How important is winning for you in your home game? (1 Viewer)

I am not a sore loser or an obnoxious winner but I always play to win (maybe some very rare usually drunk exceptions).

The crowd I play with is all the same too, while it is a friendly and fun group everyone is giving it their best which IMO makes it more fun.
 
Is it bad that I haven't actually played poker in like 6 months but I generally go to bed with some chips next to me on a pillow?

I love the chips more than the game. Weird.
 
Its harder for me to win at my home games partly because I'm not totally focused on the play (dealing with food and what not) but the biggest obstacle is that I don't have to drive and therefore can drink a lot more than I normally would if playing were I needed to drive.

But I love to take my buddy's $20 when I can!
 
For me it's more about making sure everyone has a good time first. Good people, premium hot dogs, great beer and fine cigars. Winning is just a bonus. My buy in each month is just fun money and when I win I usually blow it on the kids, so they care more than I do if I win :LOL: :laugh:
 
Personally, winning isn't as important as making good decisions.

I'm amazed at players at my game that get so bent outta shape when someone tries to give them a huge pot but suck out. It's like, just be thankful you got it in good.
 
Last edited:
Personally, winning isn't as important as making good decisions.

I'm amazed at players at my game that get so bent outta shape when someone tries to give them a huge put but suck out. It's like, just be thankful you got it in good.

This. I play every game the same. The best (which isn't good) that I can. And I try to learn and improve. Being a very competitive person, I take the approach that if its worth doing its worth doing right. But in the end the winning is really secondary. The stakes just make neither winning or losing any kind of a financial plus or minus. But I do get irritated when guys don't play correctly (out of turn, showing the guy next to them their hand, failing to voice they are raising, etc). All the guys in my home game have been playing at my house for several years so I get on them when they don't play correctly.

And I no longer provide drinks (although I always have some bottles of water) or food. I did for awhile but only myself and one other guy ever host the game and I was out money everytime so I just stopped doing it. And nobody even cares. Most guys bring a drink or two and maybe a bag of chips or candy and were all good.

Now here's for my self patting on the back. I actually don't mind that I host most of the games because I am the only one that has a good poker table. :D
 
Personally, winning isn't as important as making good decisions.

I'm amazed at players at my game that get so bent outta shape when someone tries to give them a huge pot but suck out. It's like, just be thankful you got it in good.

This amazes me too. Yes it's frustrating but it's part of the game but should never lead to bad feelings towards other players.
 
When I host, here's the things that are most important, in order:

1) Provide a good experience for my guests
2) Have fun with my friends
2a) Win
2b) Make good decisions

Winning and making good decisions are very important, but help contribute to my overall enjoyment. It's entirely possible for me to lose multiple buyins at some of my cash games (keeping in mind that some of our games have buy-ins around $5-$10) and still have a blast. But all things being equal, I'd rather take buyins than lose them.
 
So here's a case in point. Playing a 10 man NL with $20 buyin and rebuys for the first two hours. Pay the top three spots.

So one guy who I had not seen before (really nice kid) was a sloppy loose as they come. But somehow he kept building a big stack. Finally we get down to three players and I am waiting to to pick the right spot to go after him.

So I am the button and the blinds are $500 and $1000. I look down and see A Q off. So I raise to $2500 and Loosey Joe calls in the sb and the bb folds. So of course I have no idea what Loosey Joe has except that its pretty likely i have the best hand. Flop falls Q, 8, 3 rainbow. Given the stack situation (at this point I had finally gotten ahead of Loosey Joe) I decided to shove and put him all in. Figured worst case is I win a good pot if he folds but likely he'll call with anything. Yup Joe calls.

So he turns over K 2 off. So he called my all in (which for him was about $8k) with total garbage. Actually surprised he called my preflop raise from the sb but not overly. Well you know what happens. Of course, he rivered a K and takes most of my stack away and ends up winning the tourney.

But I wasn't mad. Wasn't even upset a little. I got my chips in post flop a big favorite. Played the hand exactly how I wanted and set him up to take his stack. Didn't work.That's poker.
 
