How do I keep my "high roller" buddy entertained/moderated? (1 Viewer)

[Darson]

Well the problem is that most of the guys aren't that good and often chase a straight or a flush to the river so make for easy pickings. And since we're only playing once a month, they don't really get he chance to improve. For example: two months ago I had a buddy visiting from California who has never played poker before but his brother works for Zynga and set him up with an online account - he practiced for a couple of weeks and came in 3rd of 10 in his first live game!

 

[TheOctagon]

... often chase a straight or a flush to the river so make for easy pickings.

This is easy. Tell them to stop that nonsense! Fold more than you call. Raise when you have the goods. If you're hoping for your gutshot straight with an over card or even two overcards showing, and you're facing bets and rasies - you're probably beat. Lay it down.

What are they calling pre flop with? Any old suited hand? This is easy. Give them a better idea of starting ranges! Premium only to start.

 

[Darson]

I didn't mention that although my buddy wins, I come second (or win if he can't make it).

I should be teaching them to play fewer hands - less people in the hand means less time per hand which means more hands per hour and more chance to get good cards.

 

[WedgeRock]

Well the problem is that most of the guys aren't that good and often chase a straight or a flush to the river so make for easy pickings.

All right, here's the thing. You only play premium hands. You only start with jacks or better split, nines or better wired, three high cards to a flush. If it's good enough to call, you gotta be in there raising, all right? I mean, tight, but aggressive. And I do mean aggressive. That's your style, Professor. I mean, you gotta... you gotta think of it as a war.

 

[TheOctagon]

 

[Beakertwang]

I'm probably the best player at our games, but that's not saying much. A lot of new players. They would jokingly complain about me "raising all the time" (I'm not tight, by any means, and if I'm playing, I'm raising limpers pre-flop), but I've noticed they're starting to raise more preflop, and betting stronger when they connect with the flop. They'll learn to play a better game. Or they'll it as a fun night for $20, which is cool, too.

 

[Wils]

I get all the people saying, "just play tight and you'll take his money" but often it isn't that simple. They've come to play at one stake (for cents), and they're being forced to play at another (dollars). I'd not want to play that game - at least if it became the de facto game type. As a one off, fine. NL is NL, after all, and it would be good to mix things up occasionally - but e.v.e.r.y game would kill it.

 

[BGinGA]

I get all the people saying, "just play tight and you'll take his money" but often it isn't that simple. They've come to play at one stake (for cents), and they're being forced to play at another (dollars). I'd not want to play that game - at least if it became the de facto game type. As a one off, fine. NL is NL, after all, and it would be good to mix things up occasionally - but e.v.e.r.y game would kill it.

Yeah, I sorta agree with Wils -- if your players want to play one way (and you won't know this unless you ask), and your friend wants to play bigger/another way, either he'll end up forcing them to play his game or they'll end up folding and not playing at all -- and either scenario will drive them away.

Regardless of your friendship, it sounds like he's not fitting in with the other players very well, and is bad for the game. Unless you want poker night to eventually become just a heads-up battle, you need to step up as the host and protect the other players and your game before they all just quit playing.

 

[TheOctagon]

I get all the people saying, "just play tight and you'll take his money" but often it isn't that simple. They've come to play at one stake (for cents), and they're being forced to play at another (dollars). I'd not want to play that game - at least if it became the de facto game type. As a one off, fine. NL is NL, after all, and it would be good to mix things up occasionally - but e.v.e.r.y game would kill it.

This only makes sense if they’re playing cash games, right? You can’t make a tournament game “play bigger” than its original stake unless you allow unlimited rebuys at which point the guy who brought the most cash has an effectively greater amount of chances to stick around. You can be aggressive, but all you’re doing is exposing more of your stack earlier than I suspect you’d want to.

These guys are all losing the same amount: their $20 buy in. Nobody is asking them to play a $1/$2 when they came for $0.25/$0.50.

 

[Old State]

Yes, players like that are very bad for that type of game. Most very low limit players are usually 90% about hanging out and having fun and 10% about poker. They are thinking “I can only lose $xx and that is basically what I would spend at the bar, etc”. Take away the fun factor and there goes your game. Next time you want to play it will be a whole bunch of “sorry we have plans that night”.

I recently invited some newer players into my low limit friend and neighbor game to help fill seats. All of them were really nice guys and perfect gentlemen. That said they are pretty good players and some of my neighbors noticed and mentioned it to me. Now two of them have stopped responding to the group text or have said they were busy when I know they weren’t. It’s crazy but sometimes that’s all it takes to lose a player like that.

 

[Wils]

This only makes sense if they’re playing cash games, right?

Not really. Playing against someone who is a) much more aggressive than anyone else and b) a much better player is going to turn off the social players. If nothing else, every tourney is going to be an exercise in watching one person dominate the proceedings.

Even the more competitive (but I assume not great) players will be turned off because they want to win, not let someone else show them how good *he* is all the time.

YMMV - some people will hate the dynamic, some people won't care, some people will love it. I don't think anyone can provide a definitive "this is a good/bad thing" answer - as BGinGA said, questions need to be asked of his current crew.

 

[TheOctagon]

I don't honestly know how I'd handle this. "Git gud" is too harsh for the casuals and "play soft" is not good for the best friend. I suppose ask the rest of the crew, like @BGinGA and @Wils suggest, and see if they're okay with this or if they're getting sick of losing every tournament and microstakes game. If they're cool getting cleaned out because they enjoy the company, then change nothing. If they're getting bummed out, I guess you have to split the crew into "willing to play against aggro with deep pockets" vs "just wants to throw dimes and get hammered". If you have sufficient overlap, you can still run 6-8 players every time you get a game going.

