« David Sklansky Is A Douchebag, Part 2 | Main | New Year »
December 26, 2006
FTP Software Thread
I've been playing on Full Tilt a bit lately. You guys seem to enjoy the poker software discussions, so let's talk about theirs a bit. Here's my take, and I'll list items in rough order of importance, ignoring the features that are common to almost every major site unless, of course, they are lacking.
The Good
Rakeback: Huge. If it wasn't for that I'd not play there at all. I don't blame Stars for not allowing it, I wouldn't either in their position, but without it Full Tilt would be lost.Stability: The site seems to work all of the time. I haven't played there a whole lot, but every time I've wanted to it was there. It isn't like Paradise (or Party for much of its history) which slowed down greatly or ceased to function during prime business hours.
Heads up tables: for some reason that I can't determine a lot of sites still don't spread these. Full Tilt does. Nice. Sometime when I'm in a better frame of mind I'll probably put in some serious time at those.
One click to join a wait list: On a lot of sites when you join a waiting list you first have to click "join" and then have to click "OK" to confirm. Why? What could possibly be the point of that particular failsafe? Without that, what's going to happen? It's not as if you ever heard anyone say "Well, I meant to sign up for $10/$20, but I accidentally put my name on the $100/$200 list instead. I didn't notice it so I didn't just unregister right away. And then when it was my turn I figured 'what the hell, I'm already on the list'. And that's why I'm homeless now."
I have to assume that 99% of all "Join List" clicks are intentional, and since nothing bad happens if you accidentally join the wrong one it's stupid to add an extra click to the process. Full Tilt doesn't, and I appreciate that.
The Bad
Tables don't resize: As I've said before, this is inexcusable. Every cheap piece of shareware and freeware since 1994 has had a resizable GUI. It's simply retarded to not have this feature. It's undoubtedly the biggest blemish on their user experience for frequent players. I won't even attempt to play there when I'm on my laptop since the resolution is too small, and when on my desktop, which has 2 24" monitors attached, I actually like to enlarge the screens on Stars. I've heard rumors that Full Tilt is working on this, but those began circulating months ago and still no evidence that they are true.Cashier: They offer payment methods but don't let you use anything other than Neteller to put in any reasonable amount of money. Then you call to try to get your limits raised for another method (ePassporte in my case) and they are rude to you, asking you personal questions and trying to talk you into using Neteller. Given that Neteller will almost assuredly be closing their service off to Americans in a few months, if I were in their shoes I would be encouraging people to use ePassporte now, so that when the time comes they don't have a serious lull in their action. Beyond the immediate money lost they might risk future injury should that happen. Poker players go where the action is, like sheep following the herd, and even a short period without it might cause a good number of them to flock elsewhere for good. One of the more intelligent things a site could do now is to encourage players to make the switch to other methods of payment processing.
Speed: the site is slow. Very slow. Playing two 6 max limit hold'em tables on Stars at a time you'll see about 300 hands per hour if you're at the speed tables. That number is undoubtedly less on Full Tilt, but I can't say how much for sure because of…
Lack of speed tables: Full Tilt has them, but for some reason limits them to one per game. For instance, there is never more than 1 $15/$30 6 max speed table. With most sites, the general rule is that they keep opening new tables so that there is always one table in a given game that has no players at it. Given the fact that the overhead involved in spreading a table is virtually zero, that makes a lot of sense. Full Tilt does that with regular tables, so you will always see, say, an empty $30/$60 6 max table. But they don't do that with speed tables. There's one, which is usually full, and that's it. That's idiotic. It costs them money and frustrates those of us who'd like to play faster.
Speed Tables Suck: they don't have a "wait for next blind" button when you first get into the game, so you have to manually wait until you're in the right spot. That's a pain in the ass. They also don't have a "sit out at next blind" box either which, as you guys pointed out a few days back, is essential.
Lobby: Clunky to say the least. I don't understand why everyone hasn't implemented one like Party's (except, ideally, it should actually update in real time) where you can sort by individual limits. On Full Tilt you can sort by high, medium, and low stakes, which is fine to have as an option in addition to individual stakes, but they include everything from $10/$20 to $1,000,000/$2,000,000 (or whatever the highest game they have is) in the "high stakes" category, which renders it useless for sorting.
