Why does Stars have more traffic?

Why does pokerstars have a sooo much more traffice than full tilt? More players more fish? Is full tilt full of regs and nits so no one plays there?

less rake at lowest cash table levels
higher tournament payout percentage
sngs fill faster

More money spent on advertising.

brank said:

More money spent on advertising.

Click to expand...

I'd bet on this. Especially if "advertising" includes TV shows.

Some of the above and way more tournaments to choose from, better tournament structures and payouts, a lobby that is easy to find things in, way better customer service, - I could go on for hours.

Better reward scheme if you dont get rakeback

all of the above.

im umm 90% sure stars includes each individual table that a player is running as a "player" so like 320k isnt actually 320k its like 150k? maybe more i dunno... :dancing: :dancing: :dancing: :dancing: :dancing: :dancing: :dancing: :dancing: :dancing:

You can actually tell when a player is sitting out at Pokerstars - at FT you have to notice they are not playing while you are in 6 tournaments - then check the hand history to find out - ultra lame. Or light as a yute would say lol.

Monoxide said:

all of the above.

im umm 90% sure stars includes each individual table that a player is running as a "player" so like 320k isnt actually 320k its like 150k? maybe more i dunno... :dancing: :dancing: :dancing: :dancing: :dancing: :dancing: :dancing: :dancing: :dancing:

Click to expand...

Yeah but I think stars reps always say that if they counted like FTP they would have more players or something. Its weird I dont know the exact math behind it

They do so much more advertising than full tilt and there better known around the world i think

Never wrote to Stars support to ask...

but have wondered if the 'player' count is actually individual players online,
or if they count 1 player multi-tabling 20 tables as 20 players ....

That would make quite a difference in itself I think.

Regardless, the number of online players is simply .... HUGE

Same with FT... how do they count 'individual' players .. ??

I would love to see numbers from Full Tilt and Pokerstars that were calculated the same way.

Take a look at the current numbers on both sites

Pokerstars

Full Tilt


Full tilt has around 12k less tables, but less they have half as many players.

So, you can't go by the numbers posted on the site because Pokerstars numbers are inflated by their calculation methods.

In the end, pokerstars will have more players either way, but it wouldn't be as big of a difference if they calculated the same way as full tilt.

Monoxide said:

all of the above.

im umm 90% sure stars includes each individual table that a player is running as a "player" so like 320k isnt actually 320k its like 150k? maybe more i dunno...

Click to expand...

I don't think that's correct. There very likely are 320k individual players playing at peak times.

Also, Stars is win because they have the best software bar none, best support, and competitive bonuses/VIP rewards for high volume players.

matt0216 said:

I would love to see numbers from Full Tilt and Pokerstars that were calculated the same way.

Take a look at the current numbers on both sites

Pokerstars

Full Tilt

Full tilt has around 12k less tables, but less they have half as many players.

So, you can't go by the numbers posted on the site because Pokerstars numbers are inflated by their calculation methods.

In the end, pokerstars will have more players either way, but it wouldn't be as big of a difference if they calculated the same way as full tilt.

Click to expand...

Sunday might be a tough day to use for comparisons. Aren't the current Stars numbers a bit influenced by the throngs playing various sats and step events to the Sunday Millions ??

Base on the figures above, Stars has 6.7 players per table while FT has only 3.7 players per table that they claim are 'active'. Not sure what that tells us ... ... but I'm also sure that each site counts the -0- player tables as a 'active' table.

One thing that does affect Star's numbers is that they are constantly running freerolls with huge entry numbers, while FT does not. Stars has a freeroll starting every 40 minutes with 8-10,000 entries, while FT does not. That alone makes Star's numbers huge. A 10k entry nlhe freeroll has over 1,100 tables to start. I don't play them, but I seem to recall that FT doesn't have near that kind of freeroll activity and when they do the max entries are nowhere near 10,000.

*************************************

nevadanick said:

Sunday might be a tough day to use for comparisons. Aren't the current Stars numbers a bit influenced by the throngs playing various sats and step events to the Sunday Millions ??

Base on the figures above, Stars has 6.7 players per table while FT has only 3.7 players per table that they claim are 'active'. Not sure what that tells us ... ... but I'm also sure that each site counts the -0- player tables as a 'active' table.

*************************************

Click to expand...

The players per table numbers lead me to believe Full Tilt calculates each individual as one player, while Pokerstars calculates each individual as multiple players depending on the amount of tables they are playing. That's the only way they could get the 6.7 per table.

I could be way off on that, but that's what I'm thinking..

nevadanick said:

One thing that does affect Star's numbers is that they are constantly running freerolls with huge entry numbers, while FT does not. Stars has a freeroll starting every 40 minutes with 8-10,000 entries, while FT does not. That alone makes Star's numbers huge. A 10k entry nlhe freeroll has over 1,100 tables to start. I don't play them, but I seem to recall that FT doesn't have near that kind of freeroll activity and when they do the max entries are nowhere near 10,000.

*************************************

Click to expand...

FTP actually has a 10k entry freeroll running every other hour. Its close to the PS freeroll. Just an entry to a weekly 2k freeroll.

They have been number 1 since Oct. 2006 when party poker dropped US accounts. Party was a solid number 1 with Stars number 2 at the time. Full Tilt has gained since then also but never caught up with Stars. In 2006 the lowest SNG was $5.00 if I remember correctly. They eventually got microstakes games and I think that added a lot of the players who did not have big deposits or bankrolls.

pokerscout.com

currently:

Stars Players online:
135500 Cash Game players - 22962

FTP players online:
81022 Cash Game players 15351

I go on it everytime I'm reminded about it......then I see a FT commercial!

Min. cashout in fulltilt is $50, Stars can take out what ever amount you want.

Like debi mention costumer Service is way better in Stars.

Only thing that keep me away is the huge fields in games.

I think the wsop Main Event winners have primarily been Stars players lately, so maybe that has a huge effect? which just boils down to marketing in some way

doops said:

I'd bet on this. Especially if "advertising" includes TV shows.

Click to expand...

i think i tend to notice more advertising on tv for FTP then i do for pokerstars. but who knows what the advertising is like in other countries. i wonder which site has the most traffic from USA players.

LLCoolSway said:

I think the WSOP Main Event winners have primarily been Stars players lately, so maybe that has a huge effect? which just boils down to marketing in some way

Click to expand...

Pretty sure they sign them 'after' they win.

Stars has more traffic due to advertising imo. Personally I like FTP way more!

I love both but I think I prefer PS, better software, customer support etc. I just don't play enough for it to be worth it atm with FTP and rakeback.

FT is excellent though and I've never had any problems, it does a great job.