Home Game Upgrade Guidance Needed. (1 Viewer)

[codeman00]

I have a monthly home poker game that needs some help. When we started the game a few years ago at my new job, we barely had enough players for a game. There were only 1-2 serious players and a lot of social poker players. As the game evolved, we now have a core group of 7-8 players with some games going up to as much as 16 players. We have a 2.5-3 hr $25 Freezeout Bounty NL holdem tournament, followed by Dealers Choice for the rest of the night.

Tournament
The tournament format works well and I plan to keep it as part of our poker night. The one problem is there are some people that play in the tournament that will not stay for cash. They like to limit their losses and aren't comfortable throwing "a lot" of money around.

Cash (Dealer's Choice)
I really screwed up when I set this game up because I didn't have a lot of choice with the players that we had. I had never played serious casino style cash holdem and was more familiar with tournaments and dealers choice games (5 card draw, screw your neighbor, blind baseball, follow the Q, etc). The issues:

• As I noted above, many people don't stay for cash. The excuse is that it's late (9:30PM) but the real reason is they are scared to lose or scared to spend money to learn. We're not a cutthroat group...but still many won't stay
• I never set buy in minimums for cash. Everyone buys in for $10-$20, except me.
• I set the rule early that you couldn't take cash out of your pocket in the middle of the hand. That was a bad deal with this group because it caused A LOT of side pots that delayed the game. So we allowed cash from the pocket to play. And now we have the problem of people starting a hand with $3 and adding cash to the pot dollars at a time or buying in for more chips during a hand. It's just sloppy.
  
• Even some of the regulars will "rebuy" for $5 at a time. When suggest buying in for $20, I get answers like..."I always seem to do better this way" and other answers like that. I know these people are going to be around for 4 more hours...I'm not sure why they can't buy in for $60 at the beginning and be done with it. I've seen them bet $30 at a time at the craps table, but won't buy in for more than $5 at the home poker game.
• We play some very non-poker games. In between, 727, and Screw your Neighbor are a few of them. They are not really poker.

So what I'm trying to do is get these guys more serious about the game or get our game more serious. I've added things to the game like bounties and now new casino type chips. My goal is to try to elevate this game into something more substantial and get a bit more money involved. I wouldn't mind playing holdem and Omaha all the time. There are 4-5 that understand what real poker is about and have approached me to do something different to have more of a real game. But we have so many fringe players that don't care, I'm not sure if I'm going to rock the boat too much. I've thought about having a special night with more serious players....but I'm not sure I'll have enough players.

I’m sure I’m not the only person that has crossed this bridge. Any tips or thoughts on this?

 

[Pokerdweebz]

It sounds to me like you are going to have to find some new players. You also answered a lot of your own questions.

1) NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER ALLOW ADDONS DURING A HAND
2) Set up separate "fun" wildcard/crazy whatever game nights and actual poker game nights.
3) Set a min buy-in. If you're playing .25/.25 make it $10 min and whatever max ($40 is about right).
4) People who won't stay for cash because of financial reasons will never stay for cash so stop trying to get them to.
5) Learn how to handle side pots yourself so you can handle it and not slow down the game.
6) If people don't want to play, won't commit to real games, or actually play (buy in for more than $5 at a time) why do you care if you rock the boat?

Edit: Pretty much everything you said it a huge red flag to any remotely serious player. If I was at your game I would honestly ask to cash out the second any of these things happened and never come back. It's no surprise you can't get a serious game going. I would start with creating and enforcing actual rules and start from there.

 

[upNdown]

WTF

You need to blow it all to pieces and start over.

 

[Irish]

Start with this:

I would start with creating and enforcing actual rules and start from there.

And then go with everything else @Pokerdweebz mentions above, he is wise beyond his years

 

[courage]

My game was a lot like this when I started converting it to a better format. Agree with all of the above advice and you're gonna have to commit to the new direction and sell it.

I lost the "wild card game" players and it was for the best. Had a few phone calls from them bemoaning the old days, but essentially you're trying to promote a better game that's social yet skilled so players can enjoy and improve.

In addition to the ideas above, to start I would advertise a rotation of maybe 2 or 3 games: NLHE, omaha, Lazy Pineapple and communicate your reasons for wanting to change the game. Discuss it openly at table, email, text, etc, not in a defensive way, but expressing your desire to make a better game. Maybe make it more exclusive (this addresses the short-stackers a bit) by limiting it to one table at first. "3 seats left for Friday nite."

