Have payouts been declined or held up because of this thread and the open discussion and critique in this thread?  Have they declined payouts due to any criticism in the unofficial 2p2 thread too?

This would be a first. But w btc where it’s at, lots of people/companies are probably looking to join the crypto-milly-lambo fraternity.  I wouldn’t mind taking a look at one of those emails (w any identifying data redacted). 

It’s tough not knowing what to do, as I’m an affiliate at the swc poker club, and so have a duty to represent them.  Yet, my first duty is to place the players with the right site, as best as possible, with the highest rewards possible - whether on swc, kings main, kings home games, Pbros Diamond under a club owner/union official, or ONC.  If I don’t know who’s paying me, personally, I’m more wary.  Cuz payouts are much easier when you know your cashier personally and can access all the tools in your toolbox to ensure players are paid, happy etc

I hope everybody gets paid.  My stomach is growling, gotta feed the beast.  Appreciate the rake charts and I’m not really sure what the harm in this thread is, or why so many posts have been deleted. 

Wishing everybody a happy new year.  Last year was the year of the Rat (yuck).  This is the year of the Blackjack and I think it’s going to work out just fine for everybody.   Plenty of good games online still, including at swc’s poker club I’m sure.  Just gottta be persistent in finding them, in this dynamic online poker scene.  Been playing a lot of single draw recently in a mix.  It’s got too many big bet games for my taste but it might appeal to some.

Anyways, I hope everybody makes money - the sites; the players; everieee body.  And hopefully these cashouts are rectified shortly for those waiting.  Financial solvency/security has never been a problem st swc before.  I was pretty surprised to learn of this stuff re the withdrawals today.  If anybody needs any assistance with anything, I can’t make many promises obv, but I never mind working on solutions that help the players. 

Y’all know how to get in touch, take it easy and gl

Turns out it was a moot issue - my winnings were in my wallet about 1.5 hrs after I posted.  So I guess the most efficient way to proceed, as is often the case, was to just wait a few more minutes.  In the meantime, I went back in and won a little more spinning the btc wheel, so this spot was truly a win-win lol

Hello, would anyone happen to know how long payouts take, when the hot wallet doesnt have enough, at the time of request?

I’ve had several deposits and several withdrawals and this was the first time my request could not be immediately processed.  The instructions were clear (the hot wallet did not have all the funds for the payout and it would usually take 6–12 hours), I’m not concerned due to the reputation of the site, but I’m wondering what the best course of action is.

I didn’t request to withdraw all my winnings.  Would it be faster to wait until the original  payout is  processed, or would it be faster to cancel the original payout request and request a new payout? 

Again, I’ve only made a half dozen  deposits and received a few payouts, and I’m not a frequent player or in the know as far as the cashier stuff goes so any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you

Hey Slothy I don’t think the poster you were responding to even understands that double board Omaha is pretty much only played as part of a mix and in its fixed limit format, on the other site.  I don’t think he realizes that there are multiple limit mix games and big bet mix games running around the clock at high stakes, as well as $10/pt ofc  (or is familiar w the site at all).

But the drawOE and , coach’s mix, crazy mix aren’t possible on swc yet, bc the software can’t run Archie, dramaha, 2-7 dramaha, 2-7 razz, double board Omaha, 150 bb cap nl 2-7, pot limit badugi/badeucy/badacey, A-5 triple draw, etc yet.  I don’t get the feeling that swcpoker is unwilling to run pretty much anything that players suggest, that’s reasonable.  But the other site has been around longer than 3.0 swcpoker and the amount of liquidity dwarfs swcpoker - for now.

There’s been some Stars highstakes mix players that have come over and some Kings players have come over to swcpoker.  But the stakes that US fix limit mix players and the main Stars reg that’s come over to swcpoker want to play are much higher than what swcpoker player pool supports - for now.  There’s also some kings guys who only play the $5/10 w $4 ante big bet mixes.  Among the $4/8-$8/16 (or 1k/2k-2k/4k chip) mix players, they all seem to want to play almost strictly fixed limit mix.  Among the high stakes mix players, it’s slightly less than 80/20 fix limit to big bet.

One mix that I enjoy on swcpoker, that isn’t spread on Kings, is the 11 game mix - because it’s a true mix of big bet, limit, stud, draw, and flop games (and like most, I don’t feel all that confident in my Dramaha game).  If we could bring over even 10% of the players from kings to try swcpoker it would be a huge boost For swcpoke.  If traffic was the same at both sites, everybody would play at swcpoker bc of the much lower rake.  So I don’t think swcpoker doesn’t care about what their players want - it’s just that the software can’t run those other variants yet.

