Full tilt poker $50 freeroll sunday 7 february 2010

ixgames wrote: Hello

This is just a reminder of the tournament on sunday 7th february for full tilt members.

Screen names cant be added during weekends but you will get your spot at next tournament.

How to join

This tournament is restricted but members with full access and which have posted their screen name will get added to the sunday games. If you dont have a full tilt poker account please download the full tilt poker software to join the action and all features of full tilt poker. By using ixgames exclusive link you are eligible to both a signup bonus as well as future private tournaments sponsored by ixgames-com. For depositing players use bonus code ixgames600 to take advantage of the new signup bonus 100% up to $600. Become famous at full tilt poker with ixgames.

If you have signed up through our full tilt review please add your screen name here

Freeroll information

Sponsored freeroll at full tilt poker by ixgames-com

Tournament name: ixgames-com $50 freeroll

Tournament type: Freeroll, texas hold'em NL

Maximum players: 1800

Amount: $50

Freeroll date: sunday 7th february 2010, 18.00 PM

The tournament is already visible inside the full tilt poker software.

Password: This tournament is restricted/private.

Enjoy the game and respect your fellow players!

SycoSteve wrote: [FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium]Noticed a few players were removed from this week's registration list. Were these the habitual no-shows/sit-outs or people whose activity level on the forum dropped below an acceptable level? Just curious. . . :confused:

Thanks, once more and as always for the games! :dance:[/FONT]

zjohnzzz wrote: Thanks for the game:thumbsup good luck to all

dirtpuller wrote: Its interesting people are removed. Whats more interesting is the large number that aren't even on the list. My second week in a row after having listed my screen name.

Now since the super bowl is on I most likely wouldn't play. But, i do love the fact i don't even have the option.

tallseas wrote: Did not review the names, but did see mine. Will have to hurry to make it. I get off work 5:00. Hope I make it.

madjek wrote: I'll be playin my first, didn't think about the super bowl. Guess i'll have to multi-task. Wonder how many sitters there will be. I don't mind people sittin out, hopefully all at my table, LOL. GL everyone.

onpokplaya wrote: Gl all
i know last week was a bit angry but we all have those days and i know that the top people on here are actually tryin to make it better for everyone which is a chore in itself. but the games have gotten better and will continue to . so be active /show up for the games /and most important have fun.

Samango wrote: Screen names cant be added during weekends but you will get your spot at next tournament

Quote:
Originally Posted by SycoSteve
The registration list for this week's game may have been sent in earlier than when your account was upgraded. As it's the weekend, no new players can be added for this week. I'm not sure what day is the cut-off point for the week. . .

If you're account has been upgraded then I would guess that you will be eligible and included for next week's game. Take a look at the reg list as soon as the game lists and see if you're on it. If not, maybe PM ixgames or Manne and they will be able to tell you why. . .


I thought this may be the reason why I haven't been included yet but I posted my screen name on 1st January so... that's a months cut off lol

onpokplaya wrote: Gl all
i know last week was a bit angry but we all have those days and i know that the top people on here are actually tryin to make it better for everyone which is a chore in itself. but the games have gotten better and will continue to . so be active /show up for the games /and most important have fun.

SycoSteve wrote: gl all
i know last week was a bit angry but we all have those days and i know that the top people on here are actually tryin to make it better for everyone which is a chore in itself. but the games have gotten better and will continue to . so be active /show up for the games /and most important have fun.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium]Well, sadly, another week and another pretty pathetic turnout. Maybe it was because it was Super Bowl Sunday. Or maybe it's because the people who wanted in don't really give a rat's @$$ now that they're automatically on the list. Either way, it's getting old people. I came to play with people I like and enjoy competing against and learning from. I don't learn anything or derive any satisfaction from a zombie avatar. . .

At this point I'd say to ixgames and Manne: forget the freerolls. Take the money you're putting up for them and use them for money-added micro buy-ins. At least then we would know who's coming to play seriously and who's just jerking everyone around. . .
[/FONT]

MHect wrote: I very much appreciate the freerolls and the generally good poker play at the tables. Even if my favorite team had been playing in the Super Bowl (Steelers), I would have taped it and played.

