Tuesday, December 9, 2008

Pokerstars: so far, so good

I was under the impression that players at Pokerstars were better on average than other sites. TAGgier and tougher. Maybe I was wrong.

I played one table for an hour or so tonight and picked up 35BB in pretty quick time. A heater and a small sample admittedly, but the players seemed really quite bad. A couple of too aggressive (60/40 type) players, and a couple of loose/weak players (44/0 and too tight post flop).

Anyway, I've turned my $50 deposit into $120 so far and I will see how I go while finishing my deposit bonus. I probably won't stay while I have Rakeback elsewhere, but you never know.

4 comments:

L4Y SP said...

that's pretty impressive . L4

havin_a_laff said...

Good to hear you think the same. I instantly found the Full Tilt games tougher than the Pokerstars games. Maybe time to have shot at Pstars again and compare..

TiocfaidhArLa said...

It's funny the different ways we approach a new site. I played 3 hours of Badugi last night and almost broke even without much of a clue what I was doing.

Just trying to rack up 250 points for my free StoxPoker subscription, but you've inspired me to try the NLH tables now. I was put off by the tables, I couldn't find a clean multitabling interface, is it possible to customise do you know?

parttimebonuschaser said...

i found stars pretty similar to full tilt.

plenty of tables running, and although there are plenty of tags there are also a lot of fish, so you just need to table select.

that being said, the relatively low equivalent rakeback at low (ie my) volume keeps me away from stars