There are 3 mix game sites in the world, 2 of which accept players from across the globe.  In some cases, the pool is mutually exclusive.  For example, there aren’t any games for a 200/400 chip limit player to play on Kings - cuz $4/8 is the lowest stake.  

But there is no game raked as low as swcpoker and more players that can be brought over and added to the pool at swcpoker than vice versa.  We just need to get enough full ring mix games running simultaneously on swcpoker and the Kings players willl come.  They don’t mind if badeucy is the most non-standard game and they definitely like the rake structure.  They just need to see some traffic.  There are opportunities and options available.  WSOP is right around the corner and there is a 90+ table poker room about to open near me, insidethe most expensive casino in the country.  If everybody at swcpoker tries their best, from management and admins and affiliates and players, and are incentivized to start a conversation w their neighbor at the table, opens up the mobile client and shows how easy it is to play and how low the rake is - adding another 100-500 BTC in liquidity to swcpoker over the summer shouldn’t be a problem.  

Im not sure if trading krill for a player depositing 1-10 BTC is gonna do it necesssarily, but I have confidence in swcpoker based on the last few months of added traffic and the customer service/admins are down to earth, accessible, and smart.  So hopefully something  will get worked out prior to wsop.

Hi I think that swcpoker and kings have some overlap, but not much.  It’s mostly $30/60 mix games (bc the highest stake available) and it’s almost entirely US live mix players who are used to playing the Vegas/LA type mix games that include the aforementioned games - and swcpoker is a more traditional global site that offers some of those games (and at lower rake like u said), but the global online pool that swcpoker consists of wont play those variants.  But that’s not to say that bringing kings players to swcpoker is a bad idea.  It’s a smart move for mix players to play both sites - whether they’re 8/16 or 30/60+ players.   

I don’t think a lot of kings players know about swcpoker 3.0 yet and/or aren’t familiar w using BTC, since they’re mostly live players.  Spreading the word to those players and trying to get them acclimated to using BTC would be a good thing.  I think of Big O, short deck, and 11g as the formats where swcpoker has pushed the envelope beyond the standard NL/PLO games - and that’s provided a solid offering of non-traditional games, so I think the site would benefit from those players coming over to swcpoker, but by spreading the word to them and not yet offering games that very few people play.  They’re enjoyable, so at some point I could see adding the circus games to swcpoker could make sense, not quite yet imho

Why would anyone need to "fund a bot launch?"  There are very successful bots out there that play on ACR/WPN and I'm assuming they are bought from shanky technologies, who blatantly advertise the networks that they can exploit and ACR/WPN  and Betonline/Chico were two of the main ones.

They brag about 1/2mm downloads, offer 5 pre-loaded profiles, customer support, and cost $129/yr and $79/yr to renew.

There doesnt seem to be a lack of vendors in that market, but maybe you can be the best botter in the world wavrachal.  Now that's something to be proud of!

But considering people have made real time solving 3rd party software for freaking Stars 8g that costs 1k-2500/mo to rent, it's an uphill battle to be the best.  But I think you should try to make a mix game bot and put it on swc so I can finally beat somebody.

Everybody is acknowledging BTC poker has problems - including the ones I named in my last post: SwC lack of communication and only accepting BTC.  I don't play on the other sites, other than some LHE and sports bets on Nitrogen and they've always paid. 

There are multiple things that SwC can claim to be among the industry's leaders such as: low rake, more cash game formats than anyone, fast payouts. Doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement.  I was the catalyst for their last rake decrease and that seems a lot more helpful to BTC poker than simply screaming "SITE = DEAD". 

There is nothing you can tell someone if they are determined to stubbornly hold a position - no matter how far off the (dynamic) facts they are.  There is a way to cash out less than 20 chips (which isnt that much anyways), you told him how, you've done it yourself 4x - and he is telling you that are wrong and that the sky is actually pink.  Fwiw, I've blasted the site when they've done things I considered sub-optimal, but this isn't one of those times.

