LotsOfChips
Flush
(TL/DR - Cheap ass players don't want to risk any money, Cash game is dying, Tournaments are thriving, sharks are feasting, NLHE is popular, Mixed games have mixed enthusiasm. Do I reduce the cost, add more types of games, or stop worrying about trying to please everybody?)
Apologies in advance for a long post. I wanted to provide enough detail to elicit informed feedback.
Right now I am hosting online (Poker Mavens) a weekly NLHE .25/.25 Cash Game (Min $20 Max $50, Total Limit $100) on Fridays and a $20 NLHE Tournament (2 rebuy max) on Saturdays. I'm in a bit of a quandary as to how to grow the size of the games (especially the cash game), appeal to the majority of the members who are financially limited, and increase the competitive level of the play. Maybe these are incompatible goals.
The group is a mix of mostly middle of the road players (MOTR) borrowed from a long running live NLHE tournament group that can't play during COVID, and a couple of more advanced players that tend to dominate the cash game.
Most of the MOTR players are very concerned about losing too much money or playing too often, somewhat due to decreased earnings because of COVID, and somewhat because their comfort level is such that a couple of consecutive $50 losses would end up (and have ended up) with them walking away from playing in my group. The more advanced players are less concerned with financial implications and will buy in for the maximum possible, and will bet and raise aggressively. The results are somewhat predictable.
The cash game is dying, largely because the MOTR players are too skittish to want to put money at risk outside of the known fixed cost of a tournament, and a few have stopped playing after losing their entire buy in to more advanced players. It seems a challenge now to get 6 players, and a few of the remaining MOTR players will probably drop if they lose much more. I ran a Limit Mixed cash game (HE, Omaha, 7 Stud Hi/Lo, Omaha 5 Hi/Lo) one week, and several of the MOTR players played cash for the first time. I got some good feedback, but a few of the cash game regulars didn't play, because it wasn't NLHE.
The tournament is fairly healthy, with the first three STT full at 10, and the most recent a MTT at 15. I've tried a few minor variations, including a $30 Deep Stack Freeze-out, and a $40 Single Rebuy or Add-on included , but received complaints about the added cost. The add-on game was a bit of a disaster, because the software had to be configured such that both the rebuy and the add-on were optional, so several players chose not to do either, and then complained that it cost too much to add on and that the chip leader got the opportunity to "buy to add to his stack" while they couldn't afford to do so.
I recently sent out a request for feedback about the game, and for suggestions on how to improve the experience, and whether players would be willing to try other games such as Omaha. The main theme I received back was about affordability. Several players said they really enjoyed the Mixed Limit cash game, because it let them learn new games at limited financial risk. Most said that they only wanted to play tournaments. One player suggested PLO or PLO8 as a tournament (probably because he plays them on P*, and figures that he can clean up).
Right now I'm debating how to adjust things to better meet the needs of the players.
First thing I am considering is to either:
This brings up a lot of questions, and some possible regrets.
Questions:
Apologies in advance for a long post. I wanted to provide enough detail to elicit informed feedback.
Right now I am hosting online (Poker Mavens) a weekly NLHE .25/.25 Cash Game (Min $20 Max $50, Total Limit $100) on Fridays and a $20 NLHE Tournament (2 rebuy max) on Saturdays. I'm in a bit of a quandary as to how to grow the size of the games (especially the cash game), appeal to the majority of the members who are financially limited, and increase the competitive level of the play. Maybe these are incompatible goals.
The group is a mix of mostly middle of the road players (MOTR) borrowed from a long running live NLHE tournament group that can't play during COVID, and a couple of more advanced players that tend to dominate the cash game.
Most of the MOTR players are very concerned about losing too much money or playing too often, somewhat due to decreased earnings because of COVID, and somewhat because their comfort level is such that a couple of consecutive $50 losses would end up (and have ended up) with them walking away from playing in my group. The more advanced players are less concerned with financial implications and will buy in for the maximum possible, and will bet and raise aggressively. The results are somewhat predictable.
The cash game is dying, largely because the MOTR players are too skittish to want to put money at risk outside of the known fixed cost of a tournament, and a few have stopped playing after losing their entire buy in to more advanced players. It seems a challenge now to get 6 players, and a few of the remaining MOTR players will probably drop if they lose much more. I ran a Limit Mixed cash game (HE, Omaha, 7 Stud Hi/Lo, Omaha 5 Hi/Lo) one week, and several of the MOTR players played cash for the first time. I got some good feedback, but a few of the cash game regulars didn't play, because it wasn't NLHE.
The tournament is fairly healthy, with the first three STT full at 10, and the most recent a MTT at 15. I've tried a few minor variations, including a $30 Deep Stack Freeze-out, and a $40 Single Rebuy or Add-on included , but received complaints about the added cost. The add-on game was a bit of a disaster, because the software had to be configured such that both the rebuy and the add-on were optional, so several players chose not to do either, and then complained that it cost too much to add on and that the chip leader got the opportunity to "buy to add to his stack" while they couldn't afford to do so.
I recently sent out a request for feedback about the game, and for suggestions on how to improve the experience, and whether players would be willing to try other games such as Omaha. The main theme I received back was about affordability. Several players said they really enjoyed the Mixed Limit cash game, because it let them learn new games at limited financial risk. Most said that they only wanted to play tournaments. One player suggested PLO or PLO8 as a tournament (probably because he plays them on P*, and figures that he can clean up).
Right now I'm debating how to adjust things to better meet the needs of the players.
First thing I am considering is to either:
- shit-can the cash game and run a variety of low cost ($10) tournaments on Fridays instead, or
- reduce it to every second week, and on the alternate weeks run either:
- a rotation of different Limit cash games every other week (Omaha, Omaha 8, Omaha 5 H/L, etc), etc., or
- the above mentioned variety of low cost tournaments
This brings up a lot of questions, and some possible regrets.
Questions:
- How the hell do you structure a PLO or PLO8 tournament to last 3 1/2 to 4 hours (assume 12-15 players, one rebuy allowed per player, probably 50% rebuy participation).
- Given that a lot of the players aren't that familiar with PLO or PLO8, especially in a tourney format, is this just a recipe for disaster?
- Am I likely to drive away the more experienced players by axing the cash game and catering to the MOTR crowd?
- Is the rotating (not Mixed) Limit cash game concept likely to fail miserably at the cost of the currently active but threatened NLHE cash game?
- I want to nurture and develop the cash game player pool for eventual live games. I am wondering if losing or reducing the cash game now will hurt that down the road.
- I realize that I'll never be able to please everyone, but I still want to develop and grow this game (both tournaments and cash) and the player pool, again with the eye towards hosting live (post COVID). I am wondering what the best way to do is, or whether I should just do whatever the F___ I want and not worry about whether other players are on board.
Last edited:
There are, however, two other PCFers who play, both of whom are in the "more advanced" category.