Ask your regs you trust to recruit players. Make it clear you must approve any new players but they should have an idea of the kind of players you seek and anything that would disqualify them. I've refused plenty of new players, not because they weren't serious poker players and good for the game, but because they had a shady side or habits. Protect your game and your home.

Serve some snacks or food if you're not already. Doesn't have to be fancy but players appreciate the effort.

Do a button bonus for high card at start of the game. It helps get players in the seats. It could be small ($10) that you fund and distribute in chips, or maybe chip nerd or poker-related prizes. This really helps get players to the game on time. Enforce it; if they're not seated at game time, they're not eligible. Can't tell you how many cries of anguish from regs who are 1 minute late coming in to my home when they realize the bonus has been dealt. We lol and turn it into a game. "Be on time next week!"

Splash the pot if you can occasionally with other trinkets or scratch-offs or whatever. Maybe some of your regs will get in on the act and bring items. Make it more fun and spread the idea that folks can get something back from the cash game besides cashing out.

Good luck!

 

[Rhodeman77]

All great advice.

If you want to take poker, and your game to the next level you will lose players, probably 80% or more of the people that are used to what is being played now.

When I first started 15 years ago it was $10 tournaments that got 15 or so players every week. As I slowly increased the buyin over the years to $40 the group was down to 7-8.

I realized I needed to find new people wanted to play more competitive poker and for more money than my friends did.

I am now part of large network of poker players that run well organized and structured games. Some of my original players will still play once in a while, but they are the fish for sure. Their games never improved over the years.

So it is up to you, what is more important, good poker or playing with the same people you are playing g with now? Because they ultimately will be multually exclusive.

 

[detroitdad]

It sounds to me like you are going to have to find some new players. You also answered a lot of your own questions.

1) NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER ALLOW ADDONS DURING A HAND
2) Set up separate "fun" wildcard/crazy whatever game nights and actual poker game nights.
3) Set a min buy-in. If you're playing .25/.25 make it $10 min and whatever max ($40 is about right).
4) People who won't stay for cash because of financial reasons will never stay for cash so stop trying to get them to.
5) Learn how to handle side pots yourself so you can handle it and not slow down the game.
6) If people don't want to play, won't commit to real games, or actually play (buy in for more than $5 at a time) why do you care if you rock the boat?

Edit: Pretty much everything you said it a huge red flag to any remotely serious player. If I was at your game I would honestly ask to cash out the second any of these things happened and never come back. It's no surprise you can't get a serious game going. I would start with creating and enforcing actual rules and start from there.

My game was a lot like this when I started converting it to a better format. Agree with all of the above advice and you're gonna have to commit to the new direction and sell it.

I lost the "wild card game" players and it was for the best. Had a few phone calls from them bemoaning the old days, but essentially you're trying to promote a better game that's social yet skilled so players can enjoy and improve.

In addition to the ideas above, to start I would advertise a rotation of maybe 2 or 3 games: NLHE, omaha, Lazy Pineapple and communicate your reasons for wanting to change the game. Discuss it openly at table, email, text, etc, not in a defensive way, but expressing your desire to make a better game. Maybe make it more exclusive (this addresses the short-stackers a bit) by limiting it to one table at first. "3 seats left for Friday nite."

Ask your regs you trust to recruit players. Make it clear you must approve any new players but they should have an idea of the kind of players you seek and anything that would disqualify them. I've refused plenty of new players, not because they weren't serious poker players and good for the game, but because they had a shady side or habits. Protect your game and your home.

Serve some snacks or food if you're not already. Doesn't have to be fancy but players appreciate the effort.

Do a button bonus for high card at start of the game. It helps get players in the seats. It could be small ($10) that you fund and distribute in chips, or maybe chip nerd or poker-related prizes. This really helps get players to the game on time. Enforce it; if they're not seated at game time, they're not eligible. Can't tell you how many cries of anguish from regs who are 1 minute late coming in to my home when they realize the bonus has been dealt. We lol and turn it into a game. "Be on time next week!"