The suggestion that you could register if you wanted to play is valid, although then you might only have 20 people playing and 3 or something getting paid.

sk82day wrote: I dont see a problem with the games, sure you will have no shows, so what? Just dont be a donk and go out prior to the dead hands. Sure we would all like to see full tournies but to have close to 50% turnout is not bad for this tyope of tourney.
Whats better having a restricted tourney with 50% turnout, or giving pws out and having 600 magicly show up because people will pass out the pw. Keep it the same its not that big of deal.

SycoSteve wrote: gl all
i know last week was a bit angry but we all have those days and i know that the top people on here are actually tryin to make it better for everyone which is a chore in itself. but the games have gotten better and will continue to . so be active /show up for the games /and most important have fun.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium]Well, sadly, another week and another pretty pathetic turnout. Maybe it was because it was Super Bowl Sunday. Or maybe it's because the people who wanted in don't really give a rat's @$$ now that they're automatically on the list. Either way, it's getting old people. I came to play with people I like and enjoy competing against and learning from. I don't learn anything or derive any satisfaction from a zombie avatar. . .

At this point I'd say to ixgames and Manne: forget the freerolls. Take the money you're putting up for them and use them for money-added micro buy-ins. At least then we would know who's coming to play seriously and who's just jerking everyone around. . .
[/FONT]

madjek wrote: [FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium]Well, sadly, another week and another pretty pathetic turnout. Maybe it was because it was Super Bowl Sunday. Or maybe it's because the people who wanted in don't really give a rat's @$$ now that they're automatically on the list. Either way, it's getting old people. I came to play with people I like and enjoy competing against and learning from. I don't learn anything or derive any satisfaction from a zombie avatar. . .

At this point I'd say to ixgames and Manne: forget the freerolls. Take the money you're putting up for them and use them for money-added micro buy-ins. At least then we would know who's coming to play seriously and who's just jerking everyone around. . .
[/FONT]
I was at your table steve, I only recall 1 or maybe 2 sitters. I was expecting a lot more with the super bowl. I like the freerolls, just got to play in my first. If they want more players, then upgrade more people, your always going to have sitters in a freeroll you get automatically entered into and have no way to unreg. But again, I don't know what you're talking about, I didn't see it the way you did, maybe I am wrong, but my guess is you're in the minority as far as getting rid of the freerolls goes.

tallseas wrote: The current format is good. I like the idea that only active members who positively contribute are invited to play. It is however needing a little trimming of the fat. I don't know if the sit outs are being actively tracked or not, but perhaps they should be. If they have not participated in last 5 events they should be taken off the roster. They can always petition to get back on it should they wish to participate. Just a thought.

SycoSteve wrote: I was at your table steve, I only recall 1 or maybe 2 sitters. I was expecting a lot more with the super bowl. I like the freerolls, just got to play in my first. If they want more players, then upgrade more people, your always going to have sitters in a freeroll you get automatically entered into and have no way to unreg. But again, I don't know what you're talking about, I didn't see it the way you did, maybe I am wrong, but my guess is you're in the minority as far as getting rid of the freerolls goes.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium]We were lucky, so to speak, mad. Another table I looked at seemed to have 2 live players and 7 dead stacks. And if you watched the tournament leaderboard it was quite easy to see that there were quite a number of sitouts. . .[/FONT]

sk82day wrote: I dont see a problem with the games, sure you will have no shows, so what? Just dont be a donk and go out prior to the dead hands. Sure we would all like to see full tournies but to have close to 50% turnout is not bad for this tyope of tourney.
Whats better having a restricted tourney with 50% turnout, or giving pws out and having 600 magicly show up because people will pass out the pw. Keep it the same its not that big of deal.

MHect wrote: I very much appreciate the freerolls and the generally good poker play at the tables. Even if my favorite team had been playing in the Super Bowl (Steelers), I would have taped it and played.

The suggestion that you could register if you wanted to play is valid, although then you might only have 20 people playing and 3 or something getting paid.

SycoSteve wrote: The suggestion that you could register if you wanted to play is valid, although then you might only have 20 people playing and 3 or something getting paid.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium]And the problem with that is?
[/FONT]