So he turns over K 2 off. So he called my all in (which for him was about $8k) with total garbage. Actually surprised he called my preflop raise from the sb but not overly. Well you know what happens. Of course, he rivered a K and takes most of my stack away and ends up winning the tourney.

But I wasn't mad. Wasn't even upset a little. I got my chips in post flop a big favorite. Played the hand exactly how I wanted and set him up to take his stack. Didn't work.That's poker.

Here's the thing with Loosey Joe. When a Loosey Joe sucks out on me like that, I cheer. I honestly am happy for them. They won't remember the next 10 times when they lost, but they will always remember their runner-runner flush that everyone was cheering them for. Your $20 buy-in just bought Loosey Joe a lifetime memory of joy.

For a friend, that's $20 well spent.
 
When I host, here's the things that are most important, in order:

1) Provide a good experience for my guests
2) Have fun with my friends
2a) Win
2b) Make good decisions

Winning and making good decisions are very important, but help contribute to my overall enjoyment. It's entirely possible for me to lose multiple buyins at some of my cash games (keeping in mind that some of our games have buy-ins around $5-$10) and still have a blast. But all things being equal, I'd rather take buyins than lose them.

I am very much this^^ However, mine is 1, 2, 2a make good decisions, and 2b Win.. Only because winning with good decisions is more important to me then winning..
 
I never lose so I don't know what it would be like. I never get bored and start taking stupid chances. Playing a home game is just like playing 3 tables of Zone poker so I get at least a 1,000 hands an hour and I always get my fill of action, I don't crave the adrenalin rush of hitting a 3 outer on the river, because I hit my outs every time. I love when people slow roll, makes me feel good inside... I never want to skin them and their children alive so I can cackle in their blood, I am an even-keeled player.


I hate this fucking game
 
Last edited:
Most of the players to my games are skilled and playing to win. My environment is still friendly and fun, and social.

One of the only rules I announce is that my game is a douchebaggery free zone. This means that everyone in my home is a guest, and that I'm not a casino. My goal as a host is to provide a fun time for all my guests. I hope that whether people win or lose, they will do so without being a douche.

That said, I'm often on top of the leaderboard. I'm typically ahead in the cash games, and often cash my tourneys. I have not heard one negative comment from my players. Everyone seems to win often enough, and I've had my share of bad nights.

I play to win, but I also don't "work" at it in my home games like I might in a casino. I'm definitely not as focused on punishing weaker players and crushing souls.
 
I'm definitely not as focused on punishing weaker players and crushing souls.

I love crushing the souls of my closer mates! Hehe

Definitely don't need to win. I tend to go hard (reckless) and either come out with 5x buy-ins profit or 5x buy-ins down the drain. Either way I'm happy as long as my guests are happy.
 
Guinness made me homeless for a while after a particularly bad beat. It was OK. I bought the house back from him. He gave me a really, really good rate.

EDIT: He painted my walls with Patriots colors. It took me 6 months to revert it back to plain colors and to cover up Pat the Ass Fucking Patriot. The Bob Kraft mural in the kitchen was particularly well done.
 
For me it is as important as any other poker game. That said, I absolutely FAIL if I don't host a kick ass game where everyone has fun and wants to keep coming back.
 
For me it is as important as any other poker game. That said, I absolutely FAIL if I don't host a kick ass game where everyone has fun and wants to keep coming back.

This. Had a little two table Saturday night. Sunday guys were texting me wanting to know if we could have another game this Saturday even though its the holiday weekend. So I guess Saturday did exactly that.....or maybe its because I donated my money.....:D
 
I enjoy winning. I enjoy tracking my winnings. Over the past ten years or so, I'm slightly above even. I'm very happy with that. So, I guess winning is important to the extent that it allows me to keep playing and socializing. I couldn't do that if I kept losing.

Having said that, there are a couple people I enjoy beating a lot and hate losing to.
 
