detroitdad
Royal Flush
I like @Marc Hedrick philosophy. If he takes 300 bucks to a cash game and comes home with 150. He is a 150 winner on the night!
Home Game Upgrade Guidance Needed. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter codeman00
- Start date
OP
OP
codeman00
Flush
Our work game has always had a short 2-2.5 hr tournament and then cash afterwards for the rest of the night. Agreed on the 6 players for a cash game but that’s only if they are all committed to stay. I don’t mind if we end up with 6 at 2am, but starting w 6 is not a good recipe for us.
I appreciate the limit idea but that was tried and shot down on one of the other pages in this thread. It just didn’t work for our group.
Poker Zombie
Royal Flush
^^^ This sounds like my ideal game!
OP
OP
codeman00
Flush
TheOctogan,
I definitely appreciate the advice on how to tweak our game. My intention is a bit opposite though since I tend to want to reduce complication for the sake of playing more serious poker. I enjoy the game itself moreso than the comraderie, etc. There are a couple of others in our group like that, but not that many.
I did learn one valuable lesson in regards to our high hand pot... Everyone another game that I go to puts $2 in each for the high hand of the night, valid for both the NLHE tournament and NLHE cash. It's fun and works well. I implemented the same for my work poker night and it worked well before. This time though, someone noted that they didn't think it was right to do it for the tournament (even though we had done the high hand for the tourney before). I didn't want to argue about it so we waited to collect for the High Hand before cash.
Well, we started off in cash as usual playing NLHE and Omaha. But as we lost players down to 6, per our list of games we can play (based on number of players), we have Kings and Littles as an agreed upon game. It's a version of 5 Card Draw with wild cards, btw. Well, the person that had the high hand of a straight flush now can easily be beat by 5 of a kind and there was nothing in the rules that said that Omaha and Holdem are the only games valid for the high hand. Man did I screw that up. We took a poll and everyone agreed that per our rules Kings an Littles counted as a game, the high hand was achieved at five aces, and the straight flush player lost the $20 high hand pot. That was my bad and I still feel bad about it. I think we're going to drop the high hand pot for now on or stipulate that it's only for typical Omaha, BigO, and Holdem games only. And I don't see us having a bad beat jackpot for that reason either. Less complication is better sometimes.
I definitely appreciate the advice on how to tweak our game. My intention is a bit opposite though since I tend to want to reduce complication for the sake of playing more serious poker. I enjoy the game itself moreso than the comraderie, etc. There are a couple of others in our group like that, but not that many.
I did learn one valuable lesson in regards to our high hand pot... Everyone another game that I go to puts $2 in each for the high hand of the night, valid for both the NLHE tournament and NLHE cash. It's fun and works well. I implemented the same for my work poker night and it worked well before. This time though, someone noted that they didn't think it was right to do it for the tournament (even though we had done the high hand for the tourney before). I didn't want to argue about it so we waited to collect for the High Hand before cash.
Well, we started off in cash as usual playing NLHE and Omaha. But as we lost players down to 6, per our list of games we can play (based on number of players), we have Kings and Littles as an agreed upon game. It's a version of 5 Card Draw with wild cards, btw. Well, the person that had the high hand of a straight flush now can easily be beat by 5 of a kind and there was nothing in the rules that said that Omaha and Holdem are the only games valid for the high hand. Man did I screw that up. We took a poll and everyone agreed that per our rules Kings an Littles counted as a game, the high hand was achieved at five aces, and the straight flush player lost the $20 high hand pot. That was my bad and I still feel bad about it. I think we're going to drop the high hand pot for now on or stipulate that it's only for typical Omaha, BigO, and Holdem games only. And I don't see us having a bad beat jackpot for that reason either. Less complication is better sometimes.
JustinInMN
4 of a Kind
Tbh, if 50 is the comfort point for your players in a night .25-.50 just won't be as healthy as you like. If limit is not an option, I think you should probably try .25-.25 with a buy in of 25. That way, you know these players are good for two buy ins and not trying to single stack nit it. Make that your main game for the social players and just invite the serious players for .25-.50 or .50-1.
