Host can't pay out everyone, what to do? (5 Viewers)

[Rhodeman77]

I will provide some more context as to why the OP was made.

I made the OP to get feedback from others about how to handle the situation, to see what the hive may have thought. The details were changed somewhat to keep it from being obvious to those in the know already. I didn't include any names to keep bias out and to get honest responses for a situation none of us had been in before.

Getting a reply from Ken like he made now, earlier would have been awesome! The post was also to serve as a warning for people that may end up in a game run on good faith when all they had been used to was cash. And I think that was accomplished.

To give context to their mindset and how David & Jay run games I will share this. When Covid shut everything down David's local home game group was playing on the pokerrrrr2 app and I was invited to play in their private club, a rake free game. We kept track of the wins/losses and had to settle up once per week. This worked fine for a little while until one of the group members couldn’t pay. I was a winner that week and messaged David to see why I hadn’t received a payment yet. He filled me in on what was going on. He and a few of the core players all pitched in and paid the winners. That player was obviously removed from the group and to make sure it didn’t happen again the group was moved to a Mavens server, and we all had to deposit money to play. So, David has been in almost the same circumstance and felt it was his obligation to make sure I, as the outsider to their regular group was paid quickly. While that game was not as big, it was still a week’s worth of $1/2 PLO/BigO losses, so it was a decent chunk of money.

I think Jay and David both realize they should have asked a lot more questions about how the game was run and especially how payouts would work. They came from a game of all cash and made assumptions based on that. Goldfish should have also communicated better how the game was run especially to new people coming from out of town to play in what they thought was a smaller home game than he normally runs. Hopefully they and everyone reading this thread will get something positive from it. I never intended this as an attack at Goldfish and am sorry it came across that way.

 

[elemeno]

I will provide some more context as to why the OP was made.

I made the OP to get feedback from others about how to handle the situation, to see what the hive may have thought. The details were changed somewhat to keep it from being obvious to those in the know already. I didn't include any names to keep bias out and to get honest responses for a situation none of us had been in before.

Getting a reply from Ken like he made now, earlier would have been awesome! The post was also to serve as a warning for people that may end up in a game run on good faith when all they had been used to was cash. And I think that was accomplished.

To give context to their mindset and how David & Jay run games I will share this. When Covid shut everything down David's local home game group was playing on the pokerrrrr2 app and I was invited to play in their private club, a rake free game. We kept track of the wins/losses and had to settle up once per week. This worked fine for a little while until one of the group members couldn’t pay. I was a winner that week and messaged David to see why I hadn’t received a payment yet. He filled me in on what was going on. He and a few of the core players all pitched in and paid the winners. That player was obviously removed from the group and to make sure it didn’t happen again the group was moved to a Mavens server, and we all had to deposit money to play. So, David has been in almost the same circumstance and felt it was his obligation to make sure I, as the outsider to their regular group was paid quickly. While that game was not as big, it was still a week’s worth of $1/2 PLO/BigO losses, so it was a decent chunk of money.

I think Jay and David both realize they should have asked a lot more questions about how the game was run and especially how payouts would work. They came from a game of all cash and made assumptions based on that. Goldfish should have also communicated better how the game was run especially to new people coming from out of town to play in what they thought was a smaller home game than he normally runs. Hopefully they and everyone reading this thread will get something positive from it. I never intended this as an attack at Goldfish and am sorry it came across that way.

Have a few questions to a few people that made good posts.

@Rhodeman77 why did you decide to reveal the parties involved?

@Goldfish @kk405 like others, I switched from host should bear the burden to winners/everyone absorb delinquencies pro rata. That said, do out-of-towners or special one-time guests get different treatment? For example, if some Hollywood producer attends a high stakes private NY game, wins, but a NY regular doesn’t pay, what would/should happen?

 

[Rhodeman77]

Have a few questions to a few people that made good posts.

@Rhodeman77 why did you decide to reveal the parties involved?

@Goldfish @kk405 like others, I switched from host should bear the burden to winners/everyone absorb delinquencies pro rata. That said, do out-of-towners or special one-time guests get different treatment? For example, if some Hollywood producer attends a high stakes private NY game, wins, but a NY regular doesn’t pay, what would/should happen?

Because there are some other players on this forum that play in pretty significant sized games like @doublebooyah85 that I know had been invited to also play at Goldfish’s game. I also know he normally plays with cash in/ cash out and didn’t want to chance someone else having a similar experience without having all of the information available to them.

 

[doublebooyah85]

What can I say, I get invited to games!

 

[kk405]

Have a few questions to a few people that made good posts.