 

[Darson]

So here's a thought - how about changing up the game format so that there are more opportunities. For example, having 4x 1hr games with $10 buy-in each so that there's more randomness?

I really want someone other than me and my pal to leave with winnings! Otherwise people will definitely stop coming.

 

[TheOctagon]

So here's a thought - how about changing up the game format so that there are more opportunities. For example, having 4x 1hr games with $10 buy-in each so that there's more randomness?

I really want someone other than me and my pal to leave with winnings! Otherwise people will definitely stop coming.

You can run tournaments with turbo blinds as others have suggested. It turns into a jam fest pretty fast but if you want more RNG vs skill that’s one way. I don’t know about the hour time limit though. Maybe two 2hr scheduled turbo tournaments in one night?

 

[PlaidDragon]

My game is almost entirely a bunch of casual amateurs and the stakes are $20 buy-in with rebuys.

I have one pal who in the online days would play on the $40/$80 tables. Compared to the rest of us, he's the high roller! He usually comes with a pocket full of cash with the objective of rebuying as many times as he can to stay in the game. Usually he only buys in once and wins! If we get in a 5c/10c cash game, he'll only bet in dollars.

Is it fair to ask him to chill ....?

Usually I LIKE people like this. It's just a question of catching a hand and/or punishing him when he's betting with only air.

You can't "ask him to chill" really. The likely responses would be in the nature of "what? chill how? you want me to not bet?" There's nothing good about that and he might get resentful or hyper frustrated.

I think a little generic education of your other table denizens about your agro friend is the best way to handle it. The odds say he's not going to catch a monster every hand or every other hand. If he pushes they need to figure out when to push back. If they can sting your agro buddy every now and then it's likely the situation will correct itself.

 

[haslettworm]

Playing against better players should make "you" a better player. However, if many/most of your players are there for social reasons, they may not get any benefit from the inclusion of a "pro." Here is my suggestion for resolving you problem. First, eliminate rebuys. Lose your chips and you are done. No rebuys in the WOSP main event. This will slow down your buddy or send him packing early with his aggressive play. Second, use a payout system which minimizes the benefit of finishing first. Paying 4 places at a 10 man table with small differentials (40%, 30%, 20%, 10%) will reduce his profit when he does finish first and have more people go home winners. Lastly, have a blind structure which places a greater emphasis on luck vs skill. I know someone at the forum who can help you with that. The social players should not have a problem with any of these changes. The "pro" probably will, but that is what you want.

 

[WedgeRock]

First, eliminate rebuys.

Sage advice. Could backfire in the short term, but I agree that should curb the "eff it" aggression.

 

[haslettworm]

Regarding improving everyone's game, rather than "telling" them how to play, why not tell them you have started a poker library. Put a copy of Harrington On Holdem or Kill Phil on the table and encourage them to give it a read. No use adding a "know it all" to a group that already has a "table bully". These books are readily available used on amazon or eBay for a few dollars. Poker is a little like golf, more fun if you have some idea of how to play. On the other hand, I would never try to improve my opponent's game in either sport. I have enough trouble winning as things stand.

 

[Darson]

As an update: I told him "no rebuys" on Friday and he was initially stunned but said fine. Since we were short handed with only 4 of us (over half the usual crowd are on vacation) we ended up playing three games - the first took 2 hours and he didn't win, the second too about 15 minutes due to a three way all in which busted two of us early on and I won and for the third we played a turbo game with blinds up every 5 minutes and he won that.

So no rebuys worked well with only a few of us but I'm not sure if this will work when there are 10 guys around the table. I don't want someone to bust out early and have to sit eating hotdogs while the rest play. I'm now starting to understand why rebuys are stopped after a certain amount of time - maybe I should stop rebuys after the first hour when we have lots around the table.

 

[TheOctagon]

I'm now starting to understand why rebuys are stopped after a certain amount of time - maybe I should stop rebuys after the first hour when we have lots around the table.

Unlimited rebuys is non-standard across the board for the reasons you're discovering. I'm surprised your friend expected consistently unlimited rebuys (even if he doesn't avail himself of the privilege frequently). If he's a seasoned poker player, he should know tournaments always cap rebuys before a certain blind level. You'll have to figure out which blind level works to cut off rebuys at for your games and speed of play. You may also run into a scenario where he starts a jam fest right before the rebuy deadline and that could also make the game play strangely, but it would also mean he dumps a lot more into the tournament pot and then could get stacked in the next blind level.

 

[TheOctagon]

I don't want someone to bust out early and have to sit eating hotdogs while the rest play.

In a single table tournament, someone has to be first out. Even if that guy ends up first out right after rebuys close, he still could have to sit around for a while. What do you usually do when people bust out? Second table for cash games? Or do you just have a gallery until you start the next game? Maybe get a smaller table setup for a side cash game while your main tournament rolls on.

 

[JustinInMN]

I'm now starting to understand why rebuys are stopped after a certain amount of time - maybe I should stop rebuys after the first hour when we have lots around the table.

Ding ding. You'll figure out what's best, that's a good place to start.

 

[Nimrodscall]

Just limit re-buys to the first two or three levels.

This is what I was going to suggest too.

 

[Nimrodscall]

If there's no limit on rebuys, do you play all night? The three legs that hold up the poker game are time, money, and entertainment. If one leg is too long or