Rake has been lowered to the lowest of ANY poker site, for both tourneys and cash games. There has been plenty of action at stakes from .01/.02 up to 60/120 (which is like $800/$1600) in the last couple weeks.  I've seen $100k on the table.  I know this bc I've gotten plenty of midstakes action in the few hours I have to play, even though I'm barely online.  If I knew how to play OFC, I could've played at decent stakes for hours every day.  But the site is DEAD lol

Among the things within their control, the only major fault I see is failing to maintain a strong presence in the online poker community.  If I was offering more game formats than any other site and had the lowest rake around, I'd be shouting it from the rooftop. High miners' fees, which are out of their control, may prompt them to reconsider accepting other crypto.  The BTC-only thing was fine for a while, but is now holding them back.

What else this guy wants, nobody sane can figure out.  I dont think he's a shill for another site, but why post these rants about a site that he doesnt seem to play on, want to play on, or has anything to do w his life?  If he knows they don't post much on social media, it's pretty easy to stop acting like a baby (like when he demanded they answered his questions in the exact format he proposed rofl) and just email support. 

Edit: Upon reading his other posts, they're all just random immature raging at pretty much every BTC poker site - so it doesn't appear to be a SwC/Betcoin/Ntrogen/etc problem as much as it seems to be a mental health issue.  Given that, I'm not trying to be mean and hope you can get the help you need. 

I played hands last week where the pot was raked .6 chips or like $10/hand lol.  So even after tablestarter, it was $5/hand for 3 handed $35/70 usd, which is more than double Stars rake for similar stakes.  Other games, I played hands that weren't even raked bc it was so low - the whole rake structure was broken.  Now, the max rake for limit games is .18 chips, or like $3.50/hand and you still get krill rakeback that makes it like $2-$3/hand.

Some players like to feel like they're getting something, even when they're actually paying a lot more.  Casinos have always used that to their advantage when creating promos.  

You're an idiot to fall for spam put out by paid accounts lol.

You're an idiot for notn recognizing veganhipie as someone who has played as many mid-high stakes hands on the site in the last two years without issue as anyone (whether you want to use his service is up to you.

You're an idiot for your consiracy threories that they're holding your BTC "to invest or spend".  All you have to do is look at the lobby to see how many players are sitting w 1 BTC buy-ins on the table.  All you have to do is read every ANY cashout post, as they all note that they receive their money within hours. EVERYBODY is getting paid within hours and your logic is that they're trying to invest the BTC?  What could they possibly invest it in that's more profitable than BTC?  Pretty much everything you've posted has been exactly the opposite of correct.  It is hard to be this dumb.  No wonder you can't spin it up to 20 chips (have you ever just thought of doing that so you could cash out?). 

Keep spamming the thread every day about the cashout limit though  . .  . you might think you're doing your "cause" some good.  You are actually doing the opposite.  Beeeliiieeevveee me

They've invested too much time, effort, and money on developing a new client to turn back now - whether it's the primary concern of the players or not. 

Rakeback will still be there, but it makes more sense to MASSIVELY DECREASE RAKE than to offer 50% tablestarter, which discourages 4+ games.  Promotions will be varied, fun, and geared towards players of all skill levels and bankrolls, I've been told.  Withdrawal threshold will change in some manner, to the players' benefit.  Hopefully they will lower rake again SOON, as they have indicated in their last post on the matter.

The've put most of their eggs in the "new client" basket.  If they roll out the new Android client, along w keeping their word on the host of other issues players have posted about, the site could be great again.  Two most pressing issues appear to be rake and withdrawal threshold.  Those should be handled quickly, whether the new client is ready for testing next month or not.  Rake is the most pressing issue for me, personally.  But the withdrawal threshold affects more players (and people always need access to more of their money at this time of year).

They said they would use most of my suggestions - lowering rake and withdrawal threshold ASAP this year are my big 2 . . .
Let's see what happens over the next few weeks.

Happy Holidays Everyone!





 

When BTC went to $2700 in July, I had a chat w glitch in the chat box and then wrote to management.  Within 12 hours, they reduced rake.  That was pretty awesome customer service.  But they betrayed their capabilities.

That rake structure has remained in place as BTC surpasses $15k.

I multi tabled a 1/2 limit and 2/4 limit game for a bit tonight.  The rake cap in the 1/2 was .7 chips, or something like $12/hand.  In the 2/4 game the rake cap was only .6 chips or like $10/hand, cuz there were only 3 of us.  

That's the issue that impacts me the most, though the high withdrawal threshold definitely impacts more players and I don't understand why we have to wait until "early '18" (which could be a vague way of saying late March for all I know) for these changes.  It begs the question: should we stop playing until "early '18"?    

