My problem with the Hubble Freeroll

I have a couple of problems with the pokerstars No Limit Texas Hold 'em freerolls.

My first problem is the payouts. You make the top 9 big whoop... You still have to go to another tourney which could be a game your not comfortable with and play a bunch of good players. Pokerstars probably makes the most money and is the cheapest with the freerolls. Though full tilt's freerolls are pretty cool and even better are pokerrooms.

My second is the number of people. 6000 PEOPLE!!! If your playing in one of those you want to play a big tournament. People bust out so fast in that you barely know what hit ya. You could sit out and make the final 700 or so... that's almost a cash in a regular tourney. Crazy!!!

Anyone agree with my probs?? Remember this is just my opinion and I'm not saying at all that the hubbles shouldn't be played in because I like to play them.

I have to agree. I know some people believe that paying the top 10% of the field is way to much. But, what these freerolls are trying to do is encourage people to play. if you limit your winners to the top 1% or less you are going to discourage most players because they will maybe once every 100 tournies get even close to that. 10% is just enough of a challenge to get more people into the game.

Same thing for field size. Most people don't have the patience to play 6 to 8 hours straight to get through massive fields to get to that top 10%. Making the fields that large also discourages players.

Now the megasites can afford to do this. They have so many players that the cycle through them like McDonalds cycles through employees.

The smaller sites have to work harder to keep repeat customers.

I myself like the smaller sites. Because you actually get to know some of the people you play against.

And that is a good thing.

only way to fix those problems is to play for real money

I think your perspective is a bit askew. The poker stars free rolls are a good place to practice working your way through the land mines of large groups of bad poker players. Once practiced you can put your skills to work in smaller fields. Don't forget poker is about 65% skill and 35% luck. Even excellent players cannot win without some luck. At the start of the tournement when the blinds are low it is a good practice to play very tight and let the loose players knock themselves out. As the blinds increase you will have to loosen up a bit. Remember if you are never bluffed you are calling to much. If you never bluff you will never win a tournement. That's all for now

Poker is 70% skill and 30% luck.


LOL, I'm just messing with you.

Poker is both 100% skill and 100% luck.

One view is, your in the pot with another person, same hand. ZERO luck is involved to have a person take down the pot, it takes all skill to bluff out at the pot and make your opponent fold.

On the other hand, your in the pot with another person, same hand, and you both flop the nut full house. Both of you are going to stay in the hand, no matter if you slow play, bet all in, or any other bet. That takes ZERO skill and all luck.

You cant always compare ALL situations to just one percentage value, poker is much more than that.

About the freeroll. I think the people that win it, are either the luckiest people alive, or are the most determined, most patient people alive.

Yes, I hear the argument about the second freeroll in which the game could be completely different. That is why, when I go to play in the freeroll, I check the next game for the second tournament. If I like the game, I play the Hubbles Freeroll, if not, I just walk away.

A nut full house is one that can't be beat i.e. 3 aces 2 kings. Please explain how you can have 2 nut full houses in the same hand. In contract bridge all tables play the same hands and the winning team is the one that does the best after all teams have played the same hands. This is a no luck or minimal luck situation. In poker every one gets different hands at different times therefore skill is involved in that the person who wins gets the most out of his winning hands and loses the least in losing hands. The luck comes in being dealt good hands in good positions or bad positions and what is flopped and falls on turn or river. a-k and 2 8's are about 50/50 who gets the luck. The more skillful player should always win in the end but because of luck it's not neccesarily true. I can think of 25 people who are certainly more skillful than Moneymaker or Rahmer without even thinking and could name many more if making a list. Did they win on pure luck; I don't think so but did they win on pure skill; no also to that.

Well, nut full house just means the best hand on the board or possible to make from what the board and you yourself holds. Lets say you are holding an AK and the flop is AAK. You have the nut full house. You will not fold no matter what. If another person is also dealt AK, there is no way he will get out of the hand either. In this situation, it takes no skill at all to play this hand. Neither will get the other to fold, and neither will lay their hand down.