Topic: ✅ SwC Poker ♣️ Player Lounge - page 3. (Read 2895 times)

Thank you to our loyal players that understand how hard it is to run SwC Poker.

We see the complaining players are louder than the happy players that enjoy our bitcoin poker room but we will continue to build the site better and better.

2021 will be a great year for us with new features and improvements.

Thank you for the support!

Detailed analysis of rake will be posted soon.

In order for limit games to be sustainable, the rake has to be lower.  This has been gone over countless times over the past 10 or 20 years.  If you look at PokerStars and ACR, you will see the rake is 2% capped at 50 cent for $1/2 - $10/20 heads up.  It's 1% and $1 at $15/30 and up.  Once again somehow you think charging 2.5% and $1 cap at mid stakes limit heads up is ok.  This is ever worse because most of the games that run are mixed games that have a huge percentage of split pot games which are notorious rake traps.  I'm not asking for a break here. I'm asking for the established industry standard.

The specific problem is here:

Limit (at 35k btc price)
100/200 ($3.50/$7) - 500/1000 ($17.50/$35) --- 2 players -- 30 chips ($1.05)

Needs to be 14 chips.

These are the games that run. And you only offer 5% rakeback to start. ACR offers 27%.

Why on earth would you lower the leaderboard payments for cash players before lowering the rake?  Are you paying no attention to your players who have been complaining on and off site about the rake for months.  Instead you run apology free rolls for busto players who probably have less than $100 usd on site and proceed to kick your cash game regs in the nuts who keep your site afloat.

Plus you've gone and done the leaderboard wrong again. You want to pay less players but give them each bigger rewards.  What you've done is all wrong by paying more players but giving them each less. The more you flatten the payouts, the less incentive there is for players to fight for it and move up.

Maybe you should give chat back to your regs. Take a look at the table below. 4 out of 5 players are chat banned. If 4 out of 5 players are banned maybe the problem isn't with the players, maybe it's with whoever is imposing the bans.

Ok, so the rake % went UP and the leaderboard prize pool went DOWN. Am I getting this right?

There is something very wrong about what is happening here.

If you remember April 15, 2011 (a.k.a. Black Friday), the FBI can seize a .com top level domain so there's no reason for SWC to register that one. But there are over 1000 others to choose from. Having at least one backup ready to go would probably be a good idea.

(from the player lounge thread)

Just checked and the domain now reroutes to Nitro! Aaaahahhahahahhaahahah. This is some next level trolling, fair play to them. I'd bet they have more budget for SEO aswell, wonder how long it'll take for that domain to show up first when you google SWC.

At this point, SWC should just sell to Nitro. Or maybe they already did.

GREAT start into 2021, SWC. Well played.

Haha, swcpoker dot com (not sure if you can include urls here) is available for $10,000. They do not even have that secured as a business which is mind-blowing. If they can't use EU I wonder what they'll use for a domain!?!?

Yeah technically there are a lot of issues.
When you buy in at tables the actually buyin always jumps to a number I didnt choose. Auto rebuy also often doesnt work for me.
Also at some point if I play longer at a table folded cards are not shown anymore.

Also at some point I am not able to right click on other players for muting/adjusting colour/make notes.

Only thing I can do then is leaving the table and join again.

If they close for good, which I dont think will happen, its not really a loss. Tournaments are a joke, no traffic, chat bans, sngs pretty much not available, empty promises, slow or no support and the whole higherhighs and endthefed "are not working for us" but they are active players at the site thing.

Only good thing, weak ass players sometimes at omaha.

Damn this site is amateur hour... They have never tried to be relevant, and have proven it time and time again.... They have proven that when making HH the face of their sight, and definitely now it's not falling through on this crap.... Why would you trust your money with this site at this point?

https://whois.eurid.eu/en/search/?domain=swcpoker.eu
What's this mean lol?


I don't see the same thing for nitro (the other .eu website I could think of). Did you guys get screwed over by Brexit? What a way to end 2020 lmao


edit: https://eurid.eu/en/register-a-eu-domain/brexit-notice/


Ooops....

SWC poker has rakeback? I know that poker is a good game and that anyone could get addicted to it. It means that there will be more poker players to visit your platform because of some feature specifically the anonymity in betting online. However, I wish to know that every good platform has also rakeback feature. Well, if you this feature how much could it be basing on the percentage of the players rake in the game for example in a week? Hoping to get an answer. Thank You!

The % is relevant. SWC made massive changes to the rake percentages a few months ago.



Let's look at the micros.  The cap is rarely hit in the micros in NL or limit poker.  So the % is the most important thing.  Even if you adjust the cap to something hypothetical like 27 cents usd in the micros which is approximately 10 swc chips. When the % was 2.5% you would need to hit 400 chips to hit the cap. Now with current 3% rake you would need to hit 333.33 chips to hit the cap. At $27000 BTC price, a 400 chips pot is $10.80.  Take a look at what is currently running on SWC below



The only games running right now are micros. The average pot size on both of these tables are below the rake cap. 203.93 average at 5/10 and 190.53 at 2/4. So on average the % is in play. And if you scroll up you will see that SWC increased the rake percentage by 40% on these tables 4 months ago. I'm sure the cap is hit occasionally at the tables listed above so this doesn't equate to an flat 40% increase, but it is very substantial nonetheless.

You will also notice that the rake caps in limit poker are substantially higher when 6 handed than heads up.  This is completely standard and acceptable.  So the % at say a $10/$20 mixed game will come into play at a full table very often.  Lets hypothetically give the this $10/$20 game a $3 USD rake cap. The % was 1.5% earlier this year at this table, now it is 2%. $3 USD is 111 SWC chips at $27000 BTC price. At 2% rake you need a 5,550 chip pot ($150 USD) to hit the max. At 1.5% rake you need a 7,400 chip pot ($200 USD) to hit the max. At 300/600 11 game mix ($8/$16 stakes at $27,000 BTC), let's examine a 6 handed game where it is folded to the small blind who raises a limit holdem hand and proceeds to bet every street, getting called by the big blind each time. Small blind is 150 chips, BB 300. So 1200 pre, plus 600 flop, plus 1200 turn, plus 1200 river = 4200 chips total. 4200 chips = $113.40. Rake cap is not hit. The additional .5% = 21 chips = .56 cents of additional rake.