New client should be ready for alpha testing soon and maybe it cost a lot of money to produce.  Management has told me that in combination w other key changes that - no more tablestarter, flat rb based on krill, lower rake, consistent and varying promos, larger presence in the community/social media - this new client will be a game-changer.  

Now that we know they could lower rake and withdrawal threshold within 12 hours, I can see why people are frustrated.

Gotcha, wasn't trying to be a dick about finances and nobody has stated your request for lower withdrawal amount is unreasonable.  But posting over and over about it in such a short time is not going to help your cause I'd guess.  Have you tried emailing support?

I emailed support about a bunch of stuff and learned a fair amount in less than one day.

Yes, this is the pretty obvious answer.  If people aren't willing to get 20 chips on the site to cashout, just make them pay the fees.

Biggest problem (again) is rake.

It's Sunday afternoon in the US and there is ONE game running at the lowest stakes.  That may be because a 2/4 limit game with 4 players pays up to $10/hand in rake lol!

From what I've heard, they will be decreasing rake soon, possibly doing away with tablestarter (which is also a good idea, as right now there is no incentive for a 4th player to join a mid stakes or high stakes game), and increasing their presence in the community (heard that before) and getting a new client ready at beginning soon (also heard that before).

Wavrachal, I think you can take the tin foil hat off - they arent keeping your money for the interest lol and anybody can cashout within hours.  Just deposit a little more to get to 20 chips and then cash it right out if it's such a big deal. 

BTC is almost 12k and as sweet as a BTC only site was when BTC was $300 and rewards program was better than making SuperNovaElite on Stars, they havent been able to keep up w BTC price movements to properly rake and monitor games.

Some thoughts/possible solutions:

1) Min withdrawals - Reduce minimum withdrawal from 20 chips to 10 chips or make players pay fees below 10 chips, like the fiat sites.  It's unrealistic to ask for much more imo, as it's highly unlikely a small site will pay processing fees w a small player base.  carbon charges 5% on BTC payouts, betcoin charges nothing.  10 chips favors the players as compared to the current situation and shouldn't put them out of business I hope.

2) Freeroll stuff - doesn't really help the site much, draws in players who won't rake much.  Sure, they need to offer some refreshing promos every now and then, which they haven't really done since ending the leaderboard, but freerolls on small sites are big net losers.  There's just no upside to run a bunch of them.  Use promos to incentivize high rake players without completely neglecting the micros.  Swc has to plenty to improve upon, but as in the rest of the business world, the biggest spenders should have the biggest voice.

3) Rake - yet again, as much as BTC-only has been great for BTC investors and the site, it has had a discouraging effect on ring games above .50 chip/1 chip fixed limit and below 10 chip/20 chip fixed limit.  Seals rake structure is a victim of BTC price.  1 chip/2 chip fixed limit = 10/20 usd and the rake cap HU on seals is $4, 3 handed it's $5, 4+ is a laughable $7. On Stars, ring games at 10/20 USD have a cap of $2.  This needs constant attention and re-evaluation, much like the (free) minimum withdrawal amount.  OFC (which I'm not familiar with) gets plenty of action.  Whatever they are doing to pick up that market share of rake needs to be injected into their ring cash games and yes, even the HU cash games.  The tourneys (which I'm not too familiar with) seem to offer very reasonable rake.  I'm ignorant as to how else tourney offerings could be improved, generally.

They can't change the rake or min payout amount daily based on BTC price, but when players who pay rake are discouraged from playing due to these factors, it is something worth paying attention to.  As far as rake goes, I know they've really tried to keep up, but my sense is that there aren't a lot of successful poker minds (maybe none?) employed by seals to really understand the minutiae of this stuff and how important it is to the ecology of the site.  While Glitch and support were extremely responsive to request for rake changes within 12 hours of the previous stink wrt high rake, this stuff needs to be monitored in a professional fashion.

Management is pretty secretive.  Maybe that's smart, given what happened to a previous owner/spokesperson.  Very few people know who owns the site or what their real plans are for the future.  We don't know if they're experienced poker business professionals (probably not) or just business people w this site as just one small item of a huge portfolio, or a bunch of stoners in a basement in Montana (probably not).  But it does lead one to believe they think this site is a self-driving car, when it really is a 6 spd manual.

I always lol inside when I hear "when miconn used to run the site . . . things were different in this way.  . .  ."

Any day he's going to pop into the thread and tell the world how he still runs the site and the gov't can go fuck themselves.  And he's got a couple bazookas and a mound of coke in front of him ready to rock and roll when they run in.  I just know it.  Cuz that would be the smart play and all.