Splash the pot if you can occasionally with other trinkets or scratch-offs or whatever. Maybe some of your regs will get in on the act and bring items. Make it more fun and spread the idea that folks can get something back from the cash game besides cashing out.

Good luck!

All great advice.

If you want to take poker, and your game to the next level you will lose players, probably 80% or more of the people that are used to what is being played now.

When I first started 15 years ago it was $10 tournaments that got 15 or so players every week. As I slowly increased the buyin over the years to $40 the group was down to 7-8.

I realized I needed to find new people wanted to play more competitive poker and for more money than my friends did.

I am now part of large network of poker players that run well organized and structured games. Some of my original players will still play once in a while, but they are the fish for sure. Their games never improved over the years.

So it is up to you, what is more important, good poker or playing with the same people you are playing g with now? Because they ultimately will be multually exclusive.

EVERYTHING THESE GUYS SAID

 

[Jeff]

Agree with all above. Especially dweebs #1. Not playing table stakes and allowing people to add onto their stack in a hand is a recipe for disaster.

I was invited to a game by a friend. My friend knew one of the guys in the game from high school (30 plus years ago). I got there and was a lot of old-timey shit going on that set me on edge. String betting (see your $...push bet...and raise you $...push raise in). I discovered thet they didn't play table stakes in the middle of a hand when I put a guy all in for a small amount he had in front of him and he reached into his pocket and pulled out a wad of money put a couple hundred out of it and put it on the table and raised my bet. I asked how they could not pay table stakes and how they dealt with add-ins, I asked whether the add ins were limited to what the people had in their pockets, they said no. One of them would loan me money if I was short.

I folded. I didn't want an IOU for his house from this guy and I certainly didn't want to have to borrow money from anyone, not knowing how much cash these guys had in their pocket. Folded two more hands, made my excuses and left.

 

[moose]

But Jeff you could have used that house to host your poker games in.

 

[Blaster]

Everything everybody said that everyone said.

Rebuy during a live hand is a nightmare .....
Someone looks over at an opponent's stack of $9 , & decides to bet $7, ( knowing opponent will fold , call , or raise a max of $2 addnl) ... but the opponent claims he is actually going to be raising $25 more, by pulling bills out of his ass pocket???
I'll bet many of your players going home, actually would rather stay to play Poker, not slot-machine bingo drunk hidden-secret ass pocket unknown stack triple wildcard dice rolls ...
Start with perhaps having 1 structured cash game after a tournament, let them know in advance, that it will be "chips only" , no cash on table, reload between hands, NLHE or NLHE and Omaha only for that particular cash game ... Encourage the go-homers in advance to try & stay for this one, & tell all that a "secret prize" goes to the cash game winner of the nite.. ( Buy a cheap prize such as a six pack or photo of Richard Simmons, they wont know 'till the end & it will have accomplished its purpose by then ..)
I'll bet if you get feedback the next day on the structured game, you will find many asking to have more like that ....

 

[upNdown]

Everything everybody said that everyone said.

Rebuy during a live hand is a nightmare .....
Someone looks over at an opponent's stack of $9 , & decides to bet $7, ( knowing opponent will fold , call , or raise a max of $2 addnl) ... but the opponent claims he is actually going to be raising $25 more, by pulling bills out of his ass pocket???
I'll bet many of your players going home, actually would rather stay to play Poker, not slot-machine bingo drunk hidden-secret ass pocket unknown stack triple wildcard dice rolls ...
Start with perhaps having 1 structured cash game after a tournament, let them know in advance, that it will be "chips only" , no cash on table, reload between hands, NLHE or NLHE and Omaha only for that particular cash game ... Encourage the go-homers in advance to try & stay for this one, & tell all that a "secret prize" goes to the cash game winner of the nite.. ( Buy a cheap prize such as a six pack or photo of Richard Simmons, they wont know 'till the end & it will have accomplished its purpose by then ..)
I'll bet if you get feedback the next day on the structured game, you will find many asking to have more like that ....

Give the secret prize to the first guy who busts out of the cash game. The winner is already the winner.

 

[Jeff]

But Jeff you could have used that house to host your poker games in.

Balla! You canucks have the gambol in you! As people from The Hitching Post @Ronoh will tell you...I'm good stacking off the money sitting in front of me on the table (and even in my pocket). Not knowing how deep the pool is scares me!

