t yet been tested and would likely raise other legal issues
What solutions? I haven't seen you write anything meaningful besides linking us to a 3rd tier affiliate site with articles written for SEO. Are you reading these articles yourself? because if you agree with any of these no name authors, you clearly shouldn't be posting on a subject you have no understanding of.
The last thing we need is another gray area. In business where there's lot of money involved, gray means black over time.
geez, see post #87 and figure out what "Ideal poker" is and its significance, how hard is that?
geez, see post #87 and figure out what "Ideal poker" is and its significance, how hard is that?
I'm sorry if I'm terribad at explaining, as soon as someone with charisma figures it out they can take over. Nonetheless Andrew has been sent some "Naj Coin". Now we can discuss it and figure out what it is about and see if it stands up to all your concerns (provided it works and they receive it). It took a long time to FINALLY get to this point so I hope we are all not to exhausted from our "thread battle".
I'm looking forward to answering Andrews complaints and in the meantime early adoptors obviously gain the most...
On December 09 2014 20:34 Baalim wrote:
I clicked for the LULz... was NOT dissapointed haha what a train wreck
ur not allowed to troll unless you possess some universal poker coin: naj coin.
Andrew got a wallet and gave me his address so has naj coin now so he gets the "conch shell"..
takes 10 seconds, put your cypto currency where your mouth is https://counterwallet.io/#
save your password, send or post your address and you'll get naj coin, then we can discuss it and you can bash the whole concept if you want.
On December 09 2014 21:29 Skoal wrote:
so he wants every1 to sign up for a wallet and receive a coin. seems like elaborate scheme to get a holecardviewer.exe on poker players' computers
yup or it could be that I realize that ignorant people fear things they don't understand so I am looking for someone that understands crypto currency and already knows the site "counterparty". Its like everyone here thinks they have something smart to say but doesn't realize that they are just showing their lack of knowledge on the subject...(I did not create the site, you don't download anything, the whole point is it is safer than using this forum)
Listen...Andrew received some coin...and hopefully they will discuss it with me in front of us and ya'll can express your concerns to them.
Last edit: 09/12/2014 22:47
1
RaiNKhAN United States. Dec 09 2014 22:44. Posts 4080
theres like a 93% chance this guy is gnarly. same retarded links to websites and articles that he never reads, and replies to everyone 4-6 times before anyone else writes back
The biggest Rockets, Sixers, and Grizzlies fan you will ever meet!
On December 09 2014 21:44 RaiNKhAN wrote:
theres like a 93% chance this guy is gnarly. same retarded links to websites and articles that he never reads, and replies to everyone 4-6 times before anyone else writes back
we are waiting on Andrew because they understand the technology I want to discuss "publicly".
We are going to take the industry into our own hands over night. I need a trusted member here that understand crypto currency and receives a Naj Coin. Obviously no one will trust any explanation I give.
1
AndrewSong United States. Dec 10 2014 00:06. Posts 2355
I think we're unintentionally getting trolled. First you come in linking John Nash's "Ideal Money" with "Ideal Poker" and then state that Satochi (founder of bitcoin) is John F. Nash himself. All this is fine since you can have your own opinon. However, I hate to tell you but Counterparty that you highly praise of is nothing special and seems to be just a extended version of coloredcoin or blockchain protocol. I am still beating my head around why you think this wallet is so grand because it's a trustless P2P environment running on a open software. If you weren't aware, wallet like this has been around for a long while and there's constantly new ones popping out. This service is a middle-man that lives off of exchange. It doesn't provide any solution for what I have asked. All the assets, NAJCOIN, or anything you create here requires someone to hold, collect and distribute those assets which carries a counter party risk. Hence the name, Counter party.
This is what diggerflop sent me that will enlighten you. 100 play money coins...
I am still beating my head around why you think this wallet is so grand because it's a trustless P2P environment running on a open software. If you weren't aware, wallet like this has been around for a long while and there's constantly new ones popping out. This service is a middle-man that lives off of exchange. It doesn't provide any solution for what I have asked. All the assets, NAJCOIN, or anything you create here requires someone to hold, collect and distribute those assets which carries a counter party risk. Hence the name, Counter party.
Exactly about this. Counterparty seeks to be a DECENTRALIZED exchange, it rides on bitcoin and so by saying "counterparty" its really a play on that it takes the role of a counter party essentially ELIMINATING it.
So what you point out is important, and the exact reason we are having this conversation. We have NOT had this before such ventures as counterparty.
We create our "naj coin", it is fixed, and we get to choose what ever distribution method we want. This is the new technology, first we raise the value of it by spreading the network, and then we create a price by rallying for other poker services to adopt and honor it.
This is what diggerflop sent me that will enlighten you. 100 play money coins...
Yes it took five pages of people calling boogy man before 1 person finally could be an example of how easy our universal poker coin will be to adopt.
Now let me describe the intrinsic value and I want you to argue me on it:
Today’s global poker network might not be readily comparable to Nick Szabo’s extension of Metcalf’s Law:
Metcalfe’s Law states that a value of a network is proportional to the square of the number of its nodes. In an area where good soils, mines, and forests are randomly distributed, the number of nodes valuable to an industrial economy is proportional to the area encompassed.
However if we assume a global internet landscape of Ideal Poker and the general goal is to facilitate the “probabilistic” exchange of chips from the less efficient players to the more efficient players, then the value of the Ideal Poker network becomes comparable to Nick Szabo’s formalization of Adam Smith’s works:
The number of such nodes that can be economically accessed is an inverse square of the cost per mile of transportation. Combine this with Metcalfe’s Law and we reach a dramatic but solid mathematical conclusion: the potential value of a land transportation network is the inverse fourth power of the cost of that transportation. A reduction in transportation costs in a trade network by a factor of two increases the potential value of that network by a factor of sixteen. While a power of exactly 4.0 will usually be too high, due to redundancies, this does show how the cost of transportation can have a radical nonlinear impact on the value of the trade networks it enables.
The networks’ value, is the value that Ideal (and therefore Moral) Poker brings to our society and how Ideal and how Moral the poker network is. The “transportation” cost in the trade network then becomes the “effective rake” (ie site profits per “transaction”).
So the potential value of an Ideal Poker network is the inverse fourth power of the “effective rake”.
This outlines an intrinsic value for a “Poker Coin“
Last edit: 10/12/2014 00:36
1
Silver_nz New Zealand. Dec 10 2014 04:56. Posts 5647
On December 09 2014 23:22 diggerflopboat wrote:
the general goal is to facilitate the “probabilistic” exchange of chips from the less efficient players to the more efficient players
don't tell the fish about this.
but yeah, so the value of using counterparty as a base for the poker-coin is that it could quickly establish the poker-coin using proof of stake. The poker-coin could be created to have attributes of fast transaction confirmation times, lobby listings, and cheating countermeasures. The poker-room GUI can be created to reside on players machines, but all the important information is protected in the blockchain. Is that right?
Jesus Christ if I can't understand this, what more Uncle Norman or grandpa? Can't you guys just build the software so people can actually play and try it out? Call me an idiot digger, but this is just way too complicated for a recreational player to grasp. Rake in live casinos is nuts but you see fish line up and play there giving zero fucks because it's idiot proof easy
but yeah, so the value of using counterparty as a base for the poker-coin is that it could quickly establish the poker-coin using proof of stake. The poker-coin could be created to have attributes of fast transaction confirmation times, lobby listings, and cheating countermeasures. The poker-room GUI can be created to reside on players machines, but all the important information is protected in the blockchain. Is that right?
We re wrote the game to not include "fish", when there is less rake taken out you don't need degenerate players anymore and the game functions fine off of rich philanthropic types vs winning pros.
What you say is all fine but it is not part of this plan. It is simpler, we now have a finite amount of poker "coupons", that is the plan. Once distributed amongst the players we will ask EXISTING sites and business to accept the coupon like it is money. It is very easy to receive some of this coupon, so if you want to be an early adopter you should do so.
On December 10 2014 09:35 whamm! wrote:
Jesus Christ if I can't understand this, what more Uncle Norman or grandpa? Can't you guys just build the software so people can actually play and try it out? Call me an idiot digger, but this is just way too complicated for a recreational player to grasp. Rake in live casinos is nuts but you see fish line up and play there giving zero fucks because it's idiot proof easy
No you aren't an idiot for this. But this thread is not for grandpa. Grandpa uses email now, and grandpa will soon be using bitcoin, he might even use it and not realize it in the future because its an underlying protocol. If you want simple here:
Create 21 million poker coins (done).
Distribute to poker players
Get existing poker sites to accept poker coin.
Now if you want to argue that getting and using poker coin is too difficult then you must get some first otherwise you dont know what you are arguing about. And yes its extremely easy ask Andrew.
nobody gives a fuck about "Nick Szabo’s extension of Metcalf’s Law".
pls answer concisely in plain english without copy pasting anything or making any analogies: how and at what point in your "plan" is somebody is going to be able to exchange the coins you conjured out of nothing for actual money that can be used to buy things?
On December 10 2014 11:18 Romm3l wrote:
nobody gives a fuck about "Nick Szabo’s extension of Metcalf’s Law".
pls answer concisely in plain english without copy pasting anything how and at what point in your "plan" is somebody is going to be able to exchange the coins you conjured out of nothing for actual money that can be used to buy things?
Lol, I realize different people have a different level of interest, and I am fine at giving answers to different questions. The value of the coins comes from the benefit that a crypto network would bring. Since there is a such a giant monopoly effective rake and the cost of playing poker is so large there is a giant bubble of value to be accessed. In order to do so we need to reach a tipping point level of adoption from the players side (hence metcalf's law) AND we will need to have a certain amount of merchants accepting the coin.
The coin is immediately transferable on the crypto exchange market however it obviously won't have a price established yet.
We must understand, we expect a spike in the price, early adopters stand to make the most, but in the future we are not looking for "poker coin" to be a store of wealth, it is a means to an end. In the future it might be a useful collectable for other technological reasons than "price". But in the meantime we are using as a means to join into cooperation, by giving individuals incentive to participate.
