Venting about a capped max buy in (2 Viewers)

[Jimulacrum]

Again, I’m a losing player. I’m fishy anction and more games have been built around me than I care to admit. As a rec player who loses, I don’t enjoy being told “yeah, you’re down xxx,xxx but you can only buy in for x,xxx”

You're a rare sort of losing player, in three ways.

1. You know for sure you're a losing player.
2. You admit to yourself and others that that you're a losing player.
3. You want to escalate your level of risk the more you lose.

I believe they call this a "white whale."

If this is how you consistently play when the money/competition matters to you, I guess you'll only ever be happy in a game with super-deep rebuys, but I guess that's cool if you're part of the population that I said earlier should be catered to: the ones funding the games.

It's just very different from what most recreational players seem to want, which is cheap flops, easy decisions, and minimal brutality.

 

[TheJestyr]

You're a rare sort of losing player, in three ways.

1. You know for sure you're a losing player.
2. You admit to yourself and others that that you're a losing player.
3. You want to escalate your level of risk the more you lose.

I believe they call this a "white whale."

If this is how you consistently play when the money/competition matters to you, I guess you'll only ever be happy in a game with super-deep rebuys, but I guess that's cool if you're part of the population that I said earlier should be catered to: the ones funding the games.

It's just very different from what most recreational players seem to want, which is cheap flops, easy decisions, and minimal brutality.

I guess I can’t say for sure I’m a losing player because I don’t keep records, but lord knows I ain’t considered a “pro” in any circle or game I play in haha

Yes, I love the competition and pushing the edge.

I also pay all my debts haha

Call me Moby Dick ;p

 

[Jimulacrum]

I played in that game once many years ago when I was still a relatively new cash game player. I'm pretty sure that even though I walked away a winner, I crapped my pants so badly that I ruined the chair.

The one thing I clearly remember is nit-rolling @bergs with bottom set on a QJT flop. He shoved with top two, and I think I tanked for a good two minutes before calling his $100-ish bet.

View attachment 1078118

My first circus game was at Bergs' place. Suffice to to say that I went into it expecting a somewhat tamer game.

I had barely touched any form of Omaha at that point, just a few sessions of some easy low-stakes limit O8 at the local "charity" place. (Read: Worst O8 players on the face of the planet.) Other than that, almost exclusively Hold'em. And of course I didn't know a single player in the game.

I believe Guinness was there that first night too, so naturally the action was sick.

Didn't shit myself, but there was definitely a curious turtle.

In 250 BB, out 960 BB.

 

[Saoliver]

My first circus game was at Bergs' place. Suffice to to say that I went into it expecting a somewhat tamer game.

I had barely touched any form of Omaha at that point, just a few sessions of some easy low-stakes limit O8 at the local "charity" place. (Read: Worst O8 players on the face of the planet.) Other than that, almost exclusively Hold'em. And of course I didn't know a single player in the game.

I believe Guinness was there that first night too, so naturally the action was sick.

Didn't shit myself, but there was definitely a curious turtle.

In 250 BB, out 960 BB.

Narrator: “And then, he went on to write the book(s).”

 

[bergs]

You're a rare sort

Hmmmmm, let’s stop there.

of losing player,

Ok, tbis isn’t going well….

in three ways

I’m not single dimensional at least

1. You know for sure you're a losing player.

Actually I have a winning record everywhere except 1/2 casino NL, 4/8 limit Omaha, and on-line.

2. You admit to yourself and others that that you're a losing player.

I hate those 3 game formats.

3. You want to escalate your level of risk the more you lose.

This is called the “Getting Even Stratagem”. Bring me 2:00a and my collection of DMX albums.

I believe they call this a "white whale."

don’t fat shame me bro.

If this is how you consistently play when the money/competition matters to you, I guess you'll only ever be happy in a game with super-deep rebuys, but I guess that's cool if you're part of the population that I said earlier should be catered to: the ones funding the games.

It’s true. I bought you pizza most nights.

It's just very different from what most recreational players seem to want, which is cheap flops, easy decisions, and minimal brutality.

So lemme recap:

- I’m a horrible poker player
- You tapped the glass so hard they are caulking the cracks
- Everyone is a pussy

 

[Jimulacrum]

Hmmmmm, let’s stop there.

Ok, tbis isn’t going well….

I’m not single dimensional at least

Actually I have a winning record everywhere except 1/2 casino NL, 4/8 limit Omaha, and on-line.

I hate those 3 game formats.

This is called the “Getting Even Stratagem”. Bring me 2:00a and my collection of DMX albums.

don’t fat shame me bro.

It’s true. I bought you pizza most nights.

