UB a good place to start?

[Wyvver]

Until I have some spare money to make a first deposit Ill use the time to look at the different poker sites.

I think I played nearly all the better known ones know (playmoney and freerolls), and I kinda liked UB the most.

What do you think is a good site to start at, if the most important things for me are:

- Minitable view
- Micro games (both for NL and Limit, 0.01/0.02 games)
- Slow tournament structure (1500 starting stack and blinds every 15min at least)
- No higher than average rake (10% for tourneys)
- good deposit bonus (I will only deposit like 50$, but every bit counts )
- Both full games and short handed games (at some sites there are only short handed tables at certain limits)
- A good mix of players, and enough players at european peak times
- Nice selection of MTT tourneys and satellites

At first I was sure I would chose PokerStars, but they dont have a minitable view as far as I can see, and no deposit bonus which is both kinda important to me.

[jyms]

Ultimatebet is not the best site to start. I'm there now and can't wait to leave. The software is attractive but, the things you mention are some of the issues that are wrong. The bonus is painfully slow, such that you will not clear it in three months at micro (2NL,10NL). The MTT's are lacking at the lower stakes, they are the same time everyday. They have 100 and 200 seat S&G's but they take forever to fill up(sometimes and hour) and they are all short stacked at the ring tables (everyone buys- and rebuys at the minimum). It is a nice site, very comfortable but not the best to play micro. Check Party for the first 45 days, but not S&G's, and pokerstars. They have great micro stakes and tourneys. Both these sites have plenty of euro time players. And forget about that neat little minitable veiw on ultimate. after a while it's really uncomfortable and never feels like poker.

[DickieBets]

I personally prefer PokerStars.

I haven't played for a year or so on UB, but here's what I noticed:

PS == PokerStars.

PS .01/.02 NL has $5.00 Stacks vs. $2.00 on UB - so if you play tight/solid poker you are rewarded more. PS also has .02/.05 NL which is a more gentle step up than directly to .05/.10 NL.

I found the $1.00 SitnGos on UB to be very frustrating since players just don't care about $1.00.

For some reason I was far more successful on PokerStars $5.50 SitnGos and if I played them along with 1 or 2 small stakes NL games my BR rarely went down.

There are .05/.10 and .10/.20 Limit games on PS in case you ever feel like playing Limit. UB has .01/.02 Limit - which is a waste of time or .10/.25 Limit - which can hurt a $50.00 BR.

UB software was more buggy - don't know if it's improved or not.

If you use PokerTracker - it works a little easier with PockerStars - in UB - you need (or at least you used to need) another application running to read your handhistories or have UB email them to you - which was a nuisance.

The only thing nicer about UB was the miniscreens - although they take some getting used to .

Martin

[Wyvver]

hmm is there any way to reduce the size of the PS table windows?
does PS never give a deposit bonus or just not at the moment?

[jyms]

With a fifty dollar deposit I would start at stars and grind it up at micro. Forget the bonuses. Take it from someone who has almost lost his roll a few times now trying to clear bonuses instead of grinding. If I could do it all over I would stay at stars micro till $500 then look to make the bigger deposit bonus money. I have ssasted hundreds of dollars in first deposit bonuses by depositing $50 instead of $500.

[Wyvver]

Okay thanks alot for the help, I guess Im gonna deposit at stars then.