Overview
Looking at Full Tilt's software makes you wonder if anyone at their site is actually using it. Or, if so, if they're actually using anyone else's too. I really get the feeling that the answer is no. That or they are and they just don't care.
So I'll probably be doing most of my playing on Stars for now. Their FPP program adds up to around 20% rakeback. It's nowhere near what I get at Full Tilt, but the 50% more hands per hour will easily make for a higher profit in the long run. And the added luxuries of table resizing and speed tables that don't suck will make the experience much more pleasurable. Not to mention that I have to play there when on my laptop, which is a good percentage of the time, and the pain of getting money in and out of Full Tilt makes me just want to play elsewhere. Rakeback is pretty nice though, so who knows.
Am I neglecting anything in my synopsis here?
Posted by themaroon at December 26, 2006 2:24 PM
Comments
Don't discount the silly avatars/backgrounds in your analysis. It matters not at all to you, but the money a poker site makes is off the fish, who enjoy little things like being able to be a donkey/fish/shark/devil girl with bog boobs. The cartoonish GUI was one of the big turnoffs to me early on in playing FTP, but once I turned off the backgrounds it didn't bother me.
Honestly, I hated Party's lobby structure - the trees got so convoluted and the lack of updating in real time drove me nuts, so I actually prefer FTP's lobby. Just a differing opinion there.
It seems that most of your "Bad" is geared toward the professional player rather than the recreational player, and Full Tilt, aside from offering rakeback, which is sweet, gears a lot of their promotional capacity towards attracting recreational players.
They also have a ton more promos and free money things than Stars, following the logic of "we're #2, so we try harder."
Posted by: Falstaff at December 27, 2006 10:19 AM
This was on Bill Rini Blog/site, have you tried this?
"There is something I’ve forgotten to do. Full Tilt has done a table redesign that I think deserves some kudos. The racetrack view was something that has been under construction for quite a bit of time and now seeing it come alive I have to say that it’s an excellent job. MM and the rest of the crew should be proud. My only excuse is that I’ve only played real money on it a few times.
I really love the racetrack view. Especially with avatars. Very clever way to solve the space problem. "
Posted by: Neil at December 27, 2006 11:27 AM
Your synopsis is spot on, Matt. I'm just a low limit grinder, but I haven't played much there for the same reasons as you.
I primarily play at Stars. While Gold or Platinum (where my play falls) is not 27% rakeback, neither is Full Tilt in actual practice. They deduct a laundry list of items from MGR.
I cannot pinpoint it to just one item, but something just doesn't smell right in Denmark, er, Full Tilt. I just get the sense that Full Tilt "doesn't get it".
Posted by: Michael at December 27, 2006 11:53 AM
The HU tables are awesome.. I've only been playing the low stakes NL tables, but I've been killing them.. I'd suggest sticking to those while on FTP and then hit the speed tables on Stars.
Posted by: Johnny FlopBoot at December 27, 2006 3:15 PM
I hear you guys talking about Stars FPP rakeback. How does that work? I only see BS books and consumer products in the store.
Posted by: Jeremy S at December 27, 2006 11:41 PM
To JeremyS:
For Stars "rakeback," see the Gold, Platinum, or Supernova VIP benefits. At each level, you can purchase a VIP reward bonus using FPP's. For example, a Gold VIP can get $285 for 25,000 FPP's.
Posted by: koolmoe at December 28, 2006 4:05 PM
One thing you forgot to mention is that you can data mine at FTP but not at Stars. This could be a positive or a negative depending on the games you play, your desire to data mine, and your abilities to succeed without mining.
Posted by: schnoodle at December 28, 2006 6:16 PM
Do you have a cite about Neteller "closing service to Americans in a few months" or is that speculation?
Just wondering how urgently I should be looking for alternatives.
Posted by: ErikR at December 31, 2006 9:51 AM
Matt,
I have played for about a year at Paradise. I noticed a big decline in the number of players since Congress got involved. It's tough to find any tables over $2-4 at Paradise! My new years resolution is to move to Full Tilt and start using Poker Tracker. I hear using it was a pain at Paradise. Any comments on using it at FTP?
Stephen
BTW, I prefer the graphical "last hand" snapshot on FTP (and other sites) as opposed to the written hand history on PS.... that's another reason why I'm leaving Paradise: email hand history only.
Posted by: Stephen at December 31, 2006 5:11 PM