@Rhodeman77 why did you decide to reveal the parties involved?

@Goldfish @kk405 like others, I switched from host should bear the burden to winners/everyone absorb delinquencies pro rata. That said, do out-of-towners or special one-time guests get different treatment? For example, if some Hollywood producer attends a high stakes private NY game, wins, but a NY regular doesn’t pay, what would/should happen?

No one gets a special treatment in my game. A non-paying dead beat is a non-paying dead beat, whether it’s his first time playing or been playing for 10 years. The only difference might be that I would give a benefit of a doubt to someone I’ve known for a long time and has always been paying … and try to collect for a much longer period of time … a newbie who decides not to pay after one game isn’t likely to pay, and it’s very likely I would declare the debt non-collectible earlier. Honestly, given the stakes involved, there are lots of nuances. One size does not fit all and not all games are managed the same way.

 

[kk405]

I used to host low stakes. Now I host medium stakes. The only difference is that most players buy in with $100 bills instead of $20s.

Same amount of paper. Same security precautions.

Where I live the people who might theoretically rob me would think a $900 was a big score. Making it $9,000 doesn't really change anything. Such criminals are desperate (typically heroin addicts) and (typically) very stupid.

In other words... If I thought armed robbery were a real concern, I wouldn't host any stakes of any size.

But I have a difficult-to-find and forbidding location; lots of cameras; players who could handle themselves in a tense situation; a trooper barracks not far away; and a game whose time, place and very existence are only known to a few people whose contacts are in my address book.

Realistically I'm more likely to get mugged in a parking lot than at my home. Sure, anything could happen. But in the universe of risks I tolerate, my game getting robbed is very low on the list.

Every time I get in my car (which is roughly 20+ times a week) I have a real chance of dying, given the idiotic ways other people drive. We can drive defensively but this is still by far the most dangerous thing most of us do. Hosting 20 games a year does not come close, risk-wise.

That’s great and it works for certain size games. But based on my experience, not in games that are 10x bigger and run twice a week for 50 weeks a year, or games that are 100x bigger, run once a week for 40 weeks a year. Dynamics of those games are just very very different.

 

[Rhodeman77]

No one gets a special treatment in my game. A non-paying dead beat is a non-paying dead beat, whether it’s his first time playing or been playing for 10 years. The only difference might be that I would give a benefit of a doubt to someone I’ve known for a long time and has always been paying … and try to collect for a much longer period of time … a newbie who decides not to pay after one game isn’t likely to pay, and it’s very likely I would declare the debt non-collectible earlier. Honestly, given the stakes involved, there are lots of nuances. One size does not fit all and not all games are managed the same way.

He meant the other way around, a one timer/out of towner shows up and wins big and the regular doesn’t pay. Are they treated the same way as the rest of the regulars, expected to eat a % of the deadbeat debt.

 

[kk405]

He meant the other way around, a one timer/out of towner shows up and wins big and the regular doesn’t pay. Are they treated the same way as the rest of the regulars, expected to eat a % of the deadbeat debt.

In our game, Everyone is treated the same way. There is no diff between the first timer or anyone else.

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

In our game, Everyone is treated the same way. There is no diff between the first timer or anyone else.

So the first timer is made aware of this before he buys in?

 

[grandmeme]

So the first timer is made aware of this before he buys in?

If he is a reg at other games, usually they are already aware. If he is new to those stakes, he is usually accompanied by a reg (who would let him know). It is rare that anyone invited to big home games "cold" turn up without knowing anyone except the host. From my experience in Australia of course.

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

If he is a reg at other games, usually they are already aware. If he is new to those stakes, he is usually accompanied by a reg (who would let him know). It is rare that anyone invited to big home games "cold" turn up without knowing anyone except the host. From my experience in Australia of course.

That’s good. This thread wouldn’t exist if the involved parties all had done that.

 

[grandmeme]

That’s good. This thread wouldn’t exist if the involved parties all had done that.

Well, all problems in the world usually stem from (a lack of) reasonable communication!

 

[Taghkanic]

That’s great and it works for certain size games. But based on my experience, not in games that are 10x bigger and run twice a week for 50 weeks a year, or games that are 100x bigger, run once a week for 40 weeks a year. Dynamics of those games are just very very different.

My game is a lot more than 10x bigger now than when I first started hosting cash.

And again, the type of dipshit petty criminals who get excited by the idea of a big score of HUNDREDS of dollars to feed their drug habit don't know what your stakes are. At most they will have heard that there is a poker game with a "lot" of cash.

