Does it really matter what site I play on?

Hey guys,

If you don't factor in bonus programs (sign-up bonuses, re-load bonuses, player point programs) does it really matter where you play? Or can you be profitable at any site considering you play at the same level (I mean you keep your game play consistent) and stakes at each site.

I prefer to play at Full Tilt, I like the aesthetics of the site and, most of all, the hand re-player but I seem to have a much lower ROI there. Not just much lower, awful, I am down $300+ on Full Tilt while on other sites I have a a positive ROI and have been able to cash out here and there without ever redepositing.

I suppose I am an average player, nowhere near an advanced or pro player but not a complete idiot either. I play low stakes games, mostly sit and gos and tourneys, at the $5 to $20 level.

Just curious if some sites are just harder to win at than others. Thanks.

I have noticed the same thing with FT since I started playing there. Really interested in hearing from the experts......

Some sites are definitely way softer than others... typically any of the sites with sportsbetting/casino stuff on them... have ALOT of bad players.

I find quite a difference between sites in the buyin levels you're referring to.

Personally I prefer to play on Fulltilt for many reasons.

Generally I've found the bigger/larger traffic at the site the tougher the competition through the ranks. That's just a general correlation I've noticed. I actually requested to have this be one of the main topics in the cash game section. I'd love to hear from some experts on a full spectrum breakdown.

Stix

Yes players on ps and ft have more decent players then a site on ipoker. I have a very lucky roi for sng but its just a hot run and will end soon. 22% roi and 28% with tourneys. Only couple hundreds game sample.

I've only played on three sites, FT, PS & UB, and I haven't really noticed any difference as far as ROI goes. I normally play $5.00 sng and tourneys, so that may have something to do with it. If you're playing $10 to $20 sng and tourneys, then obviously you are going to have higher level of players (skill-wise)...most bad players are playing the cheaper games.

But there probably is some amount of difference in the percentage of better players at each individual site.

When I get on a down swing at one site, I usually start playing the cheaper games until I can build my account back up. I'll set a "goal", for example, I'll play $3.00 sngs & tourneys until I build my account back up by $100, then I'll go back to the $5.00. I've found this to work really well. You'll run into more donks at the $3.00 table, but if you adjust your play to compensate for that you can end up with a positive ROI despite the occasional bad beat because of a bad player.

besides aforementioned, the larger sites have more games and tourney available to play, less time waiting for a game to start, i cant stand to wait

I've played on one small site called pokertime and there is definitely a difference in class compared to say FT or PS. The 50nl tables played like 10nl or even 5nl on stars. The amount of available tables though was really low. I prefer pokerstars where there are 100k+ people logged on at any one time. The competition is tougher but I prefer tourneys and there's always loads of fish in tourneys especially with the huge fields pokerstars gets.