OP
OP
codeman00
Flush
Another poker night in the books...therefore, another report to share.
We had 11 people for the $20+$5 bounty tournament. It's the same turbo format and we squeezed everyone at one table. Nothing really to report except it was unpredictable just like every tournament we have. My friend that won was down to one chip and made a huge comeback.
Cash - that's where things are always interesting. There were a couple of new faces, related to the hosts. I figured this would ensure that we wouldn't end early. Same game format...$40 buy-in $0.25/$0.50 NL Holdem, Omaha, O8 and Big O (with a couple more games added in as players left). We started with 10 players. We did lose players slowly during the night mainly due more to losing their original $40 buy in more so than it just being late. There are a few of us that will keep buying in no matter what (if needed) but most are set at their original $40. In some hands, I secretly cringe when one of the one buy-in players are all in...I'm just hoping they win (unless it's against me) because I know we're going to lose a player if they lose. For the most part, those players survived much of the night with one busting out every hour or two to keep us going to about 3AM where we had 5 players left. I, of all people, had to call the game end since i wanted to wake up at somewhat of a reasonable hour. 9 hrs of poker....I'll call that a win.
It was interesting that we played Big O almost exclusively all night for cash. That was a first. it was dealers choice from the list but no one every changed. Everyone enjoyed it for a change and everyone is learning how to play it better now that we keep playing the same games instead of playing the crazy games of our early days. I also still feel like if many get busted quick, we're going to be short quick and the night will end early... The main thing that holds us together is to always have the 4 main players and always start with 10-11 players...that usually keeps us going in some capacity until at least 2AM.
I will have to say that I'm actually preferring this poker night now over my other regular NLHE game....or lets say its a nice change of pace. We actually play poker now rather than screw around. We don't have to explain rules all of the time, try to figure out what game we are playing, or worry about who didn't pay their ante. And we're playing Omaha versions. So much more thinking and chaos in that game... A real challenge.
We had 11 people for the $20+$5 bounty tournament. It's the same turbo format and we squeezed everyone at one table. Nothing really to report except it was unpredictable just like every tournament we have. My friend that won was down to one chip and made a huge comeback.
Cash - that's where things are always interesting. There were a couple of new faces, related to the hosts. I figured this would ensure that we wouldn't end early. Same game format...$40 buy-in $0.25/$0.50 NL Holdem, Omaha, O8 and Big O (with a couple more games added in as players left). We started with 10 players. We did lose players slowly during the night mainly due more to losing their original $40 buy in more so than it just being late. There are a few of us that will keep buying in no matter what (if needed) but most are set at their original $40. In some hands, I secretly cringe when one of the one buy-in players are all in...I'm just hoping they win (unless it's against me) because I know we're going to lose a player if they lose. For the most part, those players survived much of the night with one busting out every hour or two to keep us going to about 3AM where we had 5 players left. I, of all people, had to call the game end since i wanted to wake up at somewhat of a reasonable hour. 9 hrs of poker....I'll call that a win.
It was interesting that we played Big O almost exclusively all night for cash. That was a first. it was dealers choice from the list but no one every changed. Everyone enjoyed it for a change and everyone is learning how to play it better now that we keep playing the same games instead of playing the crazy games of our early days. I also still feel like if many get busted quick, we're going to be short quick and the night will end early... The main thing that holds us together is to always have the 4 main players and always start with 10-11 players...that usually keeps us going in some capacity until at least 2AM.
I will have to say that I'm actually preferring this poker night now over my other regular NLHE game....or lets say its a nice change of pace. We actually play poker now rather than screw around. We don't have to explain rules all of the time, try to figure out what game we are playing, or worry about who didn't pay their ante. And we're playing Omaha versions. So much more thinking and chaos in that game... A real challenge.
Jonesey07
4 of a Kind
Glad you guys had a good time!
