Pacific multi-tables suck

[krakajak]

I played at empire for a while, and decided to try a new site to get some bonus $$$, so i joined pacific. Lots of loose players on the ring games, but the multi-tables suck. They seat a max of 8 players to a table, so you pay blinds 20% more often than you would if the tables were full, and the pots you win aren't as big. So instead of waiting for good cards and trying to win a few big pots with them, you have to play weaker cards and try to win more pots. I really don't like to play that way. I wrote to them suggesting that they change to a 10 player per table format. They wrote back saying they'd take my suggestion "under consideration" but I don't expect them to change anything.
In fact, I think they want to encourage loose play, because if you take that same style into their ring games, they make more rake.
I also noticed that the manner of qualifying for the bonus is different at pacific. At Empire, you only had to play a certain number of hands to qualify. But at pacific, you have to bet a certain amount of $$$ to qualify ($20 for every $1 of bonus). Since I only see the flop about 20% of the time, it is taking me for ever qualify for the bonus.

[Always_Bored]

Its not like your the only one at an 8 player table. Everyone has the same disadvantage/advantage you have. I dont mind the 8 player tables.

[krakajak]

Everyone does not have the same disadvantage. Blinds become more of a factor the tighter you play. Think about it. If you played 100% of your hands, you wouldn't care if you were the big blind every time, since you were going to see the flop anyway. Likewise, if you play half of your hands, the blind isn't such a big deal because there was a 50% chance you would have paid to see the flop even if you weren't the blind. But If you only see the flop 20% of the time, you are usually paying for cards you wouldn't have played otherwise. Since I play tighter than most other players at the table, the 8 person table is a much bigger disadvantage to me than it is to them.

[snoogins47]

Then the answer is to tailor your play to the environment, or don't play at all.

I hate to sound like a dick, really, but it's the truth.

By playing a tighter starting-hand set, you are typically giving yourself an edge... but when the blinds start climbing, and you're playing slightly short-handed, you have to loosen up a bit, or else the blinds will chew through your stack. So in a sense, yes, the tighter your starting hand selection, the more of a disadvantage being shorthanded is, that's true... but that will always hold true, always has, and always will, regardless of any other extraneous factors. I know that you know this, but it seems to me you're looking at this format as 'unfair' to tight players, as opposed to merely different.

But, it's like those low-limit no fold'em games: when there's 10 people in the pot, and everybody calls, these people that are chasing draws and so forth are often mathematically correct to call. Basically, in a shorter-handed table situation, the typical, poor-play decisions pre-flop are closer to correct than they are in a full, 10 or 11 handed ring game. Is that annoying? Definitely... is it unfair? Hardly.

Basically, my opinions is to not be pissed at the format, either adapt, or leave. I know there are some formats that aren't nearly as well suited for my playing as others... I don't look down on these games, I just don't play... or if I do, I try to alter my play accordingly.

...Does a tennis player who grew up playing on clay start bashing Wimbledon when he loses on grass? (I'm sure some have, but that's beside the point ;P)

I can understand your plight, really... and I understand you only said "I don't like playing that way," but this was more in response to the overall thing "xxx Sucks!" and your last post than anything. Sorry if I came off a little caustic, but it's just that I see so many people, in so many different areas of life, getting angry and pissed off at something because it doesn't fall into their typical ways of doing things.

And also: The bonus thing seems to be a fairly common thing nowadays, and THAT is annoying. It's great for stirring up action at the tables though, and that's all the poker sites want.

[krakajak]

Well taken, snoogins. Although one good thing has come out of the bonus thing: it has gotten me to play at higher limit tables in order to qualify for the bonus quicker, and I'm making more money as a result.