My home game is a two-table tourney. This gives me an added incentive to last as long as possible in the game, because it is pretty dismal having other people playing poker in your house when you have busted out. Of course, that happens, and there is plenty still to do (coloring up, dealing when things get short-handed). Sometimes there is a cash game once enough players bust, but that only happens about 50% of the time at most.

With 16-18 players, we pay five places (4th & 5th just getting their initial buy-in back). I found that if I only paid top three, the last five would end up cutting in 4th and sometimes 5th, so I just made that a permanent thing as long as we have at least 16. It’s a high percentage in the money, but it seems to keep people coming back. If too many players don’t at least break even occasionally, they tend to drop out.

Generally in my own game, I just aim to get in the money, and then see what happens. But that’s true of most tourneys for me—unless one is really running hot, you’re just trying to get past the bubble and then hope to double up on a short-stacked shove...

Overall, I tend to play better at home, and I think it’s precisely because I’m a little more patient and careful in my own game, not wanting to be a trapped spectator. But then there are sessions where you run into set over set early, and that’s just part of the deal.
 
Home poker to me is like a round of golf. I just want to have a good time and enjoy the moment. Spend time with friends and have fun. I want to do well, but am okay if I don't.

The only difference is...my golf game isn't the greatest. But I know I'm a decent a poker player. But unlike golf...where I know I'm not going to do all that well, but always want to try to do my best...home game poker is where I know I can do well and at least try to crush some souls and try to at least pretend like I'm some great player.

I'm always working on my game when at home. Just wrapped up a game not too long ago and tonight a friend of mine said "it's funny, you seem like you're playing conservative. You don't win too many pots, but when you do you win big and your stack never decreases." That's pretty much what I've been working on lately. Really trying to get away from bad decisions, chasing cards and over aggressive play. And it's shown...Ive recently won a few of the home tournaments I've had. After a long string of 2nd place finishes
 
With 16-18 players, we pay five places (4th & 5th just getting their initial buy-in back). I found that if I only paid top three, the last five would end up cutting in 4th and sometimes 5th, so I just made that a permanent thing as long as we have at least 16. It’s a high percentage in the money, but it seems to keep people coming back. If too many players don’t at least break even occasionally, they tend to drop out.

I think this is more common than you think in successful home games. Casinos and underground games cater to the "big win", but home games aren't about life-changing money. When you have 16-18 players (also our typical turnout) 1st can still be a nice win, especially if you have rebuys.

I've always said that if players are talking about a chop, something has gone wrong. Either the payout table is too top-heavy (let's chop so we all get something) or the blind structure is too long (lets chop so we can sleep).

Also, while many have said winning isn't everything, many have said if they kept losing they would eventually stop hosting. The same goes double for the fish at the table. A player that is under-skilled compared to the rest of the field still has a chance to limp into the money if the payout goes to 30%, but they will seldom hit the 10% of casino payouts.
 
I hate losing more than I enjoy winning.
I'm the opposite. I like winning more than I hate losing. If I lose in a home game, I can usually write it off as "oh well, I would have spent that much money if I went out somewhere tonight to have fun" so it's kind of like a break even - I spent some money to have some fun.
But if I win, even if I'm only ahead by one chip, I'm a WINNER, master of the poker world, king of the felt!
 
I've had my best year yet profit wise. Granted its not a ton because I primarily play quarter/ fifty cent. My players benefit when I win. I funnel it back into poker chips lol.
 
I've always said that if players are talking about a chop, something has gone wrong. Either the payout table is too top-heavy (let's chop so we all get something) or the blind structure is too long (lets chop so we can sleep).

In my game (which has been running about 9 years now, and is on its fourth venue), whether there is a chop or not often depends on (A) How imbalanced the stacks are when we get down to 3-4 players, and (B) the personalities of the players left.

We have a couple guys who really don’t like to stay out past midnight, and are always keen for a chop. Another who is not very confident of his shorthanded play, and is willing to chop even if he is way ahead. Then there are others who prefer to play all night if necessary to crown a winner.