Jimulacrum
Full House
Just came across this thread via today's update and read it start to finish. Good stuff. It reminds me a little of my poker experience, growing up playing nutty wild-card games and Acey-Deucey on the kitchen table with my family, using piles of change everyone had accumulated since the last game. And getting nice and wasted too, let's not forget.
I tried to introduce NLHE to my family too, and one of the big challenges was that it was just way faster-paced and more money than they were comfortable playing with. It was a fun novelty at first—especially getting to make big bets and go all-in instead of trickling $0.10 and $0.20 at a time—but it lost its luster after everyone noticed that I was utterly crushing every game. Took a while, since we only play 3 or 4 times a year maximum, but eventually NLHE died down and we went back to "regular poker," as they call it.
I realized after a while that I ought to leave well enough alone. Some folks simply will not play a game like NLHE long-term. In the case of my family, it was bad for the game, and I'm glad we switched back. I've had my miscellaneous NLHE games over the years, and I play a wide variety of other games, but the occasional kitchen-table games with my family, complete with people adding on out of pocket and games that have 15 betting rounds, will always hold a special place in my heart.
I'd still be fine with playing those games, by the way. There are some variants I don't especially like, but characterizing them as "luck-based games" isn't entirely accurate. How much luck factors into a game depends on the skill difference among the players, and from what codeman00 has said, his players were just throwing money around. There was plenty of profit to be made. Like most good things, it takes patience and experience. Just because there isn't a book telling you how to beat Follow the Queen doesn't mean it's unbeatable. There are even ways to squeeze a nice edge of out games like Acey-Deucey / In Between if you put your mind to it. Games like that were all poker was to me from like 15 until my early 20s, and I was (and still am) one of the only consistent winners in the game, even if my wins only cover my gas money.
I tried to introduce NLHE to my family too, and one of the big challenges was that it was just way faster-paced and more money than they were comfortable playing with. It was a fun novelty at first—especially getting to make big bets and go all-in instead of trickling $0.10 and $0.20 at a time—but it lost its luster after everyone noticed that I was utterly crushing every game. Took a while, since we only play 3 or 4 times a year maximum, but eventually NLHE died down and we went back to "regular poker," as they call it.
I realized after a while that I ought to leave well enough alone. Some folks simply will not play a game like NLHE long-term. In the case of my family, it was bad for the game, and I'm glad we switched back. I've had my miscellaneous NLHE games over the years, and I play a wide variety of other games, but the occasional kitchen-table games with my family, complete with people adding on out of pocket and games that have 15 betting rounds, will always hold a special place in my heart.
I'd still be fine with playing those games, by the way. There are some variants I don't especially like, but characterizing them as "luck-based games" isn't entirely accurate. How much luck factors into a game depends on the skill difference among the players, and from what codeman00 has said, his players were just throwing money around. There was plenty of profit to be made. Like most good things, it takes patience and experience. Just because there isn't a book telling you how to beat Follow the Queen doesn't mean it's unbeatable. There are even ways to squeeze a nice edge of out games like Acey-Deucey / In Between if you put your mind to it. Games like that were all poker was to me from like 15 until my early 20s, and I was (and still am) one of the only consistent winners in the game, even if my wins only cover my gas money.
This one is called regularly in my dealers choice games. It's the only wild card game we play.
Old State
Full House
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2016
- Messages
- 3,445
- Reaction score
- 5,695
Just read this thread. First observation is that I’m am shocked there are that many people left that prefer wild card poker. I haven’t played in a game like that since 1998. With the poker boom I figured everyone was converted to straight poker.
Also, as I have said many times before, the biggest threat to the continued popularity of cash poker is the adoption of no limit vs limit since ~2004-2005. People played limit holdem for 100 years without complaining but now somehow it’s “boring”. Ridiculous. People just need to learn how to play it properly.
Getting new players to play cash was far easier when limit poker was the norm. I wish I could get my guys to play it but I can’t.... even though it all but destroyed our regular weekly game many years ago. Guys all sudden could only show up every month if that.
