Topic: ✅ SwC Poker ♣️ BITCOIN POKER ♣️ Hold'em✅ PLO✅ Mixed✅ MTT✅ ♣️ BBJ🌟 ♣️ BIG BTC🏆 - page 59. (Read 87388 times)

SwC does not publish rake or profit data. We monitor collusion in a number of different ways, including both algorithms and human eyes. We do not disclose our exact methods because that would make them less effective. SwC takes collusion very seriously and responds to collusion at managements discretion.

What safety measures do you have in place to prevent X amount of people concluding together on a table to take all of one persons money.

I see your rake is low, but do you guys publish your total profit anywhere? Or the amount of money you rake in per day

The staking arrangement can happen anyways, regardless of whether you can transfer tickets and what's so bad about people buying tickets for cheap? They get in for cheap, the other players win some chips, the tournament still has the full value and satellites run more frequently. Classic win/win/win, how is that a downside?

Oh, and the satellites frequently have huge overlays or are actual freerolls, so no, other people do not have to cover the BI of the ticket and yes, you can compare it to freerolls in that regard.

No downside you can see, really? How about creating a dark market to sell extra tickets, for less than BI value even, because degenerates rather have some extra chips than give a ticket away that they can't even use? Or people using them as a kind of staking arrangement, but then the horse absconding with funds after a big score, causing more needless drama? Please. I'm sure there are many other less than ideal scenarios, but I thought of those two in under a minute.

I haven't played on SWC in months, and not sure how their ticket system even works, but some more logical solutions would be:

1. Don't allow players to win multiple tickets. This eliminates the desire to play sattys for more than one ticket and should open up the field for different players to win. It may have an adverse effect on getting sattys to run though, given a limited player pool.
2. Don't make tickets specific for a month. You can win as many tickets as you like, they are nontransferable, and be can used for the same tournament (or a tournament with same BI?) at a future date.
3. Credit anything over one ticket in the amount of the ticket BI in chips. This option may need tweaking though, as it can essentially remove money from the GTD prize pool, since the player isn't forced to use the chips for the tournament.

Also, regarding your free/cheap reasoning, while satellites do allow more people to play a tournament they wouldn't normally, or for less than what they would possibly pay by buying in directly, other people still have to cover the value of the ticket BI. Satellites can't be compared to freerolls in that regard.

-BttB

SwC recognizes the last update introduced new bugs and must be fixed.
Rolling back software may not seem that hard, but it is a complex process for us today, part of the reason we are doing a large software refactor is to make it easier and faster for us to deliver updates or roll back if needed.
Security is the top concern at SwC so we will continue to go slow and careful.
Estimate late next week for a client update to address current issues.

Disagree on?  Short stacking with 20bb's will deteriorate the quality of the games?  Lol...  Ok.  The site should have at least a 40bb minimum on all stakes.  IMHO.

All the regressions introduced by that botched June update have not yet been fixed. There are quite a few annoying bugs that I and other players have reported in this thread.

Before talking about "refactoring" I would suggest focusing to undo the breakage first, it should not be too hard, no new features, just revert the bugs. And a bit of regression testing and quality control before launching an update would not hurt.

"Mr. Hodl's Bitcoin Twitter Showdown" is now in the SwC lobby!🤩

♣️ When: July 16th 22:00 UTC 🗓️ 
♣️ 10,000 buy in (0.01 btc) 🏆 
♣️ Must get password from @MrHodl on Twitter🗝️ 
♣️ A freeroll open to all that awards a single ticket to the event will run July 16th 19:00 UTC 🧧



https://twitter.com/SwCPoker/status/1149432659631902720

Thank you for all replies about software issues. They have been logged. The team is working hard to overhaul the software and fix these bugs. Minor updates will continue until we are ready to push the major update, Bitcoin Poker 3.1

Mr. Hodl will host a bitcoin twitter tournament that will take place next week. Details being finalized.
https://twitter.com/SwCPoker/status/1149160101313470464

Your site run it as you like of course, but as a player and just giving you some feedback when you sit and not get any action for hours all day and when you finally do its a hit and runner, its just makes the experience of playing or better worded not playing a bs experience. At least with more traffic you get some games running so when they do hit and run its whatever, players are turned away by this and might not want to play even when you do advertise more thinking yeah been there no thanks. You don't need to advertise a heap just a little to get that bit more traffic.

Btw your sites software is much more enjoyable and better then Ignition and Americas Cardroom, so advertise a bit at least just a bit, and that way you will also see how the site runs with more players like 500 players or whatever, instead of going big on advertising straight away and having too many players flock to the site, ease into the advertising, nothing wrong with building up a player pool slowly instead of just the 100 or so players as is.

You have all these countries that are banned but only 100 players on the site, geez I think there is more countries that are banned than players :-) like I said just ease into the traffic so at least 500 players are playing and 500 would be nothing given the amount of countries that are banned.

Quick idea: Let people win multiple BigBTC tickets and then give them away to other players.

No downside I can see to SWC (except for a bit more organisational effort), more sats would probably run and more people would get the chance to play for free/cheap.

Also, QoL request: Please show the regged SNGs/tourneys as "In Game" in cashier and reflect in total balance. I keep getting mini heart attacks when I forget I'm regged and open the cashier.

STRONGLY disagree. And again, there are options who can't afford to pay $12 to play NLHE on site, the BBJ needs to be somewhat exclusive.

What?  And encourage everybody who can't afford a buy in at those stakes to short stack?  Lol.  That's gonna make the quality of the games go down.

desktop version bugs

When you select the stakes filter -> low stakes,  it doesn't show tables below 10/20 , to show these tables you need to select freerolls which likely confuses players and they might not even see players sitting at 1/2 to 10/20 tables which means less traffic.

Also doesn't display folded hand while action is still between other players.

The only thing I would change with the bad beat jackpot is to make bad beat tables for plo as well. No limit hold em is incredible boring.

No, it should not take extra rake, the concept is absolutely brilliant. What keeps lower stake players from sitting non-BBJ tables at lower stakes?

You can sit the BBJ tables with 1k chips ($12)

^

The BBJ tables should take extra rake.

That's the thing.  The rec players go broke much faster taking shots at 25/50.  You don't want that.  You want them to stay for as long as possible at lower stakes...  Attracting more traffic from there since it's more likely other rec players will rather play low than high.

And wait, a shot at 25/50 is 12 bucks?  BTC is at 12k.

I don't have much skin in the game as I don't play NLHE much, but here's my perspective on why they might not want to lower the BBJ limits:

- They make like 20-50% of the rake they make off usual cashgame tables already, since you don't pay extra rake for the BBJ. If you lower that to 2/4, the absolute amount of rake they'd make would be absolutely miniscule and probably don't cover costs. Also, the BBJ would fill much more slowly.

- The games as of now are incredibly soft, and it is because lower stake people take shots to sit at these tables. If you lower the BBJ limit, the 25/50 games dry up and move lower. A shot at the BBJ tables costs $12 right now to participate in a ~$6000 jackpot.

- And lastly, it would be kind of unfair to the people contributing at the (much) higher stakes to share their chances at the jackpot with the (more frequent, because massively +EV) lower tables.

^  I think you need to email them and make a request.

Anyway, I noticed that there's fewer traffic at the site now.  What happened?  I think making it harder to win the BBJ and expanding it down up to 2/4 might do the trick.  IMHO.

At least try it.

Hello SwC_Poker  !
One question please...
Is it possible to download hand history of played hands ? Thanks.