 

[Wils]

slot-machine bingo drunk hidden-secret ass pocket unknown stack triple wildcard dice rolls

If that game exists, I'd like to see it played.

 

[Mental Nomad]

Mythological stories about people in the old west "betting the farm" aside, the "table stakes" rule exists for a reason.

Being able to pull more money out of our pocket when your hand is good is the same as being able to take your money off the table when your hand is bad. "I call your $5 flop bet, and take the rest of my money off the table, so you can start a side pot with the other guys, but I'm getting to the river. And if I hit my draw, I'm putting it all back on the table."

Being able to go in or out of your pocket based on the cards has a name in every card room in the country: cheating.

In your game, it's not cheating, because it's allowed, but it's basically the same.

 

[codeman00]

Sorry for the delay everyone...I have read these posts a few times now...Thank you so much for all of your advice. It allowed me to see my poker night from other's perspective for sure. I almost didn't post this because after I typed it, I had answered a few of my own questions. However, I'm really glad I did.

A couple of things I want to address first off was a little more of the game background:

1. This game is $2 bet limit, 4 raises max per round. I know many have thought that unknown deep pockets could come into play but it's really not the case being that it's limit.
   
2. The reason that this this game started the way it did was because this is all me and the other host knew at the time. I also was not comfortable at live NLHE because I was new and had it handed to me a couple of times at $1/$3NL. I have have learned a lot over the last couple of years. Let's just say, we didn't know any better at the time.
   
3. My game originally was a work group, not a poker player group. It was a way for us to play poker but also to do something together after work.
4. We literally had no other options to play poker at the time barring driving 2.5 hrs to a casino one way. Blowing up this game and pissing 3/4 of the people off would have meant We were back to not being able to play at all....which was not an option.

I know many of you don't play these crazy games and games where cash can come out of your pocket during hand. Think of this before you judge. The reason in-hand addon cash has to happen during these crazy games is that you have no idea how much money will go into a particular hand. With blind baseball, there, could be 10+ betting rounds easily, 6-7 of which before you can actually see you card. When I instituted no in-hand cash early on, what happened was someone would be out of money after the 7 bets not realizing how much money they had behind. Since the blind baseball format is that you have to keep paying to see cards, the no add-on cash during a hand policy caused people to be in the middle of the hand needing to pay to see the rest of their cards. The options at that point are...your hand is dead (even though you already invested money toward the pot) or you have to pull cash out of your pocket to keep going and see your next cards. The first of which is impossible because I can't tell someone that their hand is dead when they have already put $15 in the pot. By the rule off no in hand cash add-ons, that would be the only ruling. You can't split a pot there unless you restrict the person from seeing any more cards. Adding cash is a necessity for the people that aren't starting with much more than they think they need. I hope that makes sense.

I just want to go on record to Pokerdweebz that I do know how to handle side pots myself ...its just with these crazy games with a large number of betting rounds, that's not really the problem. The players not starting with enough money is the problem...or one could say, the awful games are the problem!

(my next post will be looking toward the future)

 

[codeman00]

All of you had great advice...and I knew there had to be others that had walked through this before. I was correct.

I'll bet many of your players going home, actually would rather stay to play Poker, not slot-machine bingo drunk hidden-secret ass pocket unknown stack triple wildcard dice rolls ...

Blaster, this really stuck out at me and was right in front of my face...although I didn't see it. I think you are exactly right...people don't want to know keep putting money in dumb games not knowing how much they are going to be invested and they are not playing because of it. It's so freaking obvious. I had a good friend (who is a good poker player) that came to my game one time and never came back for that reason. And now that I think about it, others leave because of this too...I know they do. They get in the middle of these crazy games, can't understand what's going on and lose all of their money in a couple of hands. We kept trying to recruit players to play the game and hoping they would come back...but we might have had the players all along but they just hate the format without telling us. Brilliant astute observation.

I really like the idea of getting a core group that will play NLHE with established buy-ins and rules, having a serious poker night, and then emailing a cherry picked list that "we have 4 seats left", etc...I think that will work. Once that is established and people like it...then we can have our normal tournament first, and then break out in to serious cash game later...or we can just do the latter first and see how many people stick around with the newly established rules. I'll get with the other host and see what we can come up with.