Example: About 15 years ago I read about a murder of a farmer during a botched robbery. Some idiots in their teens and early 20s thought the guy was rich because he had a big farm, and imagined that he must have had a lot of cash in the house.

In truth, like many family farms his was in debt with the farmer and his wife barely paying their bills. They had like $80 on them. The robbery and murder occurred because of the stupidity of the criminals, not the actual finances of the victim.

So I think the far bigger factors as far as risk of robbery at a poker game are where you live and who your players are, not so much the stakes.

For a robbery to happen, there has to be:

(1) A specific leak of information about the game -- its existence, its location, its time, its security, means of entry and escape, whether anyone in the game carries, etc.

(2) A population of people capable of attempting an armed robbery.

If you're in a city with a lot of random eyes on every location, buildings with staff or service people, easy access to illegal weapons, ability to easily fade into crowds, etc., I think the chances are much higher that you may be robbed.

Also in a small community the odds of getting away with such a crime are very slim, even if the robbery is initially successful. Only the dumbest and most desperate tend to even contemplate it let alone try. Very different situation than an urban area with organized crime and professional criminals.

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

Well, all problems in the world usually stem from (a lack of) reasonable communication!

 

[Rakrul]

I still think crypto in advance is the best way, and I believe WW's (big) game does the same. There's no problem with rebuys, add-ons etc. I run a fairly small game ($.50/$1 and $65 re-entry tournament) and everybody transfers funds to me in advance, or brings cash on arrival, e.g. $300 and they get the equal amount in cash chips. Max buy-in for cash game is $100 so they have the rest behind and re-fill if needed.

This can also be practiced for high stakes game. Let's say it's $25/$50 with max buy in $10k (if that's a thing in high stakes games), player A transfer $30k, player B transfers $50k. Players A gets $30k in cash chips, B gets $50k and if either busts they dig out $10k from their pocket and continue. This is basically how all the high stakes streams handle it and zero workload on host/dealers (minus the crypto I guess).

If either player busts their roll they have to sit out and transfer more funds, wait for the transaction to come through and host can verify and give them more cash chips. Hopefully the players will learn to transfer enough in advance or give up when their roll is busted.

Once the game is ended, they cash out all their cash chips and gets it back in crypto.

 

[chippitydoodah]

My game is a lot more than 10x bigger now than when I first started hosting cash.

And again, the type of dipshit petty criminals who get excited by the idea of a big score of HUNDREDS of dollars to feed their drug habit don't know what your stakes are. At most they will have heard that there is a poker game with a "lot" of cash.

Example: About 15 years ago I read about a murder of a farmer during a botched robbery. Some idiots in their teens and early 20s thought the guy was rich because he had a big farm, and imagined that he must have had a lot of cash in the house.

In truth, like many family farms his was in debt with the farmer and his wife barely paying their bills. They had like $80 on them. The robbery and murder occurred because of the stupidity of the criminals, not the actual finances of the victim.

So I think the far bigger factors as far as risk of robbery at a poker game are where you live and who your players are, not so much the stakes.

For a robbery to happen, there has to be:

(1) A specific leak of information about the game -- its existence, its location, its time, its security, means of entry and escape, whether anyone in the game carries, etc.

(2) A population of people capable of attempting an armed robbery.

If you're in a city with a lot of random eyes on every location, buildings with staff or service people, easy access to illegal weapons, ability to easily fade into crowds, etc., I think the chances are much higher that you may be robbed.

Also in a small community the odds of getting away with such a crime are very slim, even if the robbery is initially successful. Only the dumbest and most desperate tend to even contemplate it let alone try. Very different situation than an urban area with organized crime and professional criminals.

 

[JustinInMN]

One of my early posts in this thread said that it is always on the host/banker to cover losses in this situation. In my context (small stakes unraked home games that are cash in cash out), I still believe that. But after reading this thread, I completely understand why that doesn't - and shouldn't - apply to all games.

It seems like there are two important things that a host should always do: have a well-defined policy for settling up between players and dealing with no-pays, and communicate that policy to the group - especially to new players. And if you're a new player in a game like this, protect yourself and always find out what the policy is up front.

I would count myself as a +1 on this understanding as well as a result of this thread.

I think Jay and David both realize they should have asked a lot more questions about how the game was run and especially how payouts would work. They came from a game of all cash and made assumptions based on that. Goldfish should have also communicated better how the game was run especially to new people coming from out of town to play in what they thought was a smaller home game than he normally runs. Hopefully they and everyone reading this thread will get something positive from it. I never intended this as an attack at Goldfish and am sorry it came across that way.