Limit poker allows new players some time to learn the game without the prospect of getting stacked in one hand.
Also, as I have said many times before, the biggest threat to the continued popularity of cash poker is the adoption of no limit vs limit since ~2004-2005. People played limit holdem for 100 years without complaining but now somehow it’s “boring”. Ridiculous. People just need to learn how to play it properly.
Getting new players to play cash was far easier when limit poker was the norm. I wish I could get my guys to play it but I can’t.... even though it all but destroyed our regular weekly game many years ago. Guys all sudden could only show up every month if that.
Limit poker allows new players some time to learn the game without the prospect of getting stacked in one hand.
TheOctagon
Two Pair
I'm trying to figure out how to introduce limit as well in a cash rotation. I don't know what will peel people away from the volatility of NLHE. It's 100% a product of the poker boom. If it's not fit for TV how could it possibly be fit to play in any way, shape, or form, right? (n) :thumbsdown:
JustinInMN
4 of a Kind
Limit doesn't have to mean small money.
I have a nickel ante (or nickel-dime blind depending on the game) dealer's choice game with my uncles but we do play Omaha hi low split with .25-.50 limit.
I think doubling the blinds gets you a similar game size. So if you are used to .25-.50 nl, make the blinds .5-1 and play 1/2 limit, for example.
But it's tough, there's just so little interest in anything that's not nlhe as seen on TV.
Old State
Full House
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2016
- Messages
- 3,445
- Reaction score
- 5,695
It’s hard to move people back especially if they never played limit. That said, even my old poker friends that used to only play limit cash poker won’t go back because they insist they “can’t win enough”. This despite the fact many of them actually lose a ton at NL.
Limit poker still favors better players and actually cuts down on the chances that bad player gets lucky. Sure you can’t stack people in one hand but you can absolutely bleed them out slowly. I definitely had a much more consistent win rate in limit as the luck factor is cut down. When you get a run of bad cards or beats there is less down side in limit. You won’t lose your stack by getting all in on the turn with the nut flush only to have the river pair and the set that called you fills up.
I’m pretty sure NL betting came first but was quickly replaced but limit betting in popularity because of this. NL poker was reserved to tournaments for decades for a good reason.
While it may be near to impossible to get seasoned casino style players to switch, newer players may be more willing. That’s what the OPs group sounds like
Jimulacrum
Full House
I feel the same way about limit versus NL, except IMO, it's not about the volatility of NLHE. In fact, it's the opposite. NLHE is not volatile enough.
While it's possible for the occasional suckout to rob you of a huge pot, that doesn't mean NLHE is inherently a high-variance game. When played with a mix of low- and high-skill players, the high-skill players will reliably crush the low-skill players session after session. It can become high-variance when played among people of equal skill, because the results will be based on chance, but that's not usually the case. Even if you start with a bunch of fish, one or two players will eventually improve.
Even if they don't know it, the weaker players want variance. That's what lets them go home with a pocket full of cash once in a while. And that's what limit poker offers more than NL. The edge is smaller for a skilled player, and though it sounds counter-intuitive, that's what the skilled players should want—unless their goal is to make the fish sick of (losing at) poker and break the game.
Jimulacrum
Full House
That's a good rule of thumb for converting from NL to limit. It can vary a bit, but in your average game that doesn't play obscenely deep-stacked or anything, it should work.
The tricky thing is finding the games that will get people to play. It's kinda pointless to switch from NLHE to LHE. You need something more interesting, more exciting. Something that will build huge pots and have people hooting and hollering. And you absolutely need some action players; there's nothing more tedious than a limit game full of nits.
Personally, I'm a big fan of playing the circus games fixed-limit. O8, Big O, SOHE, Dramaha, Scrotum, Tahoe, Criss-Cross, whatever. Even stud variants can be fun. It's also a great training ground for players who might later want to play the same games pot-limit or no-limit but aren't ready to dive in yet. More importantly, these games are wild and full of action. People will be dragging massive pots, and there will often be split pots, so that more than one person gets to stack chips at the end of a hand. It takes some time to introduce the rules, but it's all good once people get going.