Pls don't be upset if I don't explain well, it is a difficult subject for all of us. Once one community starts to spread the coin, even for "fun" it won't take much for 1 or to others. Once some players realize the power of what we are doing 2p2 will catch on and the movement will spread like wildfire. The status quo will have to face an army of a crypto currency connected network over night.
why the coin you made up and why not bitcoin? why not lightcoin or any of the 10000 other coins? why not a coin I make up myself using this counterparty thing called romm3lcoin?
when you keep repeating early adopters will gain most (if it catches on), and wanting to give "individuals incentive to participate", it sounds exactly like you're trying to sell a ponzi scheme. sure if you somehow convince everyone to use the coin you made, you and the early adopters will do fine. but if i want to get into the business of starting ponzi schemes, why don't i work for myself and make up my own coin instead of try to peddle the one you made? i can try to sound smart by copy pasting articles from journals and changing a few words too...
On December 10 2014 12:05 Romm3l wrote:
why the coin you made up and why not bitcoin? why not lightcoin or any of the 10000 other coins?
There can only be one universal players coin, I hope you see this and why it is true. Bitcoin and Litecoin do not incentivize poker players. Only a players community coin can harness the value of the inefficient poker network that currently exists.
why not a coin I make up myself using this counterparty thing called romm3lcoin?
this is the question we eventually expect. It is more valid than bitcoin and litecoin (for reasons stated above). Now you want to ask why the players should trust and use Naj Coin rather than Romm3lcoin? Gives us your arguments, we will see if they hold vs mine...in other words who can suggest that a universal players coin is the correct thing to do yet your coin is better than Naj coin?
when you keep repeating early adopters will gain most (if it catches on), and wanting to give "individuals incentive to participate", it sounds exactly like you're trying to sell a ponzi scheme. sure if you somehow convince everyone to use the coin you made, you and the early adopters will do fine. but if i want to get into the business of starting ponzi schemes, why don't i work for myself and make up my own coin instead of try to peddle the one you made? i can try to sound smart by copy pasting articles from journals and changing a few words too...
Yes out of ignorance we fear. We don't really understand ponzi schemes, we don't understand financials, and we don't understand crypto currency and counterparty, yet we are sooooo quick to point that its a ponzi scheme.
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation where the operator, an individual or organization, pays returns to its investors from new capital paid to the operators by new investors, rather than from profit earned by the operator. Operators of Ponzi schemes usually entice new investors by offering higher returns than other investments, in the form of short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent.
Ponzi schemes require money invested from the bottom to filter up to the top, so people at the bottom get SCREWED. What I suggest requires no "investment", and EVERYBODY gains. Do you see that your religion does not allow for such a thing? It is the very opposite of a ponzi scheme. How hard have we worked in this thread to paint me as a malicious attacker when all I have clearly done is spend all my energy and destroyed my entire image just to bring back the game that we all love.
You've been abused all your lives financially...
but i am not trying to hurt you, I am bringing a perfectly crafted solution by John Nash to the poker players.
Romm3lcoin, sir, how about no more arguing from habit, get a counterparty wallet it, give me your address, I will send you Naj Coin and we can discuss this in a civilized manner?
do you realise thats the same as saying nobody will ever pay real money for your coin lol. if nobody ever invests then how is your coin worth anything? value is what you can exchange for other goods and services, not some fourth root of nodes
On December 10 2014 13:00 Romm3l wrote:
what you suggest requires no investment?
do you realise thats the same as saying nobody will ever pay real money for your coin lol. if nobody ever invests then how is your coin worth anything? value is what you can exchange for other goods and services, not some fourth root of nodes
The concept is perfect, not for someone like you with a half a brain to pick anything apart about it. You need a full brain to do so.
The PLAYERS neednt invest. Meaning its not a ponzi scheme, and nothing your ass can say can make it so. Use your head, try to think for even a moment, try to make your brain cells work. Its a very simple concept and not malicious at all. We have coupon, we adopt it, we get businesses to participate in our network.
If you have a 4 year old mentality you are not going to be able to understand, do you see this?
when i played poker on stars i was able to increase my purchasing power of actual goods and services if i won. you still havent answered who is going to exchange your coin for proper money. if players dont invest then your coin is just play money chips as andrewsong said. wheres the money?
On December 10 2014 13:07 Romm3l wrote:
when i played poker on stars i was able to increase my purchasing power of actual goods and services if i won. you still havent answered who is going to exchange your coin for proper money. if players dont invest then your coin is just play money chips as andrewsong said. wheres the money?
Such a better tone thank you. The money comes from the effective rake that the industry monopoly is currently taking from the game + the money leaving from the friction of the current payment network.
Because *'s has an industry monopoly the "effective" rake is actually way higher than it would be if there was no monopoly. The difference between the two is profit. Please don't think of me as an infant because I say it so simply. It is what Nash teaches in Ideal Money. We take the ideal, and the difference is the value of the change.
Not only is there value from breaking the monopolistic control, but also because crypto currency networks are cheaper for all players and all sites. So there is a GREAT value in adoption of it. And this value gets reflected into the coin that bring about the change.
So basically you are asking "So digger you are telling us this counterparty Naj Coin is magically going to plug into PS and suck its value into a "price"?"
And I'm saying...after a year of research, and after an incredible amount of deciphering the unbelievable lecture Ideal Money...yes we are coming up a new technological currency revolution...this is our role.
Also more value can be put into "price" by having poker related merchants give a discount for the coin.
on the contrary i would think you were much smarter if you were able to express anything in simple terms. at that you are still failing.
Where's the money?
I get that lower rake means more money in players' pockets. But lower rake and playing for your funnymoney only means more funnymoney in players' pockets. Where does real money come into this?
On December 10 2014 13:23 Romm3l wrote:
on the contrary i would think you were much smarter if you were able to express anything in simple terms. at that you are still failing.
Where's the money?
I get that lower rake means more money in players' pockets. But lower rake and playing for your funnymoney only means more funnymoney in players' pockets. Where does real money come into this?
Where did the money come from for bitcoin? Obviously I do not understand your question and you do not understand my answer.
Millions and essentially billions of dollars of value leaves the poker economy through raked monies. The reduction of this leak turns our "coupon" into a conduit of value. The "money" simply gets channeled back into the poker economy. If you cannot see this as an obvious explanation as to "where is the money" I cannot be blamed for your inability to see.
Bitcoin gains value (ie where the money is) from the efficiency it brings to the centralized banking industry. Poker coin does the identical thing to the poker industry. Bitcoin cannot do this to the poker industry, it is not what it is for nor will it work. The communities each need to adopt their own currency, and this is poker's coin.
Rom, get some Naj Coin, lets make this networks value on this forum n= 3, its exponential, remember we are talking value, if we want "price" (ie where is the money), that comes later when the coin is accepted throughout the industry.
When major businesses first started adopting cryto currencies, they tried to charge equal amounts with crypto vs fiat payments. But the bitcoin community turned it into bad press and complained that its just a business PR stunt if they don't at least incentivize the use of bitcoin. For many companies the NEXT DAY they reduced the price of bitcoin related transactions for the customers.
I wonder if they charge for the conversion fees when you need to transfer between bitcoins would not be surprised if they do this.
We are finally starting to realize and admit that poker sites are centralized exchanges/banks, and thus they are subject to the same financial and economic laws and solutions that central banking is. This means that Nash's solution to the centralized banking industry is perfectly applicable to poker. That is what we have done.
Effective rake is inversely tied to our adoption of Naj Coin, and the price of Naj coin will reflect the change as a result, once its adopted amongst enough useful merchants in the industry.
It means the gasoline has been poured and we simply need to light it one fire...
Last edit: 10/12/2014 14:54
1
Silver_nz New Zealand. Dec 10 2014 15:28. Posts 5647
but yeah, so the value of using counterparty as a base for the poker-coin is that it could quickly establish the poker-coin using proof of stake. The poker-coin could be created to have attributes of fast transaction confirmation times, lobby listings, and cheating countermeasures. The poker-room GUI can be created to reside on players machines, but all the important information is protected in the blockchain. Is that right?
We re wrote the game to not include "fish", when there is less rake taken out you don't need degenerate players anymore and the game functions fine off of rich philanthropic types vs winning pros.
What you say is all fine but it is not part of this plan. It is simpler, we now have a finite amount of poker "coupons", that is the plan. Once distributed amongst the players we will ask EXISTING sites and business to accept the coupon like it is money. It is very easy to receive some of this coupon, so if you want to be an early adopter you should do so.
Your plan is:
distribute finite number of poker-coins evenly to all poker players (aka airdrop)
use community pressure to have the sites agree to exchange those coins for some small amount of cash
altcoin transactions established, people can now buy in to Pokerstars using bitcoin through the altcoin
We are slowly waking up to the revelation of John Nash's lecture "ideal poker" that teaches us a new "poker currency technology" is going to revolutionize the centralized poker site industry:
It does seem like big money is set to sneak in a bill that will ban online poker, but it will not kill online gaming. Poker rooms and casinos will just emerge on the dark web and likely the stakes will be for bitcoins.
There are already sites where we can play poker that way, more legislation and another poker site heist by the DOJ will only make those sites stronger.
On December 10 2014 14:28 Silver_nz wrote:
Your plan is:
distribute finite number of poker-coins evenly to all poker players (aka airdrop)
use community pressure to have the sites agree to exchange those coins for some small amount of cash
altcoin transactions established, people can now buy in to Pokerstars using bitcoin through the altcoin
is that right?
doesn't have to be even, but it needs to be a decent distribution. We aren't worried about PS, we are going to campaign to all of the competitors, those that want a change to the status quo. Many people have incentive to cooperate vs the industry monopoly
1
Silver_nz New Zealand. Dec 10 2014 17:56. Posts 5647
What separates Najcoin from other AltCoins?
we know it is based on the Counterparty protocol
we know it is dedicated to poker players
what else?
1
AndrewSong United States. Dec 10 2014 18:09. Posts 2355
On December 10 2014 16:56 Silver_nz wrote:
What separates Najcoin from other AltCoins?
we know it is based on the Counterparty protocol
we know it is dedicated to poker players
what else?
only the players adoption of it. There can only every be one and only the players can invoke it. Please understand the importance of your question and my answer. You can have infinite type of privatized 3rd party alt coins. But you can only ever have one universal coin sponsored by the community.