This is the question. One of the things this thread revealed is there are a lot of good PCF hosts that had no idea this method of running a game is widespread. And I truly appreciate Goldfish 's patience with that. But with that in mind, can Jay and David really be expected to ask a question they wouldn't even know they should be asking? I am sure a lot of us are now in the know if we see credit being issued in a game we start asking questions if we don't know the situation. But I think even if I can move from the position that the host is financially responsible 100% of the time, I can still say the host at the very least has a responsibility to maintain a clear communication of expectations with new players. (And honestly, based on things that were said in this thread, sounds like some of the existing players were not in sync with the host's understanding.)

Hopefully all sides have learned something. And I do sincerely appreciate this thread because I have been enlightened should I somehow get in this spot someday. (Doubtful, frankly I'll play the casino rake if I ever get in position to play these stakes.)

 

[JustinInMN]

I still think crypto in advance is the best way, and I believe WW's (big) game does the same. There's no problem with rebuys, add-ons etc. I run a fairly small game ($.50/$1 and $65 re-entry tournament) and everybody transfers funds to me in advance, or brings cash on arrival, e.g. $300 and they get the equal amount in cash chips. Max buy-in for cash game is $100 so they have the rest behind and re-fill if needed.

This can also be practiced for high stakes game. Let's say it's $25/$50 with max buy in $10k (if that's a thing in high stakes games), player A transfer $30k, player B transfers $50k. Players A gets $30k in cash chips, B gets $50k and if either busts they dig out $10k from their pocket and continue. This is basically how all the high stakes streams handle it and zero workload on host/dealers (minus the crypto I guess).

If either player busts their roll they have to sit out and transfer more funds, wait for the transaction to come through and host can verify and give them more cash chips. Hopefully the players will learn to transfer enough in advance or give up when their roll is busted.

Once the game is ended, they cash out all their cash chips and gets it back in crypto.

I would agree, but I think the takeway from this thread is not whether or not we agree that games run like this are run the best way, but what players should do/expect if we find ourselves in such a game.

 

[Rhodeman77]

I like to think that just because something has been done this way for ever doesn’t mean it can’t be improved/changed.

Technology now gives us options that didn’t exist 20 years ago. Is crypto the best option, possibly. I like the idea of it more than a bunch of people walking around with $50k+ in cash every poker game. The pros/grinders running the high stakes games probably don’t want to upset the apple cart (the whales) and feel the risk of bad debt is outweighed by the reward of the potential wins from said whales. But one would think the whales would also like some level or protection too. I’m sure they would be pissed when they finally hit a big score after many losses to have some other whale not pay that game.

 

[doublebooyah85]

Final thoughts / inputs…bc it took me awhile to even grasp what I’ve expected and encountered…

There are two types of games…

1) Mollys game style game, money is going to be deposited via wires / crypto / or credit established w a host since there is a rake. Some may bring cash. Security will be on site. As everyone had envisioned and is demanding in this thread…

2) Friendly game w friends but wealthy individuals…it’s going to be cashless and the transactions are going to wait until after the game w inherit risks we have discussed. It’s at someone’s home, they don’t want the cash there. There isn’t security.

With these friendly games, there is less risk of someone not paying bc everyone knows each other very well. These players playing $25-$25 is comparable to others playing $2-$5. So being stiffed a buy in or two of winnings is not as bad as the risk of bringing cash to the game increasing the chance of robbery and unnecessary high dollar electronic transactions prior for unwarranted attention.

If you’re playing poker 52x a year with those high limit players they don’t want to be wiring $15k every week. Now the friendly host has 52 wires a year by 10 players, that’s 500 wires a year of high dollar amounts going in and out.

I would rather be stiffed a buy in over 10 years then constantly doing large financial transactions before the game when it usually is unnecessary (bc you break even or win/lose minimal and can settle afterwards).

 

[Machine]

Discussing the meta is fine imo, and a good / valid post.

Personally, I would have preferred for the names to have stayed omitted.

There are so many facets to this whole debacle that about 80% of the forum has no clue about, and making references to the parties involved should cease.

I would point out that this thread should highlight why and how a raked game can be cast in a positive light.

I don't know why anyone would run a high stakes game with no rake. At nosebleed stakes it's not like you're going to notice it anyway, if done with the players in mind. I don't understand cashless games, especially high stakes.

 

[Rakrul]

[...]
If you’re playing poker 52x a year with those high limit players they don’t want to be wiring $15k every week. Now the friendly host has 52 wires a year by 10 players, that’s 500 wires a year of high dollar amounts going in and out.
[...]