Of course, some of your players will whine about missing the "purity" of NLHE or whatever, but they will mostly be your semi-skilled TAGs who play a basic strategy that works against fish, but they can't adjust to new games. And that's awesome for your game, because it will spread the money around better, instead of letting only a handful of players win with any regularity.
EDIT: Don't forget Draw variants. Especially with three drawing rounds, they can be big action games, and everyone is familiar with Five Card Draw.
TheOctagon
Two Pair
Right. This is the mathematically correct observation about NLHE, but the counterintuitive perception from the players who crave action or excitement or "danger" or whatever or think they're somehow more skilled when they, to use a MMA analogy, can flash KO someone instead of picking them apart with technique and a good ground game. I get wanting to play for stacks: it makes the winner feel like a boss. It makes the loser want to flip the table - especially, and most importantly, when there's a major suckout or a weaker player is chasing a beat draw to someone's made hand. There's no lesson there. The lesson is "don't play NLHE with this jerk" instead of "maybe don't call down to the river with 3 to a flush and middle pair when he's been betting the whole time". In limit, that's a slap on the wrist and useful information. In No Limit, you're already in the kitchen looking for your next beer before you catch a cab home.
Ironically, we play a lot of badugi. And, against my requests, most people want to play pot limit! It's madness. I'm probably going to insist we play limit badugi next time, but we'll see how hammered the crew is by the time the cash game gets going - it may be moot at that stage.
Jimulacrum
Full House
Also unfortunate is that big-bet poker is more likely to spur accusations of cheating, accurate or not. Those big losses that leave a guy mumbling to himself may also leave him feeling like he got fleeced unjustly, and he may invent all kinds of scenarios in his head to explain it.
I say this as someone who was accused of cheating by some moron who brought two rolls of quarters to a $0.25/$0.25 NLHE game. One of the worst players I've ever sat with, and worse, we had to repeatedly remind her of basic rules like betting order. She concocted this story where we were using marked cards and special glasses to see what she had. She didn't trust plastic cards in particular because HOW COME YOU PEOPLE AREN'T USING BICYCLES?! Somehow the entire game was in on it, involving 5–6 hours of our time and hundreds of dollars in specialized equipment, so that we could all walk away with less than $10 each. Half of it in quarters. She was dead serious and threatened to involve law enforcement.
(If you're interested in this story, check out this thread: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/24/home-poker/cheating-accusation-against-me-1373496. It's pretty hilarious. Includes all of her emails in full.)
Badugi is a blast pot-limit, with the right crew. It's generally better fixed-limit, though.
TheOctagon
Two Pair
It is easily one of the most popular and fun games we play. I don't necessarily mind it pot limit, I just think limit would be even MORE fun because we'd be in cheap multiways trying to see whose Badugi came out on top (bottom?). That's a riot.
That's incredible. I'm going to read the account right now.
On another note, I think the main thing that gets people a little off their game, and I'll admit I introduced the circus games poorly when we first played, was just not knowing the rules. I had sent A LOT of information about the formats ahead of time, but I realized nobody read that crap. So, now, I'm going to make it clear what we're playing ahead of time in a simple way (I sent a poll, everybody can see the results - total transparency) and I'm going to keep the rules cards right on the table so if someone forgets the betting rules, for example, they can just fold a hand and look at that real quick instead of stopping the game and frustrating people.
Jimulacrum
Full House
I've said this plenty of times, but @abby99's cards are a godsend for this. At my main circus game, we keep a stack of cards for the most commonly played games on the table for easy reference (and the rest tucked away but quickly accessible).
OP
OP
codeman00
Flush
We had another poker night this past Friday and I would consider it a success. Our own @Jonesey07 was able to join us for the event and he brought a few poker chips (used as card protectors) that I had never seen in person. Aurora Start sample set...awesome set!