So it is not me arguing that my private Naj Coin is the best. It is me explaining that Nash points out an "anomaly" in the sphere of currency evolution. Once you start to think in the concept of different types or quality of a currency you start to identify different currency of different properties.
I recognize the players community coin (naj coin) as an extrapolation of the decentralization of central banking (bitcoin).
You can argue me it should be called Daj coin, or Dap coin, or Silver coin, but regardless the space of a universal player coin exists and there cannot be two....in order to change the name, you need a better argument and foundation than mine, and you won't find it because there isn't one.
My friend, when all you do is post images of fry, it is YOU that is trolling, and you that has not shown a single ounce of intelligence.
Any idiot can argue from a stance of ignorance, can you not see this?
All you do is show exactly why bitcoin was created anonymously, its because ignorant people like you. Makes you wonder if the person behind bitcoin didn't spend 10 years talk about it in public lectures while zero people listened to them.
1
Silver_nz New Zealand. Dec 10 2014 20:22. Posts 5647
How many Naj coins are currently created?
How many will be created?
How are they going to be distributed to poker players?
digger logic: because bitcoin exploded and immense value was created from 'nothing,' digger can therefore use the poker industry to create his own coin all by posting nonsense on the internet
On December 10 2014 19:22 Silver_nz wrote:
How many Naj coins are currently created?
How many will be created?
How are they going to be distributed to poker players?
21 million, we are going to follow bitocins printing rate, 10million to start than 5million etc. Bitcoin goes over 140 years we'll do say 140 days.
Thats it, counterparty site has two purpose that changes the game monumentally in the players favor: 1) you can lock the amount of the asset forever 2) you can exchange it for other assets (essentially including bitcoin).
So the finite-ness is what captures value where as in history you could not make a finite amount that NOBODY could cheat with.
The distribution can be done in any way. At first word of mouth like this, once we get say 5 forums we can have the mods or trusted members pass out the coin, eventually and very easily we can create a faucet that just leaks them slowly. And on a next level we can get sites that aren't the monopoly to give them out in big tournament promotions.
Now you tell me, does Limons argument hold water now, that pros follow the fish? Or is it possible he just players bad "poker" where poker has a new strategy where the pros can use poker coin to entice recreational to play ball. IF you could get some big name pros to understand then you could sway the masses EASY. So now you and others are only left with the argument that all these pros like grinder and harmon that are creating crypto currency coins and sites, are too dull to realize the power of a universal poker coin. That they can see the opportunity of a new kind of poker but they cannot see past the current monopolistic conditions....
I think thats BS, I think these players very soon will realize that a universal poker coin is the obvious solution. And like I said, there can only ever be one.
On December 10 2014 20:41 Skoal wrote:
digger logic: because bitcoin exploded and immense value was created from 'nothing,' digger can therefore use the poker industry to create his own coin all by posting nonsense on the internet
gud plan
No. I realize what I sound like to you, but read these words carefully: It is ME that is making fun of YOU.
Imagine what it would sound like to get in front of the world and talk to them about bitcoin, something you are about to create. How crazy the world would treat you and how ridiculous it would sound that anyone would accept a world currency that is backed by computational effort.
You see, you are not laughing at ME, you are laughing at the creator of bitcoin, and its not funny anymore you just seem pathetic. People like you are the reason that the inventor is unknown. Now you finally think you know what bitcoin is and you don't. I am telling you what it is, it is a protocol that allows us to create poker coin. That is its power, laughing at that fact is just you being ignorant. I am not making a guess. I am bringing in the truth of this to the community because I have read the material.
All these children say I'm posting nonsense. I am the only person here who has read all of the material...the only one.
bigredhoss Cook Islands. Dec 11 2014 02:11. Posts 8648
he has so much heart though
Truck-Crash Life
1
AndrewSong United States. Dec 11 2014 02:58. Posts 2355
No one wants to use fake Internet coin that has no use other than poker. Counter party was never made to create a coin targeting the masses. It was made to handle projects such as crowd sourcing and you dont seem to understand that.
Any new coin moving forward will be living off BTC. If you can't see why this is a problem, you really got to understand what makes the price of crypto currency fluctuate and the role exchange has in all of this.
Take a look at litecoin for example,
If you want to cash out lite coin to USD, almost all of the exchange makes you convert it to BTC charging a conversion fee before cashing out in USD having to pay a withdrawal fee again. BTC-e lets you convert it straight to USD but they don't do it themselves. They charge .2% followed by a withdrawal fee of .5 LTC just for linking you with a buyer. The price you sell will most likely be lower than what you had in mind. So think for your self, if litecoin, the 3rd biggest coin is treated like this, what do you expect from a coin used by small group of niche poker players?
On December 11 2014 01:58 AndrewSong wrote:
No one wants to use fake Internet coin that has no use other than poker. Counter party was never made to create a coin targeting the masses. It was made to handle projects such as crowd sourcing and you dont seem to understand that.
Any new coin moving forward will be living off BTC. If you can't see why this is a problem, you really got to understand what makes the price of crypto currency fluctuate and the role exchange has in all of this.
Take a look at litecoin for example,
If you want to cash out lite coin to USD, almost all of the exchange makes you convert it to BTC charging a conversion fee before cashing out in USD having to pay a withdrawal fee again. BTC-e lets you convert it straight to USD but they don't do it themselves. They charge .2% followed by a withdrawal fee of .5 LTC just for linking you with a buyer. The price you sell will most likely be lower than what you had in mind. So think for your self, if litecoin, the 3rd biggest coin is treated like this, what do you expect from a coin used by small group of niche poker players?
lite coins market cap is 122 mill. Pokers market cap makes that look like peanuts. The cost of exchange is reducing by the day. And the entire point is as this technology gets adopted there will be no more need to convert to fiat. The whole point is the ridiculous fees will eventually stop the markets from doing so.
0
dogmeat Czech Republic. Dec 11 2014 17:37. Posts 6374
you cant print cryptocurrency and rub it on your titties...
On December 10 2014 23:37 diggerflopboat wrote:
[QUOTE]On December 10 2014 20:41 Skoal wrote:
All these children say I'm posting nonsense. I am the only person here who has read all of the material...the only one.
On December 10 2014 23:37 diggerflopboat wrote:
[QUOTE]On December 10 2014 20:41 Skoal wrote:
All these children say I'm posting nonsense. I am the only person here who has read all of the material...the only one.
If you read the material its not my revolution. I'm explaining economic inevitability. Are we ready yet?
1
Silver_nz New Zealand. Dec 11 2014 20:42. Posts 5647
Digger may be pushing a pump-n-dump scam coin, but I do think he is doing a service for the poker community overall.
Cryptocoins and online poker are a match made in heaven, freeing people to deposit and withdraw as they like, opening up american market, and greatly lowering costs. It's just a matter of sorting out the details. getting people thinking about cypto and counterparty, and how we can make a better pokerroom has value.
A peer-to-peer poker room with all important information protected in a bitcoin-type blockchain is possible. This would require the creation of a coin that is highly specialized for online poker.
a fucking rake free service would probably get me playing again. get something running and people will play it. the longer it takes the less intersting it sounds, so the smart guys should put something together if they really believed in this whole idea and stop convincing people to like it.
On December 11 2014 19:42 Silver_nz wrote:
Digger may be pushing a pump-n-dump scam coin, but I do think he is doing a service for the poker community overall.
Cryptocoins and online poker are a match made in heaven, freeing people to deposit and withdraw as they like, opening up american market, and greatly lowering costs. It's just a matter of sorting out the details. getting people thinking about cypto and counterparty, and how we can make a better pokerroom has value.
A peer-to-peer poker room with all important information protected in a bitcoin-type blockchain is possible. This would require the creation of a coin that is highly specialized for online poker.
Its the opposite of a scam coin, you don't put any money in, there is no pump. That is the succintness to it.
On December 11 2014 19:51 whamm! wrote:
a fucking rake free service would probably get me playing again. get something running and people will play it. the longer it takes the less intersting it sounds, so the smart guys should put something together if they really believed in this whole idea and stop convincing people to like it.
p2p poker room is nearly complete, there are multiple projects that will ultimately merged. But they haven't figured out a way to organize the community. The players need Naj coin to create single unique identifiers, the people that are laughing by comparing bitcoin to naj coin are just ignorant of what bitcoin is.
LIke I said this is inevitable, I'm just pointing out ignorance while we watch.
If anyone wants naj coin lemme know, early adoptors stand to gain and there is no cost or risk to receive some
Silver_nz New Zealand. Dec 12 2014 16:58. Posts 5647
On December 11 2014 20:09 diggerflopboat wrote:
Its the opposite of a scam coin, you don't put any money in, there is no pump.
oh I see. and if the value of the coin goes to $1USD per naj at sometime in the future and you just happen to have 4million of them leftover... I guess you wont really benefit at all, right?
On December 11 2014 20:09 diggerflopboat wrote:
If anyone wants naj coin lemme know, early adoptors stand to gain
On December 11 2014 20:09 diggerflopboat wrote:
Its the opposite of a scam coin, you don't put any money in, there is no pump.
oh I see. and if the value of the coin goes to $1USD per naj at sometime in the future and you just happen to have 4million of them leftover... I guess you wont really benefit at all, right?
As if you are an abused child you come from a center point of fear. Fair enough, we took that into account. The archaic way is I explain to each and every one of you, the faster way is we each educate ourselves.
There are, for example, only 21 million naj coins, and each of us is able to verify that, which is part of the benefit of the technology.
You will know approximately how many I have based on my wallet id. Perhaps I won't be anonymous and perhaps you will. Perhaps we will "multi wallet" and have some public known addresses and some private ones. It is the new image of poker for example phil g. can have a public account and a secret one. Let the fans and players decide what is "acceptable" and "cool". But we are about to have some trustable mainstream pros declare their crypto accounts publicly.