I do like the idea of having 3-4 games that can be called too. NLHE, Omaha, Pineapple (maybe), and I'm going to add "Big-O" to the mix too. Another thing that sucks about our current game is that we spend more time explaining/clarifying the rules than playing poker. Trying to explain the game "Sh!t" or "Ladder" takes a ridiculous amount of time....time we could spend playing poker instead.

Getting players in the seats has been difficult has caused lots of problems also. We always order pizza. We previously ordered it after everyone got there but that caused everyone to take an infinite break 2 levels into the tournament and it was tough to get everyone back to the table. So we started ordering it to arrive at the game start. People still show up 30 min late, etc. It's frustrating. I like the idea of a bonus or prize to get things started but I will have to figure out how to work food into this. Maybe, instead of saying poker starts at 7PM (with everyone rolling in late) say instead... Food arrives at 6:30PM, Tournament / Game starts at 7PM sharp and stick with it. People will learn when they need to be there and that we aren't waiting. I think instead of a prize, if you are on time, you get extra tournament chips or something like that.

A lot of great ideas here...I can't wait to share all of this with the other host.

 

[TexRex]

Plus 1 on table stakes! I had been playing in a regular game 30+ years ago. It was $.01 ante, .$25 limit; played with cash instead of chips. One night we are playing hi-lo split, 3 of us left. I got the nut low hand; the other 2 were competing for the high hand (call us Me, Idiot, Bad Guy). It was 5 card stud with a twist (trade out one card). Bad Guy could at most have had AA, and Idiot could have also had AA, but had a lower kicker. No limit on raises in that particular game (not sure why now, there was normally a 3 raise limit with a right to bet rule). You can guess what happened.

Bad Guy bets, Idiot calls, I raise. Bad Guy raises, Idiot calls, I raise, and so on. Players typically started with about $10 each, but hard to tell since it was all change. Bad Guy has the least in front of him, but he's the host. When Bad Guy taps out, he gets angry at my repeated raises (silly since he could have just called and put a stop to them), goes in his room, and brings out a $100 bill, plops it on the table, and says "Call that!" I said "Not a legitimate bet, and you can't bring money not on the table." Idiot backs me up. Bad Guy insists we have to call $100 or he wins the pot -- house rules (not previously announced). Idiot folds (which is what makes him an Idiot because as it turns out, he knew where the last A was and Bad Guy didn't have it so Idiot was going to win the high hand) because he isn't willing to bet $100. Bad Guy tells me I still have to call. I tell him no way. I give his $100 back, show my hand, and start divvying up the pot. Bad Guy turns over a pair, but it's not AA. Idiot starts laughing because he didn't raise thinking Bad Guy could have a straight (he had 4 cards showing 9-A and for some reason, Idiot thought we were playing with 6 cards). Bad Guy is furious with me. People take sides -- about half each among the 7 players with 1 neutral. However, 1 siding with me said he could have played with money in his pocket, but couldn't go elsewhere to get money. Hmmm, that's odd. Anyway, game broke up, never to be played again to my knowledge. Oddly, Bad Guy and I remained friendly, but some others had really hard feelings, perhaps not related to that. The two who sided with him -- that became a lost friendship. That group wouldn't play with chips and they refused to make hard rules about anything. It's hard to keep a game going that way.

I discussed it with the host of another game. I discovered they used to allow "playing light." If I went $1, and someone couldn't call it, he set $1 in front of him from the pot. When the hand was over, if he won, he got to keep the entire pot. If he lost, he was expected to immediately pay the "light" amount. He said it worked until one guy couldn't pay one night, and wouldn't pay the next week. Caused some hard feelings, so they instituted the table stakes rule, and some players didn't like it. I only played that way once. It wasn't my game, I wasn't comfortable with it, but everyone was honorable.

I've not experienced a game where table stakes was the rule and someone objected. It's simple, but it might create side pots with something like night baseball. But players know that game is coming and can buy in more if they like before the hand starts.

I like the idea of a limited number of games one night and crazy poker games the next, but I'd limit it to poker games (meaning 5 card hands w/standard poker hands).

Lots of players won't play tournaments and cash on the same day. I don't care what you do, those people aren't staying. Some of them might play cash only on a night though. You could poll the group and ask if some would only play one or the other. Lots of players will only play with table stakes. The thing I see is that players who won't stay might use some excuse, but not really tell you why.

