[CoinPoker] - Official - Bringing the Game Back to Players

A filter would be nice to eliminate 6m players constantly joining my HU table and leaving after a hand. I thought your site had connection issues because so many players joined then it said they were disconnected. Later i realized if you leave before the hand starts it starts without you and says your disconnected.

CoinPoker has been heavily censoring critical voices towards them on their discord and sites their company have bought, we'll see if 2+2 still has some integrity left:

2+2 has accepted ads for the first time since 2021 by CoinPoker (plastered everywhere) and they have bought many gaming entities that have started glazing CoinPoker ever since and delete/censor posts that point this out, such as pokerstrategy, the Escapist and others, here is a good thread about it:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/...

I would take the reviews on here, posts et al, with a huge grain of salt as a result.

bro wtf. we want the 6max players to sit. they are terrible.

We welcome criticism, but abuse towards staff isn't tolerated like on any poker site, if that was you on Discord a moment ago you're timed out for a day then you can post again. You have 1200 posts there, you aren't censored. Most other sites don't run an official thread on 2+2, we do, plus a Discord where it's overwhelmingly negative like this thread. Reddit is mostly negative too.

That's fine - generally people only post if they're unhappy, and if they're happy they're just busy playing and don't post. I'd say we give negative posts and discussion more of a platform and voice than most other poker sites do - it just can't cross the line into abuse. We take all the feedback on board and act on it.

2+2 have a right to accept our ads if they want to, and they did so because they consider us to have a good reputation. If you don't want to play here, no one's forcing you.

Took one day, over the Easter holiday.

Those T&Cs you posted are standard and the same as other poker sites, including the abuse one, I don't really understand this post.

We made that report in Aug 2024, it was online for quite some time but didn't receive much traffic to the link lately - i.e. players didn't seem overly concerned with it still being online. It was more about the fact we'd made that report in the first place, as a snapshot. If there's demand for it being put back up, I can pass that on - this is the first post ITT about it.

It had a live widget on it showing all the crypto holdings - having that on the site permanently has some potential privacy and security issues, that's the reason it was taken offline, combined with the low views of the report.

3 simple questions, hopefully can get some good feedback on

1) Credit card deposits
How much are the fees, FX rates and does it show up as cash advacnce on the credit card statement?

2) I travel alot and just carry my tiny Old Chromebook around usually. Wasn't able to install the software.
What should I do? Download the app and play from the app?

3) Any plans to add 8max or 9max with ante and 200bb buy in?

I’ll keep this simple and based only on actual play data from PLO5 (0.25/0.50), with a bit of PLO6.

Session 1:
Rake paid (Coin Enquiry): $270
Total rewards received (leaderboard + splash distributions + flat): $141
→ Effective return: ~52%

Session 2:
Rake paid: $146
Total rewards received: ~$74
→ Effective return: ~50%

So from real play data, my returns seem to be around 50–52%.

⸻

I’d like to clarify one specific point regarding the reward system:

Is the contribution to Infused Splash Pots included in the rake shown in Coin Enquiry (coins), and therefore part of what generates rakeback?

Or is the splash contribution taken separately and not reflected in Coin Enquiry?

I’m not making any assumptions here — just trying to understand whether the splash mechanism is already included in the tracked rake, or represents an additional cost that players cannot currently measure.

A clear answer would help a lot.

Anyways, now that that's confirmed:

Does Coin plan to publish numbers at the end of the month or smth with regards to how much they're paying out in rakeback on average for different stakes etc.? Or is the obfuscation the point?

I don’t understand what you don’t understand - you’ve terms that state clearly

That you explicitly don’t allow players from United Kingdom, USA etc etc
But you market to those players and allow them to play

That you don’t allow VPN use to circumvent restricted territories
And then a help section showing how to do just that

You’ve people posting who have accounts locked/closed and funds withheld for breaching t+c’s but not specifying which t+c’s they’ve broken (so it could be one of the ones you advocate breaking ?🤷‍♂️)

And I’ve never heard of any business using a line like “those are standard t+c’s the same as our competitors” …. That’s a crazy line to run with they are your T+c’s specific to your relationship with your customer