We started out with 10 players for the "turbo" NLHE tournament paying 3 players...and nothing really to speak of as far as issues, etc...our normal tournament. Jonesey07 did have a nice river card which vaulted him into a cashing
Two players parted after the tournament which left us with 8. We played O8 and BigO mostly...but also worked in other games on the list like 7 stud, Holdem and Kings and Littles (5 card draw with wilds) as the night moved on. Going back to Holdem after playing O8 and BigO is definitely...well...kind of boring. The pots are so much smaller and less players play through showdown. If you were up or down playing the Hi/Lo games, it makes it really tough to make a recovery after switching to holdem....or even Stud. It seems like everyone is finally accustomed to and enjoying the cash game format. Jonesey07 was a nice addition...he playes more aggressive than some players are accustomed to which made a noticeable change to the cash game. There were several times that he made all in moves and the more it happened, the table dynamic shifted to larger bets and more aggression...following his lead. There are a few of the regs that play aggressive but now with and added aggressor, the change was defintely noticeable. We've come a long way from our old $5-$6 limit pots with some at $60-80 now. We started at 7PM and ended after 2AM so no complaints here.
I just want to say thanks to all that have contributed to this thread. I'm actually liking this game better than my other weekly pure NLHE game that I once opted for and its much easier for new players to join in and enjoy the cash game. All good!
We started out with 10 players for the "turbo" NLHE tournament paying 3 players...and nothing really to speak of as far as issues, etc...our normal tournament. Jonesey07 did have a nice river card which vaulted him into a cashing
Two players parted after the tournament which left us with 8. We played O8 and BigO mostly...but also worked in other games on the list like 7 stud, Holdem and Kings and Littles (5 card draw with wilds) as the night moved on. Going back to Holdem after playing O8 and BigO is definitely...well...kind of boring. The pots are so much smaller and less players play through showdown. If you were up or down playing the Hi/Lo games, it makes it really tough to make a recovery after switching to holdem....or even Stud. It seems like everyone is finally accustomed to and enjoying the cash game format. Jonesey07 was a nice addition...he playes more aggressive than some players are accustomed to which made a noticeable change to the cash game. There were several times that he made all in moves and the more it happened, the table dynamic shifted to larger bets and more aggression...following his lead. There are a few of the regs that play aggressive but now with and added aggressor, the change was defintely noticeable. We've come a long way from our old $5-$6 limit pots with some at $60-80 now. We started at 7PM and ended after 2AM so no complaints here.
I just want to say thanks to all that have contributed to this thread. I'm actually liking this game better than my other weekly pure NLHE game that I once opted for and its much easier for new players to join in and enjoy the cash game. All good!
Jonesey07
4 of a Kind
We had another poker night this past Friday and I would consider it a success. Our own @Jonesey07 was able to join us for the event and he brought a few poker chips (used as card protectors) that I had never seen in person. Aurora Start sample set...awesome set!
We started out with 10 players for the "turbo" NLHE tournament paying 3 players...and nothing really to speak of as far as issues, etc...our normal tournament. Jonesey07 did have a nice river card which vaulted him into a cashing
Two players parted after the tournament which left us with 8. We played O8 and BigO mostly...but also worked in other games on the list like 7 stud, Holdem and Kings and Littles (5 card draw with wilds) as the night moved on. Going back to Holdem after playing O8 and BigO is definitely...well...kind of boring. The pots are so much smaller and less players play through showdown. If you were up or down playing the Hi/Lo games, it makes it really tough to make a recovery after switching to holdem....or even Stud. It seems like everyone is finally accustomed to and enjoying the cash game format. Jonesey07 was a nice addition...he playes more aggressive than some players are accustomed to which made a noticeable change to the cash game. There were several times that he made all in moves and the more it happened, the table dynamic shifted to larger bets and more aggression...following his lead. There are a few of the regs that play aggressive but now with and added aggressor, the change was defintely noticeable. We've come a long way from our old $5-$6 limit pots with some at $60-80 now. We started at 7PM and ended after 2AM so no complaints here.