This year we started an on-time bonus. It's worked fine, I think. It's cut down the number of late players, probably by them not coming at all as attendance is down.

If your group mixes like oil and water, you might be the glue, but it will come unglued when you change things. But for the sake of the game, you need to.

 

[codeman00]

I did make some attempts to improve our poker game....and used a lot of your suggestions.
I discussed the issues with several of the core group members so at least 3 of us were on the same page. I then sent out a non-threatening email to the group summarizing this. We wanted to fix at least two things.

• All cash that hits the table is turned in to chips...period...and everyone was encouraged to keep their stacks topped off.
• If any of the non-core players are left after the tournament, we will play much more simple games from a short list. This will allow the non-core players to learn without spending their entire bankroll on the first 2 hands. Games like 5 card draw, versions of holdem and omaha are fair game. And remember, our game has always been Limit....not NL.

So we implemented the rules without issue, 2 sessions...one cash session limiting the games, and the other opening it up. So we're in the first session of a simple games....many hands in, one of the core group suggested we play a complex game that I knew would felt the non-core guy. I immediately shut him down citing the email. After some tense debate and confusion, I then found out he never read the email...and one of the other players stepped in and enforced the rule (thankfully). We played as simpler game instead. The non-core player finally busted out (not bringing near enough cash) but actually played about 2 hrs in doing it. Mission accomplished...sort of.

One inadvertant thing that this caused was extremely low pot sizes during cash play. I'm used to playing $0.25/$0.50 NL to $1/$3NL. With limit and lack of complex games, it created a training grounds but tough on me. With the games still being limit, it's tough to have fun at the early session....the pots are just way too small. Even during the second session with more complex games, it's always a matter of who has the best showdown hand...and there's not any bluffing or strategy besides folding early when you know you don't have it.

I'm trying to figure out my end goal here...as one of the other core members asked me. I would like to evolve to more real poker...but it's pretty evident that more than half of our group will not be able to ever convert to that, as most of your have mentioned above. When players shows up to play $2 limit poker with $25...the writing is kind of on the wall.

 

[Poker Zombie]

Email has faults - and you see that now. I always do a newsletter. It's small (usually 1 page, with pictures), lighthearted, and informative. Many players are eager to read it quickly, but others will sometimes forget. However, they all know it's there, so if there was any change to the rules they have no reason for not knowing.

Many of us (myself included) had games that eventually shut down. Other than myself and Mrs Zombie, there are exactly zero players left from my original group. However, my game is now far better than it ever was before. I've lost players because my game was getting "too serious", but the game is also bigger than it was when it was less serious.

I hate it when I lose "friends" because they don't like the direction the group is headed in, but it is my game. It should run my way, not everybody else's way. Your game is yours. If you want to open it up to NL, or cut out the bullsh!t games, do it. I have players that love to rabbit-hunt. I simply do not allow it. I'll tell you once, or twice if you are slow. I might even make a future newsletter, so everybody at the table can jump on them to stop their sloppy habits.

It also helps to explain why you are making changes. "No going into the pocket, here's why." Make the example a bit outrageous, just to drive home the point. People are more readily willing to adopt rules if they know why the rule exists (and there is a good reason for every poker rule).

 

[TexRex]

Codeman, it helps when YOU know what you want. Even something as non-specific as "wanting a better game, so I'm trying this," is something of a plan. I'd try surveying players (not the same as giving them a vote) about ideas they might have. You can spend some time brainstorming yourself and then kick around ideas. I have a few people that I either PM or email from sites like this, and some players I run stuff by. I get a lot of ideas from those folks. I get to test things before I try them. Sometimes they've pointed out a flaw I didn't see, or added something to spice up an idea.

Zombie's right -- it's your game and should run your way. But too much of your way or the highway can lead to no more poker games. It seems that no game stays the same. All change somewhat over time. Players change over time for many reasons. I don't think I'm all that good at anticipating changes, but talking to other players helps me respond to changes. Honestly, no player has a right to expect the game to never change. For those who might object to a change, I deal with that by pointing out how others feel, and sometimes that I personally don't care for a change (I liked the old way better), but I'd rather have a game than lose players over issues that aren't that important.