Wouldn't this happen regardless? Or are we saying that Player A pays Player B x dollars (somehow) and Player C y dollars (somehow). I don't see how this is easier for the player? Also, it makes the whales' loss more personal. I would guess most transactions go through the house? And it's not like crypto is hard to transfer from a phone and it's faster than regular (FIAT) wires.
(I assume that whales dabble in crypto already, it might not be the case.)

Also, it is possible for the host to keep a certain amount in his hardware wallet for next week. Unlike FIAT, all transactions to and from in crypto happens in an open ledger that even we can track (if we have the address) so anyone could can see if the funds are removed from it. It does requires a lot more trust in the host and host might not want it in case baddies come home to the host to force him to transfer the funds from the wallet to another one.

The illegal clubs here in Oslo prefers that you have some funds in their "account" to minimize the amount of traffic but that's a different beast.

 

[Taghkanic]

One of the things this thread revealed is there are a lot of good PCF hosts that had no idea this method of running a game is widespread

Is it?

I've never heard of home or private game payouts handled that way.

So it never would occur to me to ask up front.

To me it's like finding out at the end of the night that winners have to buy losers an expensive bottle of bourbon. If I was then lectured, "Well it's your own fault for not asking beforehand," I'd say take a hike.

 

[doublebooyah85]

Frankly I’m done w this thread lol

No, crypto is still not at all common yet. The bull run is still to come!

 

[CraigT78]

Frankly I’m done w this thread lol

No, crypto is still not at all common yet. The bull run is still to come!

Wanna bet?

 

[JustinInMN]

Is it?

I've never heard of home or private game payouts handled that way.

So it never would occur to me to ask up front.

To me it's like finding out at the end of the night that winners have to buy losers an expensive bottle of bourbon. If I was then lectured, "Well it's your own fault for not asking beforehand," I'd say take a hike.

I think we are saying the same thing here. I have heard vaguely about these sorts of games, but I do agree, how do players ask when they really wouldn't be in position to know they should ask. I guess everyone in this thread now knows to do due diligence if you see the bank extending credit.

Before this thread I would 100% assume the host is puting in the cash to back the credit. Now I know that isn't necessarily the case and would have to evaluate personal risk if I were ever to participate in such a game

 

[aggie]

My game is a lot more than 10x bigger now than when I first started hosting cash.

And again, the type of dipshit petty criminals who get excited by the idea of a big score of HUNDREDS of dollars to feed their drug habit don't know what your stakes are. At most they will have heard that there is a poker game with a "lot" of cash.

Example: About 15 years ago I read about a murder of a farmer during a botched robbery. Some idiots in their teens and early 20s thought the guy was rich because he had a big farm, and imagined that he must have had a lot of cash in the house.

In truth, like many family farms his was in debt with the farmer and his wife barely paying their bills. They had like $80 on them. The robbery and murder occurred because of the stupidity of the criminals, not the actual finances of the victim.

So I think the far bigger factors as far as risk of robbery at a poker game are where you live and who your players are, not so much the stakes.

For a robbery to happen, there has to be:

(1) A specific leak of information about the game -- its existence, its location, its time, its security, means of entry and escape, whether anyone in the game carries, etc.

(2) A population of people capable of attempting an armed robbery.

If you're in a city with a lot of random eyes on every location, buildings with staff or service people, easy access to illegal weapons, ability to easily fade into crowds, etc., I think the chances are much higher that you may be robbed.

Also in a small community the odds of getting away with such a crime are very slim, even if the robbery is initially successful. Only the dumbest and most desperate tend to even contemplate it let alone try. Very different situation than an urban area with organized crime and professional criminals.

That’s a lot of words to say, “You’re right, I have no experience with this scenario.”

 

[elemeno]

I’m just picturing

Goldfish : Hey man! Welcome Hornet, so happy to have you here!!
Hornet : Happy to be here!!
Goldfish: Just so you know, if anyone here doesn’t settle up at the end, the winners will share the loss pro rata, ok?
Hornet: Okay…so if I lose…you’re saying…

 

[Eriks]

I’m just picturing

Goldfish : Hey man! Welcome Hornet, so happy to have you here!!
Hornet : Happy to be here!!
Goldfish: Just so you know, if anyone here doesn’t settle up at the end, the winners will share the loss pro rata, ok?
Hornet: Okay…so if I lose…you’re saying…

”Yes, yes but the players are awesome!”

 

[CraigT78]

In my game Molly takes all the buyinz.

When we win, she pays us.

When we lose, she collects.

It works for us .