I just want to say thanks to all that have contributed to this thread. I'm actually liking this game better than my other weekly pure NLHE game that I once opted for and its much easier for new players to join in and enjoy the cash game. All good!
I had a blast!
2 outer on the river for the cash!
I thoroughly enjoyed the game! I hadn't played cash in so long so it was a nice change of pace! I hit a couple big hands in the cash game including a balls to the wall re-raise in Omaha (KK with A-10-K-A on the board). I was hoping he didn't have A-K or A-10 and he didn't but made the call to give me a pretty healthy stack. I need to work on my mixed games however. I played pretty tight but had some run good to turn a decent profit for the night. I'd love to add some SOHE, 6 card hold'em, and pineapple to the rotation though!
OP
OP
codeman00
Flush
I'm glad you had a good time, especially after that massive drive. We did have a couple of those games on the rotation before. Actually, it wasn't a rotation, it as an all out "free for all." One game the low was 2 thru 6 and the next time it was the wheel. Games with 5-6 betting rounds or more. Too many games and the fringe players could never keep up. Hell, sometimes I couldn't even keep up. I wouldn't mind adding pineapple to the rotation and dropping 7stud...I think a similar flop game that we can put in the rotation that works with 10 players could work well.
detroitdad
Royal Flush
HOPES is a solid rotation of games. Mixes in PL and NL. The Omaha versions can be played either 4 or 5 card and with either one board or two (pending on the number of players.
NLHE
PLO
Crazy Pineapple
PLO8
SOHE
NLHE
PLO
Crazy Pineapple
PLO8
SOHE
detroitdad
Royal Flush
Yep. If the guy calling the game really wants to play it and we have 8 players. We sit out the dealer. Sucks for the guy calling it because he sits out twice (dealer +1). I figure that is his penalty for calling a game with 8 players when only 7 max can play it.
I was just thinking about this while walking the dog the other day. The cash game following my tournament is a $.25/$.50 game where we play a bunch of different games. I printed and laminated @abby99 cards, and I put them out for guys who want to look for new games to play. its a lot of fun, but we routinely will have 5 guys out of 15+ tournament players stay. Usually the guys that stay are pretty solid players, but with playing so many different games, nobody is an expert.
I was thinking, in an effort to get more guys to stay and see how much fun it is, make the next cash game a $.25/$.25 FIXED LIMIT night. That way guys that want to sit down with $25 are still getting 50 big bets and could hang around for a while to experience the madness.
Has anybody taken that route before?
I was thinking, in an effort to get more guys to stay and see how much fun it is, make the next cash game a $.25/$.25 FIXED LIMIT night. That way guys that want to sit down with $25 are still getting 50 big bets and could hang around for a while to experience the madness.
Has anybody taken that route before?
Poker Zombie
Royal Flush
Once a year we do a "special format" night, to change it up from NLHE tournaments. The cash game (.05/.10 at one table and .25/.25 at the other) intimidated a few players, so the next time we did limit - .50/$1 at one table and .75/$1.50 at the other. The Limit game went over far better with the casual players, even though one player bought in with $1000 (Yeah, I had the chips to cover a single $1000 buy-in at a .75/$1.50 limit game).
:I thought is was common practice to sit down with 660 big bets?Once a year we do a "special format" night, to change it up from NLHE tournaments. The cash game (.05/.10 at one table and .25/.25 at the other) intimidated a few players, so the next time we did limit - .50/$1 at one table and .75/$1.50 at the other. The Limit game went over far better with the casual players, even though one player bought in with $1000 (Yeah, I had the chips to cover a single $1000 buy-in at a .75/$1.50 limit game).
JustinInMN
4 of a Kind
You mean blinds of .25-.25 and limits of .25/.50 I assume?
But yes I think that's certainly worth a try.
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account and join our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