The only cost is the mental transaction of creating a wallet and learning to receive and send a coin
This is why the plan works because it incentives participation. This is what the paper "ideal poker" suggests, and yes it is an exact copy of bitcoin's business model, but you must see the value of its difference. You won't of course until you receive a coin.
In the sort of game theory that is studied and applied by economists the concept of “utility" is very fundamental and essential. Von Neumann and Morgenstern give a notably good and thorough treatment of utility in their book (on game theory and economic behavior). The concept of utility (mathematical) does indeed predate the book of Von Neumann and Morgenstern. And for example, as a concept, mathematical utility can be traced back to a paper published in 1886 in Pisa by G. B. Antonelli.
When one studies what are called ”cooperative games", which in economic terms include mergers and acquisitions or cartel formation, it is found to be appropriate and is standard to form two basic classifications:
(1): Games with transferable utility.
(and)
(2): Games without transferable utility
(or “NTU" games).
In the world of practical realities it is money which typically causes the existence of a game of type (1) rather than of type (2); money is the “lubrication" which enables the efficient “transfer of utility". And generally if games can be transformed from type (2) to type (1) there is a gain, on average, to all the players in terms of whatever might be expected to be the outcome.
But this function of chips in generally facilitating the transfer of utility would seem to be as well performed by the currency of PSFTCIAFBIDOJ as by that of a player run site. Or the question can be asked “How do `raked poker' and `rakeless poker’ differ, if at all, for the valuable function of facilitating utility transfer?". But if we consider contracts having a relatively long time axis then the difference can be seen clearly.
Consider a poker society where the chips in use are subject to a rapid and unpredictable rate of rake so that chips worth 100 now might be worth from 50 to 10 by a year from now. Who would want to lend chips for the term of a year?
In this context we can see how the “quality" of a rake standard can strongly influence areas of the poker economy involving financing with longer-term credits.
And also, if we view rake as of importance in connection with transfers of utility, we can see that rake itself is a sort of “utility", using the word in another sense, comparable to supplies of water, electric energy or telecommunications. And then, if we think about it, we can consider the quality of rake as comparable to the quality of some “public utility" like the supply of electric energy or of water.
I just want to show you "nash"'s strategy of how to make poker not just a zero sum game. It says by creating a linking currency unique to the community, the result is a kind of "cooperative gain". By creating this currency network there is a stability created that spawns a "rake unit".
this is the math we will use and develop.
Last edit: 12/12/2014 18:47
1
Silver_nz New Zealand. Dec 13 2014 18:38. Posts 5647
that is the wall of text you use to hide the fact that you have no realistic plan
On December 13 2014 17:38 Silver_nz wrote:
that is the wall of text you use to hide the fact that you have no realistic plan
This is you admitting you are too ignorant to read a few lines. Listen this is not you making fun of me. This is me consistently making fun of you for being so ridiculously blind. How you are able to use a computer but not put 2 and 2 together I will never understand EVER. Your ignorance works today, but in the near future you will not be able to erase all evidence of your admitting stupidity. We will hold you to it.
Like I consistently point out. Only one of us is educated on the subject of crypto currency. Only one of us has consistently called the changing poker economy in response to the current economic and regulatory climate. You are mad bro, because you cannot hold a candle to me, and I am making fun of you for it, and you cant even see that! Just to be clear, I realize you will not receive Naj Coin. I'm gathering evidence of your ignorance so as to present to the future of the game.
But there is something else. You can berate me and make fun of me more. I've been booted from 2p2 for tryng to explain to the players that Ideal Money is about bitcoin, that John Nash has been discussing it for 20 years before it was released, and so he is likely the main creator of it. So ya lets get some quotes of you laughing at me for that please.
Which is more effective in preserving (or restoring) internet poker in prohibited jurisdictions?
Writing emails and letters to lawmakers, and donating to lobbyists
Playing internet poker on a Bitcoin site
Nash: Ideal Money
Evolution of Customs and Opinions
In a large state like one of the "great democracies" it is reasonable to say that the people should be able, in principle, to decide on the form of a money (like a "public utility" ) that they should be served by, even though most of the actual volume of the use of the money would be out of the hands of the great majority of the people. But most typically the people would expect to be served by their elected representatives and not to make most of the relevant decisions in a direct fashion.
If it becomes a matter of strong and definite prefer-ences that the money used should have definite character-istics of quality then, in principle, the people can demand that. For example formerly there was the drachma and now there is, in Greece, the euro instead of that. And the people seem to be pleased with the change.
So the quality of the medium or media of exchange that is/are used can be improved, if the improvement is really desired. Here we speak of quality in the sense of Gresham or like a bond rating agency.
But the famous classical "Gresham’s Law" also reveals the intrinsic difficulty. Thus "good money" will not naturally supplant and replace "bad money" by a simple Darwinian superiority of competitive species. Rather than that, it must be that the good things are established by the voluntary choice of human agencies. And these resp-onsible agencies, being naturally of the domain of polit-ically derived authorities, would need to make appropriate efforts to achieve such a goal and to pay the costs that are entailed before their societies can benefit. And the benefits would come from the improvement in the quality of this public utility (money) which serves to facilitate the game-theoretic function of "the transfer of utility".
An example of an efficiently working global reform (at least in relation to electronic manufactures) is the metric system, with its central Bureau located near Paris. And this is an example of a system of yardsticks where inflation is currently NOT in fashion!
Me and Nash: Ideal Poker
The actions of the DOJ was actually multi-dimensional and consequently there are quite different varieties of persons at the present time who follow, in one way or another, some of the thinking of the DOJ. And of course SOME of its thinking was scientifically accurate and thus not disputable. For example, FT was labeled a Ponzi scheme. The label “PSFTCIAFBICIA" is convenient, but to be safe we should have a defined meaning for this as a party that can be criticized and contrasted with other parties. So let us define “PSFTCIAFBICIA “to be descriptive of a “school of thought" that originated at the time of Black Friday on April 15 2011. Then, more specifically, a “PSFTCIAFBICIA " would favor the existence of a “manipulative" state establishment of raked poker and poker skin which would continuously seek to achieve “raked" objectives with comparatively little regard for the long term reputation of the poker currency and the associated effects of that on the reputation of poker sites domestic to the state. And indeed a very famous saying of PSFTCIAFBICIA was “...in the long run we will all be dead...".
The paper called “Ideal Money" that was recently published in the Southern Economic Journal presented a possible conventional basis for money of “ideal" type. This variety of money would be intrinsically free of “inflationary decadence" similarly to how money would be free from that on a true “gold standard", but the proposed basis for that was not the proposal of a linkage to gold.
(One can observe, for comparison, the difficulties that are found in connection with issues of which national regions should or should not be included with the group making use of the new “poker" currency. For example, the US player would like to become world members but the PSFTCIAFBIDOJ are not convinced that they would be beneficiaries by inclusion.)
In the near future there may be a smaller number of major sites used in the world and these may stand in competitive relations among themselves. There is now the “euro" sites and the old history of the UB scandal is past history now. And there COULD be introduced, for example, a similar international site for the Islamic world or for South Asia, or for South America, or here or there.
So here is the possibility of “asymptotically ideal (rakeless) poker". Starting with the idea of value stabilization in relation to a domestic ‘deposits raked’ index associated with the territory of one state, beyond that there is the natural and logical concept of internationally based rake comparisons. The sites being compared, like PSFTCIAFBIDOJ, Merge, Party Poker, etc. can be viewed with critical eyes by their players and by those who may have the option of whether or not or how to use one of them. This can lead to pressure for good quality and consequently for a lessened rate of rake.
Illustrating the principle of these optional choices, the people of Sweden recently had the opportunity of voting in a referendum on whether or not Sweden should join the Eurocurrency bloc and replace the kronor by the euro and thus use the same currency as Finland. The people voted against that, for various reasons. But it cannot be irrelevant whether or not the future quality of a rake is really assured or whether instead that it depends on the shifting sands of poker site decisions or the possibly arbitrary actions of a bureaucracy of officials (PSFTCIAFBIDOJ).
Of course when a poker currency, for a time, does have a specification of its value beyond the local fiat of administrators in its national home, like the money of PS and FT had a peg to the U.S. dollar a few years ago, then international observers can wisely distrust the reliability of such a stabilization of its rake
For example, if all sorts of non-US countries decided to define the values of their rake as less than with the US sites, without actually joining into any system of cooperative regulations associated with that, then the effect of that would seem likely to destabilize the stability of the US sites if it would otherwise be highly stable and of high rake.
So I see the entire privately raked community as in a weak sense comparable to the “PSFTCIAFBIDOJ " because of the support of both parties for a certain “lack of transparency" relating to the functions of poker sites as seen by the players. And for both of them it can be said that they tend to think in terms of sites operating in a benevolent fashion that is, however, beyond the comprehension of the player of the raked sites. And this parallel makes it seem not implausible that a process of poker revolution might lead to the expectation on the part of players in the “great game types" that they should be better situated to be able to understand whatever will be the rake policies which, indeed, are typically of great importance to players who may have alternative options for where to place their “deposits".
It has nothing to do with me "plan" we have simply pulled up a chair and popcorn and are watching the industry implode.
Cliffs and small words for Silver: Bad money = bad, good money = good.
I'm not going to bother reading your walls of text anymore Digger. You've clearly shown you have zero interest in meaningful discussion and you don't answer people's questions about your Naj Coin plans. You have completely and utterly failed to address the questions regarding why using Naj Coin would be better than simply using the existing and popular crypto Bitcoin. We all understand it's the same technology. However, poker players who frequent forums like LP are mostly skeptical and thoughtful people.
Our Questions:
1. Why does using a small barely known Crypto with associated fees of turning Naj Coin back into Bitcoin back into USD benefit Poker Players? What does NAJ Coin do that Bitcoin can't?
2. You claim unique identifiers as Wallets allow Naj Coin and the poker community at large to flourish, why doesn't Bitcoin accomplish exactly the same thing without the fees of transfering from Naj to Bitcoin?