So lemme recap:

- I’m a horrible poker player
- You tapped the glass so hard they are caulking the cracks
- Everyone is a pussy

- Bergs' range somehow includes negative numbers
- Bergfish is the only fish I know that actually likes the sound of glass tapping
- Y'all gon' make me lose my mind
- Up in heah, up in heah

 

[bergs]

- Bergs' range somehow includes negative numbers

If I can add cards that don’t exist to my perceived range, you’ll never know how many cards are added or what the value is, hence you’ll never be able to play correctly against me.

- Bergfish is the only fish I know that actually likes the sound of glass tapping

I’ve seen the world outside the water and lemme tell you it’s not so great.

- Y'all gon' make me lose my mind
- Up in heah, up in heah

Y’all gon’ make me act the fool…
Up in heah, up in heah

 

[KHarp1]

If I can add cards that don’t exist to my perceived range, you’ll never know how many cards are added or what the value is, hence you’ll never be able to play correctly against me.

I’ve seen the world outside the water and lemme tell you it’s not so great.

Y’all gon’ make me act the fool…
Up in heah, up in heah

Who among us can argue the greatness of this man! No, man doesn't begin to describe him. Dare I say a god?

 

[bergs]

Who among us can argue the greatness of this man! No, man doesn't begin to describe him. Dare I say a god?

I did slay Gematria. Calling me a god isn’t a huge stretch.

 

[Rhodeman77]

I did slay Gematria. Calling me a god isn’t a huge stretch.

Gematria predicted you would do it.

 

[bergs]

No capped buy ins really defined my style of play. I purposely chose games where I could buy in for 500-1000bb and push the table around. It made people uncomfortable when I’d constantly push the action and hit them with big bets.

GuinnessNH, is this you?

 

[slisk250]

I like to control the stakes from escalating in a game I host.

.25/.50 circus light max buy in 100. If you bust, 100 max regardless of stack size. I like people having to earn their stack to have an advantage, not just buy in big and try to push people around at the start as you say. Other tables at my games can rebuy at half the stack and a max buy in is set before.

 

[SendThatStack]

My game was initially a .50/$1 "match half the big stack" game, and now is sort of a "match big stack game". No one has ever reloaded to more than $300 except once I rebought $500 towards the end of the night. Most guys rebuy for $100-$200 at a time, sometimes topping up to around a $300 stack. I think this works overall. We have finally recently had one guy who was on a bad losing streak say to take him off the list at least temporarily.

Back in the late 00s there was a cardroom near me that ran a 1/3NL uncapped, I only played it once cause it was kind of seedy. Shocked me watching guys buyin for 5-10k and seeing monster pots go down.

 

[merkong]

I'll preface this by saying that I consider a practice good for the game of poker if it does any of the following: invites new players to try the game, inspires existing players to play more, and/or allows casual players to win occasionally and get more entertainment out of their losing sessions.

Through this lens, a practice is bad for the game if it pushes in the opposite direction, discouraging new players or making it harder for casual players. This is naturally true of any rule or structure that favors skilled players.


Agree with @dmoney that this is angling, or worse. If you did this in my game, I wouldn't invite you back.

Whatever the case, it's horribly bad for the game. Being tricked out of their money makes people upset. Pretty self-evident. You may as well pickpocket the guy on the way out too.


Making people uncomfortable might make you money in the short term, but it's bad for the game.

In the long term, games that allow this eventually shrink up and die because so many players get tired of getting bullied out of pots or priced out of the game entirely. Part of the game for most people is fun, and if they're not having fun, they're out.

Capped buy-ins exist for exactly this reason. They protect the game from sharks and bullies, so that casual players have a chance to actually enjoy it instead of being driven out of the game by big-fish-small-pond types. Without it, there would be nowhere near as many NL/PL cash games out there—at least not ones with an open invite list.

Everything ^^^^^^ here

 

[louBdub]

I definitely think there has been a trend toward larger caps. I think finding 150BB-200BB caps in live games is more common. Certainly in hosted games here. I'm going to start experimenting with 200 BB caps in my home game this year, we'll see what I think.

I made all my cash games 200bb max

I’m actually thinking about trying a new thing…. 1/2 game, min $300 buy in - max buy in would be chip capacity of my set….. Let the players dial in where they wanna be. Who knows what will happen with my players, but it might work.

 

[Old State]

Tapped on this thread and have no clue where it went but to the OP….in what casino did you ever see an uncapped NL game? I started playing NLHE in AC as soon as they offered it and there was always a cap. That cap has gone up but it was always there.