After playing with a spreadsheet for the better part of a Saturday afternoon earlier this year, I settled on a “final” (?) payout structure dependent on the number of players. If I got it right, it should mean that an “average” player in our game should just about break even for the year. I’m tracking results to see if that proves true over time.

All that said, a funny thing is that the biggest fish in our game is also the guy who *never* skips a game. Always first to show up, perfect attendance record. He gets razzed endlessly for his terrible play, which is notorious. At one point, he went more than a year (in what was then a weekly game) without getting in the money. Just keeps coming back for more, bless his heart, and his wallet.
 
Last edited:
If I got it right, it should mean that an “average” player in our game should just about break even for the year.
Should the average player break even in tournament play? I'd argue no, but I can see how in a regular home game tournament setting, that might make sense.
 
Should the average player break even in tournament play? I'd argue no, but I can see how in a regular home game tournament setting, that might make sense.

In a large MTT? No. In a regular home game, where you’re always working to make sure 14-18 guys show up? Probably.

By average, I really mean the median player... If I have a roster of about 30 players, I expect 5-6 of them to do very well in the game over the course of a year, and 5-6 of them to do terribly. The rest will be up a little, breaking even, or down a little.

I expect to lose at least half of the worst players over time, because it just gets demoralizing—even when the real point of the game is mainly social. Some of these will take a 2-3 month break, then come back for more.

Anyway, this is how I figured my structure:

Say the typical attendance is around 15 (which makes the math easier—it is usually more like 16/17). And the typical participant plays 15 out of a possible 25 times.

If I’m paying a third of the players (5 payouts), a decent but not exceptional player should get in the money roughly a third of the time, based on their average play, and occasional rungood. Maybe a little less, but for the sake of argument, 5 out of 15 tries.

If those five cashes are evenly distributed, they will finish one time annually in each of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th places.

So, if they are investing $1,500 in the game per year ($100 x 15, ignoring bounties, high hands, etc., which are extras anyway), those five cashes should total ~$1,500 if I want to maintain interest for the “average” guy.

With 15 players, payouts of 650/400/250/100/100 works out.

I’m sure there is some arguable logic here, but that's how I worked it. Payouts for fewer/more players are adjusted up/down based on how many show up in a given week. (18 players pays 750 for 1st, 14 more like 550.)
 
Last edited:
In a large MTT? No. In a regular home game, where you’re always working to make sure 14-18 guys show up? Probably.

By average, I really mean the median player... If I have a roster of about 30 players, I expect 5-6 of them to do very well in the game over the course of a year, and 5-6 of them to do terribly. The rest will be up a little, breaking even, or down a little.

I expect to lose at least half of the worst players over time, because it just gets demoralizing—even when the real point of the game is mainly social. Some of these will take a 2-3 month break, then come back for more.

Anyway, this is how I figured my structure:

Say the typical attendance is around 15 (which makes the math easier—it is usually more like 16/17). And the typical participant plays 15 out of a possible 25 times.

If I’m paying a third of the players (5 payouts), a decent but not exceptional player should get in the money roughly a third of the time, based on their average play, and occasional rungood. Maybe a little less, but for the sake of argument, 5 out of 15 tries.

If those five cashes are evenly distributed, they will finish one time annually in each of 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th places.

So, if they are investing $1,500 in the game per year ($100 x 15, ignoring bounties, high hands, etc., which are extras anyway), those five cashes should total ~$1,500 if I want to maintain interest for the “average” guy.

With 15 players, payouts of 650/400/250/100/100 works out.

I’m sure there is some arguable logic here, but that's how I worked it. Payouts for fewer/more players are adjusted up/down based on how many show up in a given week. (18 players pays 750 for 1st, 14 more like 550.)
I think that makes a lot of sense. The home games I play in are almost always cash games - tournaments are a rare exception. Even the fishiest of fish will get lucky or run good and walk out of a cash game a winner at least 10-15% of the time. In tournaments, those occasional lucky nights probably translate to min-cashes more often than not. So I can see tweaking that a bit to keep everybody coming back.
 

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.

Back
Top Bottom