3. You have a lot to gain from being the "earliest adopter" of your currency - it seems to me, that's the biggest reason you're promoting it's use because you aren't articulating better reasons
4. Stop posting basic economic theories, nobody gives a shit. We're well aware of them. What we are discussing is not why Bitcoin is a cool thing and why it works - we know all that. Sell us on why Naj Coin = better or superior to using other more established and more stable Crypto's that already have brand recoginition.
You're not selling us on anything right now. You basically seem to insult anyone who disagrees with you or claim they're just ignorant. You come off as a really dumb fuck. Maybe work on that and remember you're trying to sell us on something not piss us all off.
On December 17 2014 21:56 Bejamin1 wrote:
I'm not going to bother reading your walls of text anymore Digger. You've clearly shown you have zero interest in meaningful discussion and you don't answer people's questions about your Naj Coin plans. You have completely and utterly failed to address the questions regarding why using Naj Coin would be better than simply using the existing and popular crypto Bitcoin. We all understand it's the same technology. However, poker players who frequent forums like LP are mostly skeptical and thoughtful people.
Our Questions:
1. Why does using a small barely known Crypto with associated fees of turning Naj Coin back into Bitcoin back into USD benefit Poker Players? What does NAJ Coin do that Bitcoin can't?
2. You claim unique identifiers as Wallets allow Naj Coin and the poker community at large to flourish, why doesn't Bitcoin accomplish exactly the same thing without the fees of transfering from Naj to Bitcoin?
3. You have a lot to gain from being the "earliest adopter" of your currency - it seems to me, that's the biggest reason you're promoting it's use because you aren't articulating better reasons
4. Stop posting basic economic theories, nobody gives a shit. We're well aware of them. What we are discussing is not why Bitcoin is a cool thing and why it works - we know all that. Sell us on why Naj Coin = better or superior to using other more established and more stable Crypto's that already have brand recoginition.
You're not selling us on anything right now. You basically seem to insult anyone who disagrees with you or claim they're just ignorant. You come off as a really dumb fuck. Maybe work on that and remember you're trying to sell us on something not piss us all off.
If you aren't going to read the explanations then why continue to insist on my answering your questions?
Naj coin sucks the value from the industry monopoly into a coin that only poker players benefit from. There is no immediate incentive for players to adopt bitcoin, its the ENTIRE point. If you use bitcoin you have nothing. It doesn't matter how much bitcoin you have and how awesome you think it is, the players need their local community currency...
And yes I think its stupid to ask if its a pump and dump, nobody is asking anyone for money...
This isn't a difficult concept a 4 year old could understand, we are on like page 10 and you still don't hold a naj coin...I am not asking everyone here gets one on blind faith, I am asking you receive it so that you can explain to everyone what you have. Nothing but fear could have stopped you from participated in receiving some coin but still continue to demand my answers (while admitting you refuse to read them). And so your remaining "argument" is that if you won't participate then of course others won't...but that is just circular and silly argument that has the solution of your participating.
This is embarrassing for all of us
I'm not selling anything. For 10 seconds of each of our time we could own the industry over night.
1) Read the material and learn the plan
2) Jump on the band wagon once its too late
If you are still asking what the plan is then you chose the #2 pill
Demanding I convince you of something ignores the purpose of the plan. Notice there is not part where I am like "give me your money and you will get rich".
AndrewSong United States. Dec 18 2014 18:47. Posts 2355
Sucks for digger and the Najcoin, it looks like there's much smarter person working on something better. lol
1
JohnnyBologna United States. Dec 18 2014 20:50. Posts 1401
So in the future, playing poker is going to be rake free? Whats the catch?
Pokerstars is going start to use bit coins on their site? wasnt this your plan lol.
On December 18 2014 17:47 AndrewSong wrote:
Sucks for digger and the Najcoin, it looks like there's much smarter person working on something better. lol
sucks for you too because you have some Najcoin. No in this sense Naj Coin is a hoax, we don't care if something better comes along. Doesn't matter the name or the coin...the players need a universal coin to secure their network. If someone created a better version I would be happy to support it.
On December 18 2014 19:50 JohnnyBologna wrote:
So in the future, playing poker is going to be rake free? Whats the catch?
Pokerstars is going start to use bit coins on their site? wasnt this your plan lol.
cliff notes? in stupid people language please.
No catch, poker is played on a cloud and the cost of maintaining servers (security etc) is saved into the economy of the game. Because players realize they gain from this they begin to think about ways to save costs and secure the game. Poker stars using bitcoin would be great, but if they don't offer it for less than normal currency then anyone knowledgeable about bitcoin will complain. That is the crux of the beginning.
Santafairy Korea (South). Dec 19 2014 12:47. Posts 2227
"asymptotically ideal poker" sounds like what you would get if you translated "anomalous heat production" from cold fusion scams to the context of poker
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
On December 19 2014 11:47 Santafairy wrote:
"asymptotically ideal poker" sounds like what you would get if you translated "anomalous heat production" from cold fusion scams to the context of poker
Yes you mean to say we generally fear things we don't understand. I think that is why there is such an extravegant and methodic presentation. Here is some help:
The term asymptotic means approaching a value or curve arbitrarily closely (i.e., as some sort of limit is taken). A line or curve that is asymptotic to given curve is called the asymptote of .
In terms of ideal money nash means the ending of "state"'s ability to print money. In terms of ideal poker it means the ending of sites ability to rake poker. Which of course sounds absurd but we didn't make these presentations as a theory, I think rather they are detailed explanations of the phenomena we are witnessing today.
Bitcoin takes time to stabilize however it is 5 years old and almost "very stable". In terms of the Ruble bitcoin is ultra stable. So what happens when the world realizes we can bring about a money of ultra stable quality by collectively cooperating against our governments? Its true that eventually the people have to "choose" this strategy, however what "asymptotic" means is that there is a force that is drawing us nearer and nearer to this inevitable "event" and it is called "the invisible hand".
We have this equivalent now in poker as I have shown through multiple writtings that poker sites function perfectly like banks and thus "nashian" economics is completely applicable.
Naj coin sucks the value from the industry monopoly into a coin that only poker players benefit from. There is no immediate incentive for players to adopt bitcoin, its the ENTIRE point. If you use bitcoin you have nothing. It doesn't matter how much bitcoin you have and how awesome you think it is, the players need their local community currency...
Is it me or again he he didnt explain why Naj Coin is better ?
Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online
0
dogmeat Czech Republic. Dec 21 2014 05:42. Posts 6374
First to Romm3l you are very welcome to make such posts, provided there is 1% content to them. The reason is what you are laughing at I am laughing harder. But keep in mind our current currency and current poker systems work exactly like the video you post. I simply want to bring the value back into the currency it is supposed to rep.
On December 18 2014 12:16 diggerflopboat wrote:
Naj coin sucks the value from the industry monopoly into a coin that only poker players benefit from. There is no immediate incentive for players to adopt bitcoin, its the ENTIRE point. If you use bitcoin you have nothing. It doesn't matter how much bitcoin you have and how awesome you think it is, the players need their local community currency...
Is it me or again he he didnt explain why Naj Coin is better ?
You and others are wondering why we cannot use bitcoin as our "store of wealth", but I am explaining the technology is not only for a store of wealth. Bitcoin will always be the best currency in that sense for our "money" needs. But the players still need things like single unique identifiers to run the communities. We need the system and network that WE own so that we can use the functions of crypto currency to our advantage.
Everyone wants to know how the players combat collusion in the future when they own their own game, who will run the games, who decides the structures....all of these questions that for so long have been conversation stoppers now beg an answer. Everything we pay the centralized site model to secure for us are things that Naj Coin help us take on our own...
So you see the question of "why Naj Coin, why not just bitcoin", is really not understanding the technology, we are not looking for a store of wealth. Its an advanced email system that is so extremely helpful for the players we no longer need to pay rake to centralized site. What do you think the intrinsic value of such a solution is? You see how to get you too believe we have a miracle technology for poker?
Also Baalim, we got off on a tangent that wasn't part of my point...I agree we can observe that the "pros" have historically followed the "recs" just like Dnegs points out, however my point is that it is what we have historically taught the recreational and also there are external factors as to why this is....
What I want to realize is that in the near future, the pros teach the fish where it is most profitable to play, and this brings a value to the game that nobody would believe until they experienced it. Now you see how circular of an argument it is to me to have you and Dneg suggest such things. Its bad strategy to suggest otherwise. The "pros" have ruined the game by doing so.
We need to understand a wallet creates a private address infinite public addresses that can be used to "anonymously" identify you. So in the near future instead of paying high rake to a site to organize the seating an structure with the promise of security...players instead keep their rake and sit down at a game that involves Baalim, knowing that they trust his identity enough to feel they are in a safe and secure game (otherwise Baalim wouldn't recommend playing there).
The public key/private key thing, allows baalim to show proof that it is in fact him that is approving the game. The magic of the technology is that no one can forge his signature, they must "spend" from his wallet. This changes the game on so many levels and cuts out so many middlemen, and the value of this change is immense. We can even think about the effect this will have on the types of "pros" that will become popular based on their ability to put there "guaranteed" on the security of a table or tourney.
If we can see this it paints a question of how to get from point A to point B, how to incentivize a crypto poker rush that will break through our collective mental transaction barrier of learning how to use and adopt "crypto" whether bitcoin or any other coin...
Its quite simple, you get pros like baalim that are fed up with the current status quo to adopt "naj coin", you create a FINITE amount of them, and then you create a poker network based on a political movement that seeks to dissolve the status quo. No one is worried Naj Coin will not be bitcoin in the future, Naj Coin is just a feather for dumbo, something to hold onto...but it is there and people can "hold it", they can talk about it, they can trade it, they can spend it....
We desperately NEED a linking currency for the players, and bitcoin is not "local" enough to harness the community into a movement, nor does it provide us the prop technical solutions that are needed to organize a poker game with no 3rd party involvement.
You ALMOST understand sir but you are not quite their yet. It is ME that is making fun of the "status quo" which is a "team" you seem to belong to. "Naj-coin" is not your idea to ridicule (although I welcome you too), but rather it is my "hoax" (or what I call coupon) in order that I might taunt the industry giant. It is a mere straw with the capability of breaking the camel.