You differentiate your business from some competitors as you’ll take players from markets some others won’t operate in, it’s one of your USP’s and then fall back on “industry wide standard terms” … it can’t be both and the fact you’d even come out with that ? Honestly that’s Amateur hour and this isn’t people buying a pair of shoes or a jacket @$100 you position yourself regularly for high stakes players so there’s real money at play here and what exactly are they relying on ? Because it’s not trust/transparency that’s gone down the toilet this past month you’ve pushed the envelope on that one, it’s just been try on after try on and I would urge you to correct that sooner rather than later

Transparency

so dramatic about nothing. site is doing well

It's taken separately, and then there's a zero sum redistribution to players. There's a new page on the site explaining it here - https://coinpoker.com/promotions/splash-...

Then Coin adds $500k / week to the Splash pool, the 'Infused Splash Pots'.

dragonrider

They couldn't give you a straight answer on what day of the week it is at the moment .. No drama from me
You are dealing with a completely unknown entity, ambassadors mean nothing they have zero liability
There is not one public face of this company and they've been totally evasive (or argued water isn't wet) for over a month now
So you do as you like mate but the blind leading the blind isn't a game I wish to play
Peace out

Transparency

Do you enjoy a place to play with global access and player pool

Then plug the T&C's into Claude and let her explain if you're too stupid to read between the lines and understand how this type of access is possible.

But you're most likely here just to **** on them because of some agenda

I know exactly how this works and covered it in some depth before - that when everyone signs up here and accepts the t+c's your giving a legal Carte Blanche for them to keep your funds at any time with no recourse (that's what your agreeing to here "I will not do x, y, z" and immediately you play doing it - hence the need to trust them and when they carry on as they have done lately the very thing that makes this all possible (trust) evaporates - I have zero agenda and again as previously stated was a staunch supporter of Coin

If read between the lines doesn't do it for you, then how about hand in hand?

If you want a global pool you gonna have to accept T&C's written in the way that creates legal buffer for the operator.

If you're uncomfortable with that do not deposit and go play on overregulated segregated sites that have T&C's to your liking, instead of naively demanding something that is not possible.

12bb rake. Is it true, or H2N somehow misreads hh?

I’m not being naive at all - I’m well aware of what has to be done to give legal cover to anyone operating like this

The whole point (again) is if your going to take that risk (which I’ve been doing for over 20 yrs online gambling) you have to watch carefully who your dealing with … and the name can stay the same but the people behind it can change along with the trustworthiness (and when the owners change you start from zero trustworthiness rating again nothing from before counts especially with no oversight on who those owners are and their previous history/credentials)

Coin has changed hands lately … or if it hasn’t the people who were public facing are looking for plausible deniability for some reason - we’ll just go with the former

So under new ownership the whole trust issue has to be rebuilt - or at the very least studied

And my issue is if they are prepared to misrepresent a large flagship promo as they did (and didn’t buckle until a lot of pressure came to bear) that’s a thought process by them that needs challenged- because today it’s that what tomorrow ?

The level of Stockholm’s syndrome with online gamblers beggars belief sometimes if you want to talk about naivety - imagine sitting down with your wife/partner and them handing you a legal document which gave up all rights to your money in their favour if you wake up before noon any day from now on ….. but she looks you in the eyes and says it’s only for your/her protection in the event of any legal claims would you sign it ? Would you open up a bank account if the t+c’s said if you use the app or debit card they have the right to seize your funds … but don’t worry about it we won’t implement it, only protects us from some regulator … would you have money in the account ? You wouldn’t give that level of trust to a wife/partner/bank but hey in the Wild West of internet gambling not only do you do it (because you wish to play) you’d assume anyone who could see issues arising is “mad”

And yet you have some issue with a completely faceless website who a few years ago were holding $15, 000, 000 of player funds when they weren’t doing much and if they get any traction (which is what they want now seemingly at any expense with ambassador spend etc) that could easily be $100, 000, 000+ and if these totally unknown individuals behind it any day the figures don’t stack up and a bird in the hand instinct kicks in just fancied turning it off and walking away with those funds HAVING DONE VERY LITTLE LEGALLY wrong (as you’ve given them carte blanche to do so) your jumping up and down about how anyone could ever question them (because nothing like this has ever occurred in online gambling before)

