the croc Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 Re: Sharkscope missing about 30 to 40% of mine too now.4 pay games dont get counted either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staffy Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 Re: Sharkscope missing about 30 to 40% of mine too now.4 pay games dont get counted either 4 pay games do get counted. Just not all of them again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robilaruk Posted August 15, 2007 Share Posted August 15, 2007 Re: Sharkscope thanks both - what time period are we talking about, are these last week/fortnight/month/33 months etc? cheers Damo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaF Posted August 16, 2007 Author Share Posted August 16, 2007 Re: Sharkscope Boss has been in Beta since May.... So far as I know, there are no results prior to this.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robilaruk Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Re: Sharkscope Boss has been in Beta since May.... So far as I know' date=' there are no results prior to this....[/quote'] Thanks matey - so i have only played 156 games since May - hmmmm its very up to date then! LOL Still its nice to see that they are working on it and I am sure that I can get some use out of the 5 free searches a day cheers Damo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devil tish Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 Re: Sharkscope ey up guys and gals been playing $3 speed on paradise tonight. did ok, made about $45 profit. what does roi mean? is it good to be plus? gaf can u post mine up if u still have the free trial m8? used my 5 searches in one game!!! one guy -$99, one brand new, one -$34, one $-15. got a bit of confidence from this and won the game! cheers tish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slapdash Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 Re: Sharkscope what does roi mean? is it good to be plus? roi = return on investment. E.g., if you spent $1000 on buy-ins and made a net profit of $100, your roi would be +10%. So yes, it's good to be plus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devil tish Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 Re: Sharkscope roi = return on investment. E.g., if you spent $1000 on buy-ins and made a net profit of $100, your roi would be +10%. So yes, it's good to be plus. cheers sd:ok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devil tish Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 Re: Sharkscope oops Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slapdash Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 Re: Sharkscope Sorry if DT's last reply looks puzzling, but I'm having problems copy-and-pasting his stats without including loads of irrelevant guff, so I deleted my post. But basically: 71 games played. Average profit: $1. Average stake: $4. Average ROI: +25%. Total profit: $65. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAM Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 Re: Sharkscope Sorry but I cannot remember where I read this :unsure but I believe Pokerstars are going to stop their data being used by the likes of sharkscope. Something about protecting their clients information and it looks like other sites will follow suit. So don't invest just yet :ok (in the meantime I will try and find the source :eyes) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morlspin Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 Re: Sharkscope PokerStars’ Policy Regarding “Rankings / Ratings” Services Distribution: Operators of Online Poker Player Ranking Sites To ensure player privacy regarding certain player statistics and financial information gathered by websites (hereinafter “Service Operator”) that collect and organize PokerStars players’ results by various means, PokerStars has devised the following rules with which such Service Operators must comply: 1. No player profitability data (i.e. ROI, net profit, etc) may be displayed on any player unless the player has explicitly opted into such display by transferring $0.03 to a prominently published PokerStars account owned by the Service Operator. This request must be acknowledged by the Service Operator by sending the $0.03 back to the player as confirmation within a reasonable time frame not to exceed 5 days. 2. Any player may choose to completely opt out of having any information about them displayed on the Service. To do so, player will transfer $0.01 to the service operator’s PokerStars account. This request must be acknowledged by the Service Operator by sending the $0.01 back to the player as confirmation within a reasonable time frame not to exceed 5 days. Note that the amount here is different, in order to distinguish an opt-out request from an opt-in request. 3. The use of the “transfer from user to Service and back again” method for opt-in and opt-out is required. This method permits these requests to be handled privately and securely without the disclosure of the player’s Email, real name, or other private information. Only the player’s PokerStars User ID is required. 4. Both the opt-in and opt-out options must be prominently displayed on the main / front page of the Service (at minimum, a normal-sized link on the front page to a more complete description elsewhere). 5. If the service’s operation pre-dates the establishment of these guidelines, there shall be no “grandfather clause” for existing data. 100% of historical profitability data must be removed from view until such time as a player explicitly opts in as above. Any Service Operator found to be in violation of these rules risks having their access to PokerStars’ game client restricted and/or the service impeded, including but not limited to the warning of players who access the Service while the PokerStars client is open. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAM Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 Re: Sharkscope Thats seems a bit more legal than the statement I saw but I guess it is the same thing, cheers morl :ok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaF Posted August 28, 2007 Author Share Posted August 28, 2007 Re: Sharkscope Is this the article you saw? PokerStars Prohibit Player Database Service Information August 03, 2007 Barry Carter PokerStars have announced that they will be prohibiting data mining web sites, like Sharkscope and thepokerdb, from displaying information about their clients in the public domain. Currently anyone can access comprehensive information about an online poker player by simply typing their user ID into one of these search engines. They reveal a players total profit/loss, average ROI, number of games played, longest winning streaks, etc. Pokerstars have issued a release to all data mining websites which states that: 1. No player profitability data (i.e. ROI, net profit, etc) may be displayed on any player unless the player has explicitly opted into such display by transferring $0.03 to a prominently published PokerStars account owned by the Service Operator. This request must be acknowledged by the Service Operator by sending the $0.03 back to the player as confirmation within a reasonable time frame not to exceed 5 days. 2. Any player may choose to completely opt out of having any information about them displayed on the Service. To do so, player will transfer $0.01 to the service operator's PokerStars account. This request must be acknowledged by the Service Operator by sending the $0.01 back to the player as confirmation within a reasonable time frame not to exceed 5 days. Note that the amount here is different, in order to distinguish an opt-out request from an opt-in request. 3. The use of the "transfer from user to Service and back again" method for opt-in and opt-out is required. This method permits these requests to be handled privately and securely without the disclosure of the player's Email, real name, or other private information. Only the player's PokerStars User ID is required. 4. Both the opt-in and opt-out options must be prominently displayed on the main / front page of the Service (at minimum, a normal-sized link on the front page to a more complete description elsewhere). 5. If the service's operation pre-dates the establishment of these guidelines, there shall be no "grandfather clause" for existing data. 100% of historical profitability data must be removed from view until such time as a player explicitly opts in as above. So it appears that in order for a poker players information to be readily available they have to expressly give permission for the web site to use it. This could mean that only the very successful players will be allowing their information to be accessible in the public domain. This, to an extent, would run contrary to one of the primary uses of these data mining resources; to identify and isolate weak players. Rather interestingly, the former Card Room Manager at PokerStars, Lee Jones, wrote an article a month ago about keeping anonymity in poker. He suggested that as the "Sharks" were evolving through online tools like data mining, poker tracker etc, the "Fish" were devolving because of barriers preventing them from redepositing money ie: the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. Jones inferred that with such comprehensive tools to allow weak players to be exploited the fish pool could dry up and it would be better for the entire poker community for everyone to be allowed to change their online ID at will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philossify Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 Re: Sharkscope Could basically go for allowing change of displaye id (alias) but not more than once or twice a year otherwise things would get so confusing as you'd never know who yer mates were :ok. Its always nice knowing who you are losing to :lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morlspin Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Re: Sharkscope Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slapdash Posted September 15, 2007 Share Posted September 15, 2007 Re: Sharkscope Playing STTs on Virgin, I've only just got to the stage where Sharkscope has enough data to generate a ROI v buyin graph for me (middle graph). Am I the only person in the world whose graph looks like this? :unsure Thing is, in my "Chris Ferguson" experiment on UltimateBet, I've been struggling recently just to break even in the $0.50 and $1 STTs. :$ Should I just take out a bank loan and step straight up to the $1000 tables? :lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glceud Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Re: Sharkscope [ATTACH]4823[/ATTACH] Was looking at Sharkscope today and noticed they could combine players ids , so paid $10 to satisfy my curiosity and found 54 definite aliases of mine and put them all in one group. Big surprise was how few network games I have played as have been playing online for close to 13 years and have only played 648. Site exclusive games aren't included. Actually surprised by the profit of £399 which will be a fair bit out due to the amount of tickets won through freerolls, cash game loyalty points etc., etc. But even upping the profit by say £500/£1000 to allow for that it still gets me no were near my profit over the 13 years. Pretty chuffed with my 71 rating as that must be pretty good for such a low buy in average Doubt if my cash game profits are earth shattering either so I must have won a hell of a lot in freerolls and site exclusive games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glceud Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Re: Sharkscope ........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.