Have you studied the history of gambling at all, enough to understand and know what happens to those associated with different "organizations" in the gambling industry, at the time of economic hardships and "decline"? What happens to these team pros when players start to realize how much of their collective monies is being used to perpetuate the "myth" of the "poker pro". How long will these "pros" be able to sell the dream that their "raked monies" is better taken out of the game to create an unprofitable one in the name of player "fun poker" that recreationals can enjoy?
You are not the first from this "status quo" that has tried to make fun of me and belittle my rationale. A year ago I was called crazy by an industry professional for suggesting that the centralized poker site model is a thing of the past and so sites like *'s are dinosaurs in a quickly changing industry. Since then Isai sold an insanely profitable business, to a company that has done nothing but dissolve the image. Under-investigation and no US entry in sight. Yet everyday a new poker site emerges, either fiat, bitcoin, altcoin, or a hybrid.
All dramatically cheaper, easier, faster and open to the world....
GL Stars pros...
Naj Coin, Baj coin, Laj coin....we can make millions of them, doesn't matter to me ;p
The “Achilles’ heel” of the Centralized Poker Industry
After careful examination of the logic and maths esoterically outlined in the lecture “Ideal Money” it has become obvious the poker community has a solution to the monopolistic state the current poker economy faces today.
The thesis of “Ideal Money” is that if the peoples of this world could have a universal currency with a stable printing supply, and users could freely use this currency to trade in and out of their own respective national currencies, then they could put pressure on their central banking authorities to print and maintain a currency of stable and good quality. This concept is referred to as “Asymptotically” ideal money, and it is a phenomenon we are experiencing today because of “bitcoin”.
In relation to poker, the players have a corresponding solution, since poker sites effectively operate on the same type of Keynesian/central banking model:
Players simply need to collectively demand that their rakeback points be paid out as a digital currency (or assets), so that it may be freely traded on a digital asset exchange.
The concept is simple, once rakeback points can be traded on a free market exchange then the players can PROPERLY valuate the effective rake on a given site. This too will lead to pressure for sites to print “chips” of stable or high value in relation to the effective rake.
It’s going to seem like a strange solution, however it is a perfectly effective one and also one that would be incredibly easy for sites to implement REQUIRING NO EXTRA SOFTWARE. It matters not which sites participate but only rather that the players begin to collectively understand the solution, since the pressure created will inevitably lead to its adoption.
If sites take the line of adjustment where they simply end rakeback points altogether this should be seen as favorable for the players, because if the sites don’t show evidence of an overall reduction in “effectively raked” profits while simultaneously ending the rakeback program, it can then be seen as ,and proved to be, simply stealing from the players.
It is this lack of evidence the players have always suffered from that they now have a tangible option as a solution to rally behind.
Enacting this simple change will set in place the foundation and infrastructure for decentralized poker through:
Creating Assets as Single Unique Identifiers
Establishing a Poker Forum Coin
Ultimately leading to Ideal Poker
Last edit: 25/12/2014 22:37
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Dec 25 2014 22:42. Posts 2227
yes i know what asymptotic means
believe it or not i know what every single word you type means. it's when you string them together that it stops making sense
On December 19 2014 13:01 diggerflopboat wrote:
Bitcoin takes time to stabilize however it is 5 years old and almost "very stable". In terms of the Ruble bitcoin is ultra stable. So what happens when the world realizes we can bring about a money of ultra stable quality by collectively cooperating against our governments? Its true that eventually the people have to "choose" this strategy, however what "asymptotic" means is that there is a force that is drawing us nearer and nearer to this inevitable "event" and it is called "the invisible hand".
in all the books i've read about mathematical analysis there was never any mention of an invisible hand. it sounds more like something from Adria's spellbook
PS has annual revenue on the order of what half a billion dollars? i would say given that, 10 times that, $5 billion, is a fair lower bound for the money wagered on their site annually. which is on the same order as bitcoin's market cap. when you say bitcoin is almost table it's a wish because you want it to be stable. suppose the entire poker economy switches overnight do you think maybe people wagering billions of dollars would affect the stability of your crypto-edsel?
people who play poker as an income don't need bitcoins they need fiat currency to pay rent and buy food wtf?
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
"very stable" comes from a comparison to the average currency. Or for example notice the russian rupple. Also notice countries have begun to repatriate their gold, or in other words gold is moving. If your currency starts to suffer, trade it for bitcoin, but in the near future your currency won't suffer because your government will know you will just trade it for bitcoin if they fuck around. So stability is for example vs the rupple, and on average considering USD and rupple etc bitcoin has become more and more stable over time and will soon be the most favorable "commodity" for "such" (because i have inside knowledge vs the world even bitcoiners).
"Invisible Hand" comes from Adam Smith it is a well known economic term. It is not understood though and N. Szabo has formulated Smith's work which is so monumental I claim it has redefined quantum physics. basically the tl;dr is that software expansion can be described with irl economics. and so bitcoin becomes describable.
Szabo also wrote "shelling out" which shows through the "kula ring" solution that money CAN in fact come about as a useful practical artifact. where as before in our understanding we felt that it must first arise as a commodity. So this paper with the kula ring solution was needed to explain to economic academics that bitcoin can in fact happen (but we know it can because irl it is an observable phenomenon).
If you are following you see that the invisible hand and the redefinition of economics has paved the way for quantum physics. and we will need the probabilistic understandings for that.
As for your question about stability, what happens when the entire poker community starts jumping to bitcoin? Will you argue me that a rising poker dollar will be unfavorable because of stability?
No, you don't believe in a device of cooperative gain...
the kula ring is that 4 of 5 island trade because they have something to offer and the 5th island particaptes only to complete the ring of trade. The value of "helping" is enough for them to participate. and then two direction of economy develop counter and clockwise.
Baalim nailed it. And we are missing an efficient pricing mechanism that has a significant cost to the individual player. Because the entire field is not able to easily and properly value their exchange of money for chips, we ALL suffer. It turns out we can use this fundamental understanding to extrapolate a design for the implementation of a proper pricing mechanism.
We didn't suggest Adam Smith redefined quantum physics although it wouldn't be a huge stretch to suggest:
In his last years, he seemed to have been planning two major treatises, one on the theory and history of law and one on the sciences and arts. The posthumously published Essays on Philosophical Subjects, a history of astronomy down to Smith's own era, plus some thoughts on ancient physics and metaphysics, probably contain parts of what would have been the latter treatise
200 rake free accounts would kill most poker sites. Much less any bitcoin poker site.
The fact it could never work means they are just trying to get suckers to pay $600 for 100% rakeback.
You see this person recognizes the "solution" I present, and see it in an existing business plan about to launch...
But this person doesn't know I have been getting kicked off 2p2 for explaining that John Nash's lecture "ideal money" was used a year ago to predict that a "players coin" on counterparty (NOT a "site coin" is going to bring an end to raked poker...
Last edit: 29/12/2014 18:39
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Dec 29 2014 19:35. Posts 2227
You physically cannot end raked poker
There are technical reasons and market forces that have nothing to do with what currency you gamble in that create costs. There are barriers to entry for a startup. It costs money to operate servers and have employees and security. It costs money to generate random numbers. these costs have to be financed and where can that money ultimately come from besides money that would have been gambled? You can't make game integrity out of a hat while ending rake just because you get everybody to agree to start playing with monopoly money what the fuck
besides which your conclusions do not follow from the source material. if you knew anything about Nash or game theory i feel it would be obvious that you are never going to get tens or hundreds millions of people in a game, that most of them have no chance in and isn't zero sum, to cooperate to save cents on the dollar... when most of them are pissing money away anyway?
you think bitcoin is ALMOST VERY STABLE or whatever other nonsense words you chose in terms of the ruble
2) I dealt with the market forces for example there are no servers rather it is peer to peer. All other considerations have been considered.
3) it is "asymptotically" ideal which means we hit zero rake only at infinite. Some calculus, and you can figure it out from there.
4) Yes my conclusions are not my own, but were ripped from new nash theory and lectures, as well as new szabo papers and material who is the anonymous identity everyone thinks created bitcoin.
5) monopoly money. yes we redifined what game integrity means in our paper "moral poker" which is a function of "integrity"
Why do people focus on currency, that is the lesser of the problems, a poker site has a lot of operational costs and man hours, PokerStars have thousands of employees and do you think their work is simply non-esential, that is ridiculous.
Just for starters who would stop cheaters? because that idea sounds to me like a cheater haven, you need a team to watches 24/7 the integrity of the game or you will get angle shooters, multiaccounters and colluders everywhere, who will be technical support, do you have any idea how many emails PokerStars support reply every day? who will be the software developers, you need multiple people working on this piec eof software 24/7 are they going to work for free?
You cant have sucessful rake-free online poker for the same reason you cant have rake-free live poker, it has operational costs
Of all my crazy conjectures, I think the most obviously true is John Nash is the creator of "buttcoin". As for baalim, I have extensively (well not so much) explained how the cost of things such as paying sites to police cheating is exponentially greater than the players doing it themselves.
Philosophically we have become dumb because as a mass we rely on a 3rd party to analyze our game.
Or in other words instead of paying baal to be a pro with rake , we take that money and keep it in the game and the effects are exponentially gainful for baalim.
On December 30 2014 06:35 AndrewSong wrote:
It's thread like these that make quality posters stop posting here..
Ive seen nothing but shit posts from you with comments that only seek to derail and discredit the OP.
Im just looking for an intelligent poker players, are you seriously going to keep sticking your business where it doesn't belong and is not wanted? Do you not have better things to do with your life? Are you capable of participating in discussion, and offering actual content?
Last edit: 30/12/2014 13:02
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Dec 30 2014 14:13. Posts 2227
On December 29 2014 19:14 diggerflopboat wrote:
1) I did end raked poker and it wasn't "phsyical"
when i said physically impossible i mean i believe your ideas are not consistent with the laws of nature
On December 29 2014 19:14 diggerflopboat wrote:2) I dealt with the market forces for example there are no servers rather it is peer to peer.
okay great I love peer to peer software show us your open source code solution that demonstrates technical feasibility
On December 29 2014 19:14 diggerflopboat wrote:All other considerations have been considered.
this is pure hand waving LOL
On December 29 2014 19:14 diggerflopboat wrote:3) it is "asymptotically" ideal which means we hit zero rake only at infinite. Some calculus, and you can figure it out from there.
okay I love calculus please link me to your rigorous mathematical model so i can independently run tests verifying your theory is realistic
On December 29 2014 19:14 diggerflopboat wrote:5) monopoly money. yes we redifined what game integrity means in our paper "moral poker" which is a function of "integrity"
On December 30 2014 06:35 AndrewSong wrote:
It's thread like these that make quality posters stop posting here..
