Cash Game Why introduce cash games to a home group used to $20 tourneys? (3 Viewers)

[Jabinator]

Hey all,
I host a casual home game where we typically run 200DKK ($30) buy-in tournaments. It's been the standard for a long time, and everyone is comfortable with it. I'm considering introducing low-stakes cash games occasionally—probably still centered around a 100DKK. ($15-ish) buy-in to keep the financial commitment light, especially with rebuys in mind.

What are the key benefits of convincing my group to try cash games once in a while? Any tips on making that transition smooth for a tournament-focused crowd?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Taghkanic]

Hey all,
I host a casual home game where we typically run 200DKK ($30) buy-in tournaments. It's been the standard for a long time, and everyone is comfortable with it. I'm considering introducing low-stakes cash games occasionally—probably still centered around a 100DKK. ($15-ish) buy-in to keep the financial commitment light, especially with rebuys in mind.

What are the key benefits of convincing my group to try cash games once in a while? Any tips on making that transition smooth for a tournament-focused crowd?

Thanks in advance!

I used to play in (and eventually became the host of) a weekly two-table tourney. It began as $35, eventually escalated over 12+ years to $150.

Anyway, for most of that time there was a cash game which started later, once enough interested players busted. Some were willing to play with as few as 3-4 to start, but often it would wait until 5-6 were out of the tourney.

About half the regs usuallly stayed for cash, some never played it at all.

If yours is a one-table tourney, that might not work. But if you have enough interest, it is a nice addition especially for those who bust the tourney early.

 

[Gavin]

I run mine the opposite. We (one table) start with a cash game and then after X hours, cash everyone out and then start a $20 Tournament. Our tournaments typically last 2-2.5 hours. That way when someone gets eliminated, they can either go home, or help clean up a little, or stay to help with dealing (in other words, they go home). Maybe try that from time to time???

Just a thought...

 

[Jabinator]

I used to play in (and eventually became the host of) a weekly two-table tourney. It began as $35, eventually escalated over 12+ years to $150.

Anyway, for most of that time there was a cash game which started later, once enough interested players busted. Some were willing to play with as few as 3-4 to start, but often it would wait until 5-6 were out of the tourney.

About half the regs usuallly stayed for cash, some never played it at all.

If yours is a one-table tourney, that might not work. But if you have enough interest, it is a nice addition especially for those who bust the tourney early.

Yeah I was thinking about doing it like this. I read a post about only having one table and slowly when people bust, one end of the table plays cash, while the other half plays the tourney.

 

[Jabinator]

I run mine the opposite. We (one table) start with a cash game and then after X hours, cash everyone out and then start a $20 Tournament. Our tournaments typically last 2-2.5 hours. That way when someone gets eliminated, they can either go home, or help clean up a little, or stay to help with dealing (in other words, they go home). Maybe try that from time to time???

Just a thought...

That is an interesting way to do it - my main worry of playing only tourney is that people who usually bust early, will start to fade away from the group. I know 2 of my in laws have not show interest in the tourney nights after 3 or 4 times. So maybe by introducing cash as a "warm up" and then start the main tournament after a couple of hours. I like this.

 

[Munchies11]

Me and my friends prefer cash games because for the simple reason everyone can stay in the game til the end. We play for the social aspect to hang out and play cards all night. Tournaments I feel are more competitive and there more for the game than the social aspect. However I do love tournaments when you can round up at least 20 of the boys ( which is always impossible). I recommend if you want a cash games sell it as a hang out with the guys and the poker comes second than other way around .

 

[churlbut18]

We only play cash games for the following reasons among others…

Players can buy in and cash out at any time (no hard start & end times)

Players can rebuy at any time and as many times (no getting knocked out & sitting on the sidelines)

Players can cash out any remaining chips at the end (no “winner takes all” mantra)

Most importantly cash games allow us the ability to play the mixed/circus games we love so much.

 

[Rhodeman77]

As others have said, the main benefit to running a low stakes cash game is that everyone can stay and be part of the game for as long as they want. Get busted out of the tournament in the first level, too bad, either go home early or sit around and be a rail bird hoping something else pops off. That sucks either way.

 

[springbox]

Some advantages to cash include:

People showing up a little late doesn't cause any issues, we can start whenever we have 4 or 5 and people can join in as they arrive.

People can play as long as they're willing to re-buy, people can cash out early without giving up anything. I've had issues with both for tournaments, people bust around an hour into the tournament, and there's still 2~3 hours of play left and they leave disappointed. On the other hand, other players who want to take off early for whatever reason are stuck waiting till they're eliminated and end up just making spewy plays that are unsatisfying to everyone so they can leave.

People can take breaks mid-game without any issues, in tournaments it feels a bit worse to have a big chunk of your stack eaten by blinds/antes while you're away, in a cash game we're not blinding people out.

Cash into tournament is a good order, because tournament into cash leaves a bunch of eliminated players waiting around for the tournament to end. Cash into tournament means everyone can play the whole time until they get eliminated from the tournament, and then they can leave.

 

[ekricket]

As others have said, the main benefit to running a low stakes cash game is that everyone can stay and be part of the game for as long as they want. can afford, or in some cases more than they can afford

FYP

 

[drdr]

Some advantages to cash include:

People showing up a little late doesn't cause any issues, we can start whenever we have 4 or 5 and people can join in as they arrive.

People can play as long as they're willing to re-buy, people can cash out early without giving up anything. I've had issues with both for tournaments, people bust around an hour into the tournament, and there's still 2~3 hours of play left and they leave disappointed. On the other hand, other players who want to take off early for whatever reason are stuck waiting till they're eliminated and end up just making spewy plays that are unsatisfying to everyone so they can leave.

People can take breaks mid-game without any issues, in tournaments it feels a bit worse to have a big chunk of your stack eaten by blinds/antes while you're away, in a cash game we're not blinding people out.

Cash into tournament is a good order, because tournament into cash leaves a bunch of eliminated players waiting around for the tournament to end. Cash into tournament means everyone can play the whole time until they get eliminated from the tournament, and then they can leave.

I understand this works for many hosts. Just isn't right for my crew. They want the tournament, with only a minority interested in cash. So cash is after the tourney if there are takers, or people can leave or hang around (and they do). I do offer rebuys into the tournament, so this minimises early busts. This way most/all are happy.

To me, arguing that one way or the other is best doesn't seem to fit. Is just depends on what the players prefer.

 

[Labrat]

I understand this works for many hosts. Just isn't right for my crew. They want the tournament, with only a minority interested in cash. So cash is after the tourney if there are takers, or people can leave or hang around (and they do). I do offer rebuys into the tournament, so this minimises early busts. This way most/all are happy.

To me, arguing that one way or the other is best doesn't seem to fit. Is just depends on what the players prefer.

Truth.

That being said, CASH GAMES ROOOOOL.

 

[springbox]

To me, arguing that one way or the other is best doesn't seem to fit. Is just depends on what the players prefer.

The golden rule of hosting