Differences Between Sites

I've been playing exclusively on pokerstars for the last 6 months and never tried out any other sites.
Do the tournament formats differ much there or are they pretty much the same, and does the level of play stay the same or do certain sites have more bad players?

If you are outside the USA you have plenty of choices, and lots of fish available. If you are inside the US it essentially comes down to Full Tilt or PokerStars.

I live in UK. Does the presence of Americans raise or bring down the average level of competition however?
Just tried to go on Full Tilt but the software won't download.

If there are any person who have had extensive experience at both FT and Stars, please express your opinion on the quality of play. I've seen some stats where one person really excels at Stars but is dead money at FT and vice versa.

Thanks in advance.

Xavier said:

I live in UK. Does the presence of Americans raise or bring down the average level of competition however?
Just tried to go on Full Tilt but the software won't download.

Click to expand...

You would probably assume that it would bring the standard down, but actually there are a lot of people on FT/PS using tracking software and there is some tough competition, but still plenty of fish anyway, simply because of how big they are (FT/PS I mean - not the Americans! ).

Smaller sites such as PaddyPower, BetFred, williamhill, Titan, Pacific and Ladbrokes have plenty of fish but generally people can't use software to track you AFAIK - although obviously they can check you out on sharkscope etc.

If there are any person who have had extensive experience at both FT and Stars, please express your opinion on the quality of play. I've seen some stats where one person really excels at Stars but is dead money at FT and vice versa.

Click to expand...

I don't fit your criteria, but I think it depends whether you play cash games, SNGs or MTTs, and what stakes you are at.

full tilt / pokerstars

full tilt is a better site due to their freerolls
pokerstars is nice because of their graphics you are able to change the table images which is nice but the tournaments kind of suck

adamb said:

full tilt is a better site due to their freerolls
pokerstars is nice because of their graphics you are able to change the table images which is nice but the tournaments kind of suck

Click to expand...

Why do the tournaments on Stars suck?
I play them a lot.

I play on pokerstars and full tilt. I like the full tilt sofware much better than stars and i think that the people on each are about the same... however there are plenty of donks on stars

Yeah Full Tilt has many fish.

Avoid Everest, thats full of good playing french ppl.

Cake is hella glitchy.

adamb said:

full tilt is a better site due to their freerolls
pokerstars is nice because of their graphics you are able to change the table images which is nice but the tournaments kind of suck

Click to expand...

your saying pokerstars doesn have freerolls?....they certainly do.

i think FT has nice graphics as well.......i think that PS actually has better tourneys than FT... while i think FT has better ring games than PS......

also you can change the table image on FT as well

I prefer Full Tilt to Pokerstars, but I do much better at stars (go figure). FT freeroll tourneys have more active players than stars - more aggressive and less people sitting out. Stars has a lot more macro tourneys.

I prefer pokerstars to full tilt... I've just always found their software better and easier to use, I like the graphics more too. I bust myself faster at full tilt than I did at stars so I'd say the players at tilt are tougher.