Ive seen nothing but shit posts from you with comments that only seek to derail and discredit the OP.
Im just looking for an intelligent poker players, are you seriously going to keep sticking your business where it doesn't belong and is not wanted? Do you not have better things to do with your life? Are you capable of participating in discussion, and offering actual content?
do you like chiraz? merlot? burgundy? because i am seeing a lot of whine. discrediting you actually is content and arguably more valuable than what you post. if you made a post saying the planet is a banana and neil degrasse tyson came in and said posts like these are ruining astrophysics would you say he was shitposting because that is basically what's happening here
On December 30 2014 01:11 diggerflopboat wrote:
I have extensively (well not so much) explained how the cost of things such as paying sites to police cheating is exponentially greater than the players doing it themselves.
no kidding
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
when i said physically impossible i mean i believe your ideas are not consistent with the laws of nature
Understood, I am pointing out your understanding of the laws of nature are rooted in religious belief.
On December 29 2014 19:14 diggerflopboat wrote:2) I dealt with the market forces for example there are no servers rather it is peer to peer.
okay great I love peer to peer software show us your open source code solution that demonstrates technical feasibility[/QUOTE]It's not my code but i could link to multiple projects that are peer to peer and have software solutions to all the problems you think exist. We call it "decentralized" poker or poker not owned by a 3rd party other than the players.
this is pure hand waving LOL
there is no way for me not to hand wave vs your attitude, I cannot convince you if you will not read the explanation. But if you bring up a specific issue, I will link it to a specific paper/solution I have written for it.
okay I love calculus please link me to your rigorous mathematical model so i can independently run tests verifying your theory is realistic
You allude to the math that created the bitcoin protocol that counterparty runs on. To test my theory you simply need to find your own sector that suffers from pokerz inherent issue and implement the currency.
On December 29 2014 19:14 diggerflopboat wrote:5) monopoly money. yes we redefined what game integrity means in our paper "moral poker" which is a function of "integrity"
wat?
Gold gains stability over time. stability is not a sufficient condition of being a universal currency.
bitcoins monetary supply was modeled after gold as well as an overall basket of significant commodities. The graph you post is nearly identical to the beginning of golds growth. Gold has not increased in stability since the existence of bitcoin and will soon become negatively correlated with bitcoin. Already countries are repatriating their gold from the US. Golds power, value, and stability are changing. I don't know how you are about reading graphs but the below shows bitcoin is gaining stability:
do you like chiraz? merlot? burgundy? because i am seeing a lot of whine. discrediting you actually is content and arguably more valuable than what you post. if you made a post saying the planet is a banana and neil degrasse tyson came in and said posts like these are ruining astrophysics would you say he was shitposting because that is basically what's happening here
asking questions, attempting to clarifying, attempting to understand, attempting to make a counterpoint is useful. Showing up to not read the discussion or material and to roll ones eyes because one is too ignorant to use ones brain cells is not useful.
On December 30 2014 01:11 diggerflopboat wrote:
I have extensively (well not so much) explained how the cost of things such as paying sites to police cheating is exponentially greater than the players doing it themselves.
no kidding[/QUOTE]You'll find nearly all of my argument is based on what is obviously true. Its how I know I am correct.
Who gives a fuck about cryptocurrency its the least of the problems with this idea.
You just said the players police the integrity of the game and not a employees... well how in the actual fuck would that work? dont reply with generics crap please
On December 30 2014 15:47 Baalim wrote:
Who gives a fuck about cryptocurrency its the least of the problems with this idea.
You just said the players police the integrity of the game and not a employees... well how in the actual fuck would that work? dont reply with generics crap please
Well its a very big questions with a very big multi layer solution obviously. And we need to understand cryptocurrency facilitates almost all of the solutions.
bitcoin is a protocol/network that allows us to create a secure an anonymous database that can be searched without revealing any information to any 3rd parties. So we can implement intensive collusion detecting algorithms. So in the near future SOME players win poker money from detecting cheating methods and solving them for the rest of the society.
another example is naj coin creates incentive for players to hold private keys or in other words to hold a single account. These keys can be useful to create a web of trust. Again because of anonymous databases that don't require 3rd party trust or security, players can optimize a network of known and trusted players. These players become the backbone for safe games. It can be a mix of well known players/celebs, or it can be anonymous identities. All trusted based on certain statistics from algorithms that essentially already exist.
Crypto currency was sold to the public as a kind of gold you can get rich if you get in early...
but that is not its purpose, it is exactly the platform that is useful for what I describe.
You might undestand baalim why I think it is not correct to suggest that the pros follow the recs. It might be true in the past but its really only superstition. In the near future we are going to see a dramatic shift in this...the recs will look to the pros for advice on where to play. And this time the pros will learn to be happy to the educate the "fish"...
The simple fact is, we destroyed the game by teaching players to rape the game while hidding strategy from bad players...
We are simply now realizing what is ideal is to teach the recs that playing in lower effective rake environments is more profitable for pros AND recs!
On December 30 2014 16:20 diggerflopboat wrote:
[QUOTE]On December 30 2014 15:47 Baalim wrote:
bitcoin is a protocol/network that allows us to create a secure an anonymous database that can be searched without revealing any information to any 3rd parties. So we can implement intensive collusion detecting algorithms. So in the near future SOME players win poker money from detecting cheating methods and solving them for the rest of the society.
So thats your answer? we create algorithms? you clearly have no idea what is required to run a poker site
On December 30 2014 16:23 diggerflopboat wrote:
You might undestand baalim why I think it is not correct to suggest that the pros follow the recs. It might be true in the past but its really only superstition. In the near future we are going to see a dramatic shift in this...the recs will look to the pros for advice on where to play. And this time the pros will learn to be happy to the educate the "fish"...
The simple fact is, we destroyed the game by teaching players to rape the game while hidding strategy from bad players...
We are simply now realizing what is ideal is to teach the recs that playing in lower effective rake environments is more profitable for pros AND recs!
Its not a myth, who in the hell are you to come make these ridiculous claims that go against the most common of knowledge to any freaking poker player, professionals looking for softer games is not a freaking superstition, professionals dont go to casinos for their pretty carpeting, they go where the juicier games are, period, and again, that has nothing to do with the marketability of poker celebs for an overall growth of poker.
No that is not a simple fact, its a ridiculous claim by you and opposite to reality, we didnt destroy anything by not educating the fish, in fact one of the biggest factors about how poker is harder today is CardRunners and educational video sites.
We arent realizing anything now... oh its better to play with lower rake for Pros AND recs? zomg!!! discovery of the century.
Im done with this pseudo-discussion this person clearly has no idea what he is talking about, he has no clue about poker, and he has no clue about how to run a poker site and he is only interested in pushing and talking about crypto currency.
On December 30 2014 16:20 diggerflopboat wrote:
[QUOTE]On December 30 2014 15:47 Baalim wrote:
bitcoin is a protocol/network that allows us to create a secure an anonymous database that can be searched without revealing any information to any 3rd parties. So we can implement intensive collusion detecting algorithms. So in the near future SOME players win poker money from detecting cheating methods and solving them for the rest of the society.
So thats your answer? we create algorithms? you clearly have no idea what is required to run a poker site
No Baalim, you are mistaken. Amaya does not know how to run a poker site. This is why new models like bitnplay are going to rapidly start arising and take over. I am not talking about what is "going" to happen, I am pointing out our reality. You are spending your time dismissing the facts and information I present, while others are thanking me for the connections I have been making with the literature in relation to the next evolutions of poker.
On December 31 2014 03:26 diggerflopboat wrote:No Baalim, you are mistaken. Amaya does not know how to run a poker site.
On October 25 2014 11:48 Defrag wrote:
<img src="http://admins.liquidpoker.net/staff/Defrag/pokerstars_office.jpg" align="right" style="margin:5px; border:1px solid black;">Directors at Amaya Gaming are for sure happy after their newest and very expensive acquisition of PokerStars, which they paid $4.9bln for. Amaya just released their financial reports for the first half of 2014 and PokerStars/FullTilt combined made $706.5 million in combined revenues.
Those numbers are also higher then last years revenue: for the first half this year PS/FT made $567.9mln in revenues (compared to $545.9mln in 2013), $218.4mlnin net income (compared to $189.9mln in 2013) and $246.4mln in net cash from operating activities (again, up from $207mln in 2013). This is quite a heavy growth rate.
Amaya and Oldford Group(official owner of PokerStars and FullTilt) combined revenues for the first half of 2014 were $706.5 million and $276.3 million in net income.
They also spent quite a bit of money: $78.7mln to be exact. Combined player funds held on their accounts are worth $606mln in the first half of the year.
Amaya CEO David Baazov commented:“We’re very pleased with the performance of PokerStars and Full Tilt in 2014. The core poker business continued to grow during the first half of the year and recorded strong cash flow. More recently, we have broadened our rollout of casino, including into Spain, and introduced an exciting new poker game that has proved very popular on Full Tilt and which was recently launched on PokerStars.”
In the same report we could also see that recently launched Spin&Go tournaments are a huge success for the company (over 7.5mln games played in first two weeks after the format was introduced).
Everything else aside, I've been reading this thread for awhile and I have to admit you are a terrible ambassador for this so called 'next big thing'. You should probably stop because all you're doing is turning people off of the idea. You don't defend your arguments, you have confusing answers to the most simple of questions, and you attack your target audience.
If I were you, and I actually believed this is the next big thing - I'd stop promoting it immediately. Insulting your audience because of your inability to adequately explain an (albeit complex) idea is extremely immature and unprofessional.