I ask losing players who keep coming what they think. I pay very close attention to what they say. If they are losing but still coming, they are there for a reason. I'll try hard to accommodate a losing player and seek their opinion about changes. Your game revolves around those people. That's not to say I ignore winning players, but winning players will keep coming back because they are winning. Losing players will NOT keep coming back because they are losing, but they will keep coming back for other reasons as long as those reasons exist.

It sounds like you've gotten a good start on making positive changes. I'd love for you to keep us posted about the changes and how they are going.

 

[BGinGA]

Only thing I might add is that you don't have to switch to No-Limit or Pot-Limit games to convert your group to playing real poker with real rules. Fixed-Limit Hold'em, Omaha, Omaha Hi-Lo are all great games, and provide a much better transition for the 'limit-my-losses' type tournament player than does having them jump into cash games where they can lose their entire buy-in in one hand. Limit games take that fear completely away. Once they get hooked (and comfortable) on the cash game aspect of poker, you can ease them further into big bet games like NLHE and PLO. Baby steps, bro.... unless you don't care about alienating the existing crowd.

I'd go with fixed-limit games at the beginning, and add an occasional rotation of NL as time goes on. Maybe you end up playing 1/2, maybe not. But the group will ultimately decide what types of games have the most appeal, and at what stakes. You can also ease the tourney players into the various cash games by hosting an occasional Omaha or Crazy Pineapple tournament (or a rotation of Hold'em, Pineapple, and Omaha). You can also introduce the limit betting structure by hosting limit Hold'em tournaments, or even a HORSE tournament.

 

[inca911]

If that game exists, I'd like to see it played.

I believe it also goes by the name "3-2-1 SOHE".

 

[codeman00]

It's been an interesting progression so far...

My work game has stuck with the $2 limit but we did make some changes. I sent an email out discussing with everyone what changes I proposed and the reason behind it.

• The buy in was mandatory $20 and everyone was encouraged to keep their stack healthy because they couldn't buy in in the middle of a hand. I actually started buying in for $80 and encouraged some of the players to buy in for more to get the rest of the group accustomed to putting some real money on the table. $20 comes out of peoples pockets frequently and quickly now for most. It was once a fight to get $5-$10 at a time out.
• When certain players attended, we made it rule to only play the more simple games, like Omaha, 5 card draw, Holdem, Big O, etc depending on how many players we have. More complicated luck based games like Ladder with 6-7 betting rounds were not allowed. A couple of people grumbled but rolled with it because most players helped enforce it (because of the email).

During our last game, we had 10 players...all night which normally doesn't happens. Because of this, we could only play Holdem and Omaha Hi/Lo....still with a $2 limit. Several players independently told me days later how they got bored playing the same game and that every hand was almost pre-determined that the best hand would win at showdown. I pointed out that that is exactly why I've been wanting to change to NL because we are not playing real poker...where you have to worry about big bets and bluffs....everyone just puts in their up to $2 bet and see's what happens at showdown. There were some ah-ha moments. They realized the crazy game rules was the thing that people liked because it filled in for the excitement of the big bets and bluffing (real poker.

Three of the group approached me with wanting to play NL. Amazingly enough, two of the other guys that played once and quit, are back in the fold, excited to play real poker. We now have 5 players from the work group that want to play NL. And I'll be happy to say, I had the first NL Cash game (0.25/0.50, $40 buy in) at my house. There was hardly any drinking...all poker. I had to pull 5 players from another group but we had a full table all night, $950 worth of buy ins, and had a great NLHE cash game. Finally!

We still have several people in my work group that I'm not sure will want to play NL. Its going to be interesting to see how the 4 guys that played NL at my house go back to to playing Limit. I know I'm bored out of my mind. But the more it's talked about during that game, the more we can get the others to try it. We're thinking about doing one night playing $0.25/$0.25, $20 buy in to start to see how the others like it. We still don't have the player pool like many of you have, but it's a start in the right direction.

Thank you for all of the help and suggestions.

 

[Mental Nomad]

I know I'm bored out of my mind.

Limit shouldn't be boring. Strategy is different, and you may prefer no-limit, but it shouldn't be boring. (And it's still "real poker.") You should be deciding whether you get more money by betting out, or check-raising... or waiting to raise until the big bet round. You can be seeing whether a raise on the small-bet round will take the lead on the hand, so you can check down the turn card for free when you chooose. Etc.