So if you accept the risk because as you quite rightly say it’s the cost of being able to play the very least you should be doing to protect yourself is holding them to account for anything (no matter how small it looks as it ALWAYS starts small) that looks in any way deceptive/shady and seeing how they react - as that’s a good indicator

The ONLY reason I even post on this thread is because I really liked Coin and was hoping they would be the go to poker site, all the elements were there for that . And I’m pissed with them for even sowing seeds of doubt with the way they’ve handled themselves lately - I communicate regularly with them privately never mind here in the hope they might take on board the optics of their marketing but it doesn’t seem to get through for whatever reason nefarious or otherwise - And that’s enough for me personally not to have funds on deposit with them - but it’s for everyone to decide their own risk appetite you all have free will

Well, good, you don’t have funds on their site. Your funds are safu.

You can now move on with your life and let others to make their choice.

Instead of making comparisons between divorce, banking and on line gambling as if the options for each are comparable.

Correct and the comparison is of course skewed as the trust level required for online gambling you’d think would be greater … but the argument always appears to be is it’s far less 🤷‍♂️(and you’ve always been free to make your own choice I never stated any different but over the last 2 decades it’s been helpful to many to be forewarned)

Again, you’re wishing for an ideal world which is not possible in a current framework. And there is nothing Coin can do to accommodate your wishes. Go lobby your politicians if you’re so passionate about it. Don’t waste your passion on giving forewarnings about what’s already perfectly obvious.

I appreciate this exchange and I’m now bowing out of it, gl.

It is noteworthy that everyone who has been around for 20+ years is worried while the newbies are not.

As I was asked what exactly the problem is elsewhere, let me try to articulate it here:

CoinPoker has recently undergone a notable shift from verifiable data towards obfuscation of much of their operation.

Before this shift, you knew what you were getting: You buy CHP at price X, then you get 33% RB + whatever you finished in on the leaderboard. Simple, easy to communicate.

Then CHP was scrapped and converted into a bonus that they themselves didn't know how you would clear it (after blocking it for a month with no prior notification). They communicated it would clear at a rate of 33% rake paid / USDT received, it then turned out to be 1/10 of money wagered instead. If this is incompetence, that is worrying as well.

The RB is now 15% + LBs + splash pots, which they didn't communicate the extend of the extra fees of, they cannot tell you what the RB% would average out to etc.

Additionally we do not know how the $500k extra infused are handled. Is it an algorithm (I doubt it), a set frequency? What if the action is such that either towards the end of the week the pool is drained or there is some left? Would the drops decrease over time or would, on Sunday 23:59, all tables miraculously get the rest paid out? Will it turn over into next week's drops?

It is unclear.

So people, naturally, ask what the RB% will be that they can expect week in and week out and the rep will cherry pick high data point outliers that will happen in a system like this to create hype and cry foul when you point that out. Reacts as if you had asked him to shoot his mom when you request RB averages once a time window has elapsed where data becomes reliable and representative. If they were proud about the new numbers, if it would even out the rake increases they have done, they would happily present the data backing it up.

In conclusion: It is unserious, it is enshittification and people, rightfully so, will continue to point that out. Some of us remember when Stars scrapped the SN/SNE system 3/4 way through the year, it resembles this and caused the loss of trust and subsequent continued downfall of that site.

This only concerns rakeback, there are many other areas where communication has, in the most favorable interpretation, been lackluster and in the worst, been downright deceitful.

_____________

Yes, we do understand that they operate in a legal environment that necessitates some things to function differently from licensed operators. That's fine.

What that does not mean is that you have to start to obfuscate data or engage in deceitful communications towards your player base. That is done to maximize profit, moves towards the PVI GG business model, betrays the "for the players / community" motto they had advertised on prior and is disrespectful towards the players they have gathered with that motto.

Be shady towards the system, not the players.

It's definitely accurate, 5% rake w/ 5bb cap is going to yield double digit rake paid

It's still not clearly stated anywhere what exactly this fee is or how it is calculated. What's the deal?