That'd be like me asking for the rake to be lowered just so I could get action and lose some chips.  Ok, so maybe it's not exactly like that, but you get the point.

The main issue I had was the unbeatable rake.  They fixed that.  I got my BCC and of all the (losing) pots I played this past week, none were overraked.

The mid-stakes mix games are slowly starting to gain steam, now that the rake caps were cut in half.  There are other issues that people are alluding to, but I don't understand what they are.  I can access my HHs from a folder.  Is it that people can't play from Macs?  I guess after all the scammy sites I've played on, my low bar has been set at 1) player funds are safe 2) games are secure and fair (rake) 3) the games I want to play are spread 4) traffic

I'm happy w 3.5/4 of those items currently and like everybody else, I'm hoping the latest screw up isn't right around the corner.  But unless I'm missing other major issues, this site seems better than the rest.  Tell me a better site for US player and I'll go play there.   I've tried most of them and they don't care about poker (trying to funnel poker players into casino/sportsbook instead), support isn't accessible, or the games are filled w nitty bots (WPN).   

I guess I'm not in tune w the frustration over client/software upgrades because I'm a tech noob and most in the BTC space prob aren't, so their frustration goes right over my head.  I don't have DC and that's mostly what I care about wrt software.

So it looks like swc did exactly what they said they were gonna do: process the refunds in a matter of days.

I'm very happy to receive my 279 chips (most were from the 200/400 days back in '15 I presume). 

While they may seem non-corporate, understaffed at times, and I'm guessing they're playing as hard as they're working, it's hard not to root for the antithesis of the calculating, greedy sites that permeate the online landscape.  They stand for everything AmayaStars seems to stand against (for better and for worse).

None of us owe them shit for handling this.  Not even a thank you.  Poker is not a team sport or a team business, but I certainly hope that with all the rec players looking for a place to gamble while they are watching football, we can at least point them in swc's direction.  BTC is in the mainstream now as we all have realized from our co-worker/cousin/parents/baby's mamas asking about it.  Fucking Floyd Mayweather is promoting ICO's.  BTC-only should thus no longer be a deterrent for these recs.

They have always honored their word.  They have the lowest rake around and a tablestarter element to help get games going.  They offer games nobody else does, from the smallest of micros to the highest of nosebleeds, and in almost any variant you can imagine. 

Hope to see you all at the tables with our unexpected early Xmas presents.  Cheers and thank you swc!

- Marauders80

Hey guys,

From what I've been told, support is almost finished calculating the refunds.  They will process these refunds (BCC included as swc chips) within a matter of DAYS - not weeks, months, or years, which would be unacceptable.

My initial reaction to this situation was pretty negative.  It doesn't matter whether I felt like I had a good rapport with their support/management or not.  But I'm pretty sure that they will continue to keep their word, as they have done every time I have brought concerns to them.

Obviously, every player will look at this situation thru their own lens.  But I'm concerned with results.  And if we get these refunds within a matter of days (money that those affected are certainly owed, but probably weren't expecting, simply out of ignorance), that's what will be of the utmost importance to myself.  The basic unwritten contract between operator and player, in any gaming environment, is that player will be made whole by operator in EVERY circumstance.  While time has passed, we have not been made whole yet. I wouldn't be writing this if I didn't believe we would be made whole within the stated timeframe.

So hopefully a positive outcome will result in a plethora of games once everybody's accounts are pumped up with some extra chips.  Hope swc will come thru again for us and hope to see some of you on the tables (at least the ones I can beat lol).

gl all - Marauders80

ps - maybe it's just the nature of this forum/thread, but some of you guys seem to be really going after one another.  It can be funny sometimes, but might be distracting us from our ultimate goals in this instance.  But I've never been one to stop a fight so . . .

To SWC Support:

As someone who has played mid to high stakes ring games on your site and was recently compensated 100k krill for agreeing to forgive other past "incidents", shall we say, this is a new issue that I'm disappointed to hear about  . . . from the players first.

Can you please tell us when we will receive our chips and BCC as a result of this glitch?  I've played as high as 200/400 limit games when BTC was priced lower and still play 15/30+ if there is a game running.  I can only imagine how many chips I lost to this glitch while you stood by and let those that knew take advantage.

I don't think it's quite time for all the players to boycott the site until we've gotten compensated for yet another error, but I think it's something that has to get answered this month, at the very latest.

Thanks,

Marauders80