My work game has stuck with the $2 limit

The discussion here just says "$2 limit." Do you mean you're playing blinds of 50c/$1, with a $1 limit on bets on the first streets, and $2 bets on the later streets? Like a $1/$2 limit game? Or is it just $2 limit all the way?

If it's $2 limit, I see the problem... $2 bets probably get made pre-flop and on the flop, and without a bigger bet size later in the hand, later betting rounds lose a lot of their strategic element. Limit really needs to have some bet-scaling built into it.

 

[FDLmold]

The only thing I can add that I have not seen mentioned is a cap. It's a fixed limit that is the most you can lose on one hand. I'm starting a game soon, mixed cash game only, micro stakes, and the cap will be around $10 because that won't scare anybody away. (If a $10 cap scares you then poker is not for you.) 5c/10c NLHE or PLO will be part of the rotation, limit games will be 25c/50c or something similar. I think it will allow for the group to also explore playing circus games and to get better at them. If we have 4+ players anyway. 3 players or less we will probably just play OFCP pineapple, also with a cap probably. I think the game will generate some interest among my friends and will have some potential.

 

[codeman00]

Limit shouldn't be boring. Strategy is different, and you may prefer no-limit, but it shouldn't be boring. (And it's still "real poker.") You should be deciding whether you get more money by betting out, or check-raising... or waiting to raise until the big bet round. You can be seeing whether a raise on the small-bet round will take the lead on the hand, so you can check down the turn card for free when you chooose. Etc.

The discussion here just says "$2 limit." Do you mean you're playing blinds of 50c/$1, with a $1 limit on bets on the first streets, and $2 bets on the later streets? Like a $1/$2 limit game? Or is it just $2 limit all the way?

If it's $2 limit, I see the problem... $2 bets probably get made pre-flop and on the flop, and without a bigger bet size later in the hand, later betting rounds lose a lot of their strategic element. Limit really needs to have some bet-scaling built into it.

My work game is a mess for lack of a better term. I typed a lot about it above but to answer your question, it's 25c ante, and $2 limit bet, with the $2 bet being all throughout the hand. This started because we played so many games like ladder, no peek, and other games with numerous betting rounds...we rarely played traditional casino poker games.

We did talk about the fact that now going to traditional games that it was important to establish the stairstep limits like you suggested. I'm glad you mentioned it but I forgot. Some of my group is getting tired of me being the poker nazi and changing our game rules every time we play. But you make a great point.

The only thing I can add that I have not seen mentioned is a cap. It's a fixed limit that is the most you can lose on one hand. I'm starting a game soon, mixed cash game only, micro stakes, and the cap will be around $10 because that won't scare anybody away. (If a $10 cap scares you then poker is not for you.) 5c/10c NLHE or PLO will be part of the rotation, limit games will be 25c/50c or something similar. I think it will allow for the group to also explore playing circus games and to get better at them. If we have 4+ players anyway. 3 players or less we will probably just play OFCP pineapple, also with a cap probably. I think the game will generate some interest among my friends and will have some potential.

We have no cap on our game for the pot, nor do we have any cap for the buy in. We do limit to 4 raises, so that does somewhat artificially cap the pot.

 

[Shaggy]

I think creating a properly structured limit cash game of traditional casino games (HE, Omaha, O8) is the proper next step. Could even do a fixed rotation. Could add the NLHE night for that select group. That way you have an experienced game and a game that develops players (with the goal of graduating to the experienced game).

 

[codeman00]

I think creating a properly structured limit cash game of traditional casino games (HE, Omaha, O8) is the proper next step. Could even do a fixed rotation. Could add the NLHE night for that select group. That way you have an experienced game and a game that develops players (with the goal of graduating to the experienced game).

I think you are on to something here.

 

[timinater]

It's going to take a while to transition this to a more serious game, but no new "serious" player will stick around in a game that lets you add on during a hand. You need to stop doing that.

Set up some rules and formats of the game, and keep it consistent.

 

[codeman00]

It's going to take a while to transition this to a more serious game, but no new "serious" player will stick around in a game that lets you add on during a hand. You need to stop doing that.

Set up some rules and formats of the game, and keep it consistent.

Add ons during a hand have been eliminated unless we play a game like Guts and a big bet is lost. Cash from the pocket must be played if enough cash isn't on the table.