There is absolutely everything coin can do about it - hence why I engaged with them and this thread
You don’t have to be in an ideal world to

1) Not misrepresent a promo and arbitrarily start renaming any promo as rakeback when everyone and their dog knows what it is - and when your pulled on it dig your heels in and argue waters not wet using your ambassadors to reinforce the misrepresentation

2) Suspiciously within hrs of a major bot scandal on another site announce a $156, 446 refund to players having identified 98 bot accounts - this is January 2026 - CoinPoker has been running from 2018 I didn’t see one mention of bot refunds up until then (and I reported accounts previously to support that had bot indicators with no response) - no publishing of these 98 bot account names (they are bots they deserve no anonymity and would be highly unlikely to hire bot lawyers) for cross referencing by the players and lo and behold this seems to have been a 100% fix for this problem that is the scourge of online poker as they don’t seem to have found anymore since (it was suggested a monthly report be published on the site - xx number of bots found this month, usernames and total refunded - that would certainly in-still confidence, bot hunting is a 24/7 realtime thing after all)

3) Provide a pin the tail on the donkey rakeback system that’s now the subject of forum and media guesswork to work out exactly what’s on offer - with CoinPoker liking and reposting favourable reports - look it’s like this if this was “best value in the sphere” you can be damn sure they’d have it laid out clearly selling it on that basis - and they will have all the math behind it that of course is guaranteed .

4) Close accounts and withhold funds stating terms and conditions breach with no clear explanation as to what the customer has done - again when the t+c’s are only written from a perspective of operator protection and a lot of it is “made to be broken” how does the customer know which ones to break and which ones not to ? Or which t+c breach has led to the loss of their funds?

5) Remove your proof of reserves page from your website after ownership change / push for more players and holding vastly larger funds - waffle like “not many visited that page” or “it could be a security risk” isn’t cutting it with me currently - the whole purpose of initiatives like that were to provide transparency and gain trust

6) Have ambassadors intervening to solve disputes - that gets lauded as a good thing why? If you’ve contacted support and been given an answer you didn’t like what’s an ambassador getting involved for ? Is support incompetent ? Or is it that supports the first level of denial but if the customers persistent and there could be negative publicity let a few slide ? Insurance industry playbook

7) Provide marketing communications on ad hoc promos throughout the month without in many cases any conditions specified (recent example customers depositing for casino bonuses only after depositing being told that promo is not available in their region etc etc that’s just bait and switch)

8) CHP bought and paid for in cash, then discontinued and not just credited back as straightforward cash … that was so easy but again the thought process consistently seems to want more from their side than what’s just straightforward and fair

9) Denying issues with vulnerabilities in launch software and again arguing with well respected poker players that waters not wet - Caitlin Comeskey “ I take my platform in poker very seriously. I don’t promote slots, table games or sports betting. I don’t pump out soulless short form slop, buy engagement or use AI to make content in any capacity. I don’t associate with people or entities that don’t align with my values & if I’m made aware of bad behavior in existing relationships, I sever ties.

Yesterday it was brought to my attention that were serious vulnerabilities with the CoinPoker software being discussed in a private discord for HS cheating. If all the other concerned citizens want to leave me holding the bag, that’s fine. I can take the heat.

I won’t be apologizing for acting in good faith to protect my followers. I’m glad CoinPoker acted quickly to resolve the issues, & their swiftness is admirable. But to say there was never a problem & call for me to apologize is not something I’m gonna take lying down. I am currently not employed by any poker site or media outlet & had no financial motivation behind my actions.

If you want proof that there were vulnerabilities in the initial launch of the desktop application, I invite you to read the thread linked below -( links then to my thread on this forum ) “

10) Issues with casino games malfunctioning and reports filed and no response or reply ever given from the “relevant department”

11) Ambassadors X accounts promoting Coin Promos and when pulled on misleading advertising ambassador admitting “I don’t actually run my X account”

Here we’ll stop here as of course it’s exactly how you say … coin have no control over any of this (well actually we’ll stop as it’s time for a swim and a pint but I might come back later for some more tomfoolery - don’t any of you get too concerned with me getting on with my life - because you’re not concerned one bit about anything that might actually affect you 😃)

If the Splashpot fee is included into those 12bb/100, it could be understandable, but otherwise it is another case like GG, when regs are playing with negative winrate and relying only on RB.