On December 31 2014 03:26 diggerflopboat wrote:No Baalim, you are mistaken. Amaya does not know how to run a poker site.
On October 25 2014 11:48 Defrag wrote:
<img src="http://admins.liquidpoker.net/staff/Defrag/pokerstars_office.jpg" align="right" style="margin:5px; border:1px solid black;">Directors at Amaya Gaming are for sure happy after their newest and very expensive acquisition of PokerStars, which they paid $4.9bln for. Amaya just released their financial reports for the first half of 2014 and PokerStars/FullTilt combined made $706.5 million in combined revenues.
Those numbers are also higher then last years revenue: for the first half this year PS/FT made $567.9mln in revenues (compared to $545.9mln in 2013), $218.4mlnin net income (compared to $189.9mln in 2013) and $246.4mln in net cash from operating activities (again, up from $207mln in 2013). This is quite a heavy growth rate.
Amaya and Oldford Group(official owner of PokerStars and FullTilt) combined revenues for the first half of 2014 were $706.5 million and $276.3 million in net income.
They also spent quite a bit of money: $78.7mln to be exact. Combined player funds held on their accounts are worth $606mln in the first half of the year.
Amaya CEO David Baazov commented:“We’re very pleased with the performance of PokerStars and Full Tilt in 2014. The core poker business continued to grow during the first half of the year and recorded strong cash flow. More recently, we have broadened our rollout of casino, including into Spain, and introduced an exciting new poker game that has proved very popular on Full Tilt and which was recently launched on PokerStars.”
In the same report we could also see that recently launched Spin&Go tournaments are a huge success for the company (over 7.5mln games played in first two weeks after the format was introduced).
Everything else aside, I've been reading this thread for awhile and I have to admit you are a terrible ambassador for this so called 'next big thing'. You should probably stop because all you're doing is turning people off of the idea. You don't defend your arguments, you have confusing answers to the most simple of questions, and you attack your target audience.
If I were you, and I actually believed this is the next big thing - I'd stop promoting it immediately. Insulting your audience because of your inability to adequately explain an (albeit complex) idea is extremely immature and unprofessional.
I don't know what you mean to point out but Amaya is losing key and core customers by the droves. 2p2 is filled with threads, and more and more everyday of disgusted and unsatisfied customers. And now they are starting to leave. Paper looks nice for unwares shareholders but the reality of the situation is that it is a sinking ship.
The money that players hold on Amaya in their bankrolls is a hidden cost to the players. Or in other words as crypto becomes popular and players do not have to store a bankroll on ANY site, this is more value that will remain in the game (ie players can now invest the 100's of millions they previous held stagnant on stars bank rolls.
Your attitude and sentiments towards me do not reflect the future of the game nor the driving force behind it. I simply point out the economic inevitability. When bitcoin's price goes up, you will buy it. As better alternatives to the "status quo" arise, you will leave to play on the alternatives. Easy game.
I'm not affiliated its just they are doing the next evolution, exactly what I have been explaining. I realize it is difficult. Its a new question the players are asking "What is the value of a rake free account". I don't care about all the bullshit...its magic, the collective player consciousness is growing...
Expect more big giant countdown "rake-o-meters"...
Expect that every time the "giant machine" tries to impose the status quo, a phenomenon will arise to maneuver us free from it...
I don't really care about the main topic of this thread
I'm just here to point out how funny it is that Baal defends PS, while digger is trying to promote somewhat of a poker anarchy, and if it were a case of governance he'd be taking digger's side :D
It's like PS is the government and we're all getting fucked except the cool sponsored players and guess who s sponsored
Not saying you're not right, just saying its funny :D
edit:
Also blah blah about the OP claims, but if networks like prima can virtually offer 80% rb to players with flat rakes/perm bonuses/rake races/rake chases and still be a profitable company then fuck PS and their 10% rb
You nailed it! Exactly. That is the obvious observation.
How much rake I had to pay so that Danial N could tell the plays that higher rake is good for the game. And how many players somehow found math and logic to support such absurdity
Players are slowly starting to get cypto wallets and receive Na.j Coin. If you want to be an early adopter and try it out, sign up for a wallet and post your public address in the 2p2 thread on post 134 (or here if you don't have an account. Any questions feel free to ask!
Its just like email 2.0, its not really money, and there is no value or cost, just learning how to play with the new programmable email technology and understanding how it helps the players!
The crucial point that gets missed in these rake discussions is that the health of the games and the rake taken are dependent, NOT independent. The amount of rake taken in bb/100 seems to be the single biggest factor influencing game health. I appeal to an intuitive argument for this point; if (in a zero rake environment) winrates fall roughly around a normal distribution (or some other distribution of your choice), with the peak being at 0bb/100, then picture a line on this distribution where the rake is set, say 10bb/100. The portion of the curve above the rake line will be the winners. Currently, the rake is 10+bb/100 at low stakes, and so only a tiny fraction of "giant" winners are beating the games.
PokerStars makes the claim that the rake has stayed relatively constant throughout the history of online poker (Zoom notwithstanding), and then makes the hand wavy argument that the current poor game conditions can't be caused by current "high" rake because rake was always as high as it is now. It's true that rake has always been high, but the conclusion doesn't follow. What Stars' argument misses is that if the rake was set at a lower level in the Boom era, then games might have been even better during the Boom era, and good (or at least better) game conditions might have lasted far longer. The great games from the boom era should be explained by the massive influx of new players and the lower skill disparity between professionals and recs, which allowed games to thrive even in a high rake environment. I don't think PokerStars has ever addressed why a Boom era rake level will be sustainable in a more competitive poker economy.
Stars makes an additional argument that continued high rake is necessary in order for Stars to invest in ways to improve the poker economy, notably by attracting new players and pushing for legalization/regulation throughout the world. There's certainly some truth to this, and we as pros should realize that in many respects Stars' interests coincide with our own, and some sizable fraction of the money raked by Stars gets reinvested into our business via Stars' efforts at marketing poker. PokerStars Michael J summarizes this view here (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...75&postcount=1).
I disagree that Stars' efforts towards marketing and legalization can fully justify the current rake being charged. It appears that Amaya is "operating on a a profit margin of approximately 38 percent after taxes and operational expenses" http://www.cardschat.com/news/amaya-...#ixzz3YQmXcc00
which I think shows that Amaya is operating at an excellent short term profit even while spending money on player acquisition and pushing for regulation.
Summing up, poker is a negative sum game, and the magnitude of the negative sum is determined by how much rake is taken. It's silly to argue about qualitative reasons why games are getting tougher when a quantitative one is staring us right in the face. Stars' twin justifications for high rake, (1) 'that high rake doesn't cause poor games because rake has always been high and games used to be better', and (2) 'that current high rake is necessary to attract new players and help fund Amaya's efforts to re-create good game conditions' do not tell the whole story. The simplest way to make games better over time is to lower the rake.
The crucial point that gets missed in these rake discussions is that the health of the games and the rake taken are dependent, NOT independent. The amount of rake taken in bb/100 seems to be the single biggest factor influencing game health. I appeal to an intuitive argument for this point; if (in a zero rake environment) winrates fall roughly around a normal distribution (or some other distribution of your choice), with the peak being at 0bb/100, then picture a line on this distribution where the rake is set, say 10bb/100. The portion of the curve above the rake line will be the winners. Currently, the rake is 10+bb/100 at low stakes, and so only a tiny fraction of "giant" winners are beating the games.
PokerStars makes the claim that the rake has stayed relatively constant throughout the history of online poker (Zoom notwithstanding), and then makes the hand wavy argument that the current poor game conditions can't be caused by current "high" rake because rake was always as high as it is now. It's true that rake has always been high, but the conclusion doesn't follow. What Stars' argument misses is that if the rake was set at a lower level in the Boom era, then games might have been even better during the Boom era, and good (or at least better) game conditions might have lasted far longer. The great games from the boom era should be explained by the massive influx of new players and the lower skill disparity between professionals and recs, which allowed games to thrive even in a high rake environment. I don't think PokerStars has ever addressed why a Boom era rake level will be sustainable in a more competitive poker economy.
Stars makes an additional argument that continued high rake is necessary in order for Stars to invest in ways to improve the poker economy, notably by attracting new players and pushing for legalization/regulation throughout the world. There's certainly some truth to this, and we as pros should realize that in many respects Stars' interests coincide with our own, and some sizable fraction of the money raked by Stars gets reinvested into our business via Stars' efforts at marketing poker. PokerStars Michael J summarizes this view here (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...75&postcount=1).
I disagree that Stars' efforts towards marketing and legalization can fully justify the current rake being charged. It appears that Amaya is "operating on a a profit margin of approximately 38 percent after taxes and operational expenses" http://www.cardschat.com/news/amaya-...#ixzz3YQmXcc00
which I think shows that Amaya is operating at an excellent short term profit even while spending money on player acquisition and pushing for regulation.
Summing up, poker is a negative sum game, and the magnitude of the negative sum is determined by how much rake is taken. It's silly to argue about qualitative reasons why games are getting tougher when a quantitative one is staring us right in the face. Stars' twin justifications for high rake, (1) 'that high rake doesn't cause poor games because rake has always been high and games used to be better', and (2) 'that current high rake is necessary to attract new players and help fund Amaya's efforts to re-create good game conditions' do not tell the whole story. The simplest way to make games better over time is to lower the rake.
The proposal ideal poker as an extrapolation of ideal money is difficult to understand, partly because of its disjoint presentation but also because of the difficultly of evolving our own paradigm of what poker is or what money is. A new platform called Fermat's Library allows different peoples to contribute annotations to certain lines of certain writings. Here I think the dialog benefits from this platform so any peoples interested in created a global unit for a rake standard can start to understand and participate in the discussion here:
I should think a small bump would be warranted. It seems to me the players are ready and encouraging each other to revolt. Joey asked Ansky what he would do, but Ansky admitted he has no answer, no plan. There is an extensive plan outlined on theweatlhofchips. I should think it could at least be a discussion point, as well as "What is Ideal Poker?" because I think a lot of players have never asked or answered that question.
Canada. Nov 08 2014 12:59. Posts 20070