A cap is 100% necessary to keep a home cash game going long term. I have been the host of 90% of the home cash games I’ve played in the last 20+ years. I will tell you that raising stakes and/or buyins prematurely will quickly kill a game. People talk tough and ask to raise shit up but then mysteriously will have stuff to do when the next game rolls around after a loss. For home games I maintain a 100bb cap for for any stakes except when I host $1/2 where I allow $220 buyin…simply because it’s easier to count out the chips

I haven’t played limit HE in 18 years but I really really wish it came back into vogue. NL poker died off from cowboy days until 2004 for a reason. It’s not ideal for maintaining games long term and is killing poker

 

[Nanook]

.....A cap is 100% necessary to keep a home cash game going long term. ...... I will tell you that raising stakes and/or buyins prematurely will quickly kill a game. People talk tough and ask to raise shit up but then mysteriously will have stuff to do when the next game rolls around after a loss. .......

NL poker died off from cowboy days.... for a reason. It’s not ideal for maintaining games long term and is killing poker

Most poker players do not understand this concept, but it is real. Just about anyone that has been in the poker industry for many years ie dealers, poker room managers etc & a select few expert players will agree with everything that @Old State stated in the above post.

The main issue with NL is that losing players lose too fast & they catch on really quickly that they are losing too fast. Think about it like this: lets say u are average joe single 45yr old guy poker player. Median US salary is about 70k so lets assume that the average poker player that's playing poker is making about that. Since something like 80% of people are living paycheck to paycheck lets also assume that average joe can't afford to lose more than 5-10% of his monthly salary and continue to play poker. 70k/12 * 10% only = $583 and that is 10%

If your max loss per month is $500 & you lose $1000 in like 15 minutes in a 2/5nl game you are going recognize very quickly that you have to stop playing poker. If instead you lose $500 over the course of 10 sessions with some winning sessions sprinkled in & over the course of an entire month playing 3/6 limit HE you have a much higher chance of keeping that player as a regular

 

[merkong]

Tapped on this thread and have no clue where it went but to the OP….in what casino did you ever see an uncapped NL game? I started playing NLHE in AC as soon as they offered it and there was always a cap. That cap has gone up but it was always there.

A cap is 100% necessary to keep a home cash game going long term. I have been the host of 90% of the home cash games I’ve played in the last 20+ years. I will tell you that raising stakes and/or buyins prematurely will quickly kill a game. People talk tough and ask to raise shit up but then mysteriously will have stuff to do when the next game rolls around after a loss. For home games I maintain a 100bb cap for for any stakes except when I host $1/2 where I allow $220 buyin…simply because it’s easier to count out the chips

I haven’t played limit HE in 18 years but I really really wish it came back into vogue. NL poker died off from cowboy days until 2004 for a reason. It’s not ideal for maintaining games long term and is killing poker

This.

The game is what’s most important.

 

[upNdown]

I like to control the stakes from escalating in a game I host.

.25/.50 circus light max buy in 100. If you bust, 100 max regardless of stack size. I like people having to earn their stack to have an advantage, not just buy in big and try to push people around at the start as you say. Other tables at my games can rebuy at half the stack and a max buy in is set before.

I’m not saying you’re doing it wrong, but I think the last time I played .25/.50 circus, if you got scooped, you were probably losing like $50-$70.

 

[TheJestyr]

Tapped on this thread and have no clue where it went but to the OP….in what casino did you ever see an uncapped NL game? I started playing NLHE in AC as soon as they offered it and there was always a cap. That cap has gone up but it was always there.

A cap is 100% necessary to keep a home cash game going long term. I have been the host of 90% of the home cash games I’ve played in the last 20+ years. I will tell you that raising stakes and/or buyins prematurely will quickly kill a game. People talk tough and ask to raise shit up but then mysteriously will have stuff to do when the next game rolls around after a loss. For home games I maintain a 100bb cap for for any stakes except when I host $1/2 where I allow $220 buyin…simply because it’s easier to count out the chips

I haven’t played limit HE in 18 years but I really really wish it came back into vogue. NL poker died off from cowboy days until 2004 for a reason. It’s not ideal for maintaining games long term and is killing poker

Thanks for the response!

Detroit’s Greektown 2/2/5 game was uncapped in the beginning, as was most of the 10/25 or 25/50 games in Vegas and other places. All home games I played in didn’t have a cap as well for the first couple years.

And I agree that with the wrong player pool, uncapped games can be a death sentence for the game. I’ve been running games on and off for about 15 years and we intentionally only play once a month in a larger game.

 

[SendThatStack]

Tapped on this thread and have no clue where it went but to the OP….in what casino did you ever see an uncapped NL game? I started playing NLHE in AC as soon as they offered it and there was always a cap. That cap has gone up but it was always there.

A cap is 100% necessary to keep a home cash game going long term. I have been the host of 90% of the home cash games I’ve played in the last 20+ years. I will tell you that raising stakes and/or buyins prematurely will quickly kill a game. People talk tough and ask to raise shit up but then mysteriously will have stuff to do when the next game rolls around after a loss. For home games I maintain a 100bb cap for for any stakes except when I host $1/2 where I allow $220 buyin…simply because it’s easier to count out the chips

I haven’t played limit HE in 18 years but I really really wish it came back into vogue. NL poker died off from cowboy days until 2004 for a reason. It’s not ideal for maintaining games long term and is killing poker

Most important is the stakes not the buy-in cap. Kind of weird though after all these years people saying NL would kill poker its still going strong while Limit has died out.

 

[slisk250]

I’m not saying you’re doing it wrong, but I think the last time I played .25/.50 circus, if you got scooped, you were probably losing like $50-$70.

That’s not the case in any .25/.50 circus I’ve played at meets. As people bust and stacks grow, 500-1000 pots happen every time.

 

[upNdown]

That’s not the case in any .25/.50 circus I’ve played at meets. As people bust and stacks grow, 500-1000 pots happen every time.

Oh yeah no doubt - I meant that more as a minimum than a maximum. But my point was supposed to be that it can be intimidating to get involved in a pot limit hand when you know that if there’s 4 streets of betting, you’re getting most/all of your starting stack in.

 

[Nerxa]

I agree with OP. Especially with less than 200bbs caps, they're predatory from the casino who wants us to play two streets no limit to cap their rake

 

[Goldfish]

So I’ve read and re-read these points and have a couple questions. (And PLEASE know that I’m not coming at you with any attitude, I’m genuinely trying to figure out answers…I swear I’m not being defensive!)

Many rec players consider check-raising rude. Slow playing or trapping big hands, overbetting the river, all things that make the game less enjoyable for the casual player. (I was raised that checking wasn’t allowed in our friends and family games.) Yet I argue that these are vital to the different levels of poker artistry. Should these be banned from the game? Or should players learn from their mistakes, learn from different plays used against them, and then improve their own game? I ask because I was on the receiving end of the cash-under-the-stack maneuver and had to learn that moving forward I need to ask for an accurate count when making decisions. I didn’t get mad at the player or the rule, it was just part of the game and I had to learn that.

Again, please don’t think that I’m arguing for it to be allowed today. I’m just stating that poker grew very fast, and not all the rules grew with it, and unfortunately that was just a part of the game. Same as someone strategically betting just enough so the action would reopen if a short stack went all in. It’s all part of the learning process of all the nuances of the game.

Also, I think playing deep stack poker is a skill that is difficult to cultivate if you can only buy in for 100-200bb. I love jamming in short buy ins once in a while, but I know that I take the game way more seriously when I have a stack to consider.

Lot of people brought up the rake. I agree that that’s a factor in not wanting people to go broke fast…doesn’t mean I have to like it though

I went back and forth about posting this last part, but I think it’s relevant…would it matter at all if I said that the games I play in have 5 and 6 figure swings regularly? Does this change how you’d view what’s best for the game or the players in the game? (I wasn’t playing that big twenty years ago when people would have cash under their chips, those games would only be 10-20k swings. Again, not arguing for that to ever come back as an accepted part of poker)… the more I read and consider the comments, the more I think it really does matter because the people I play with aren’t new to the game. And if you’re 20 hours or more into a session and get felted, you want to buy in for a lot more than just 1-200bb.

As before, thanks everyone for your time and energy!! I really appreciate everyone’s input and love thinking about the game we love in a much deeper way!! I’m grateful for you PCF!!

There are casino PLO games in Ohio big enough for 6 figure swings? @Hornet, @Headhunter13 lets gooooooo!

 

[Goldfish]

@TheJestyr, don't worry you're our kind of degen, come out to some of the meetups, you'll love the mix games, and the big boi tables. Krish, Goldie, MatB and a few others would love you to push them around =)

Seriously you'll have a blast!

Yes, by all means come to a meet up. You can have @MatB seat. He doesn’t use it very much.

 

[Goldfish]

But when I play in the bigger games (sometimes in Pitt, sometimes Maryland, sometimes in Vegas, sometimes in Cleveland) we all play very competitive and enjoy trying to win big. We trust that each person who sits down has their stop loss limits and we play hard.

Again, I’m a losing player. I’m fishy anction and more games have been built around me than I care to admit. As a rec player who loses, I don’t enjoy being told “yeah, you’re down xxx,xxx but you can only buy in for x,xxx”

You play in the Pittsburgh PLO game? Which games do you play in Maryland?

 

[Hornet]

There are casino PLO games in Ohio big enough for 6 figure swings? @Hornet, @Headhunter13 lets gooooooo!

I’m in. Bring Howard with you.

 

[Goldfish]

Detroit’s Greektown 2/2/5 game was uncapped in the beginning,

I played in this game when I was in town for work, but I recall it being bigger. Lots of cash on the table. Good game.

 

[Goldfish]

I’m in. Bring Howard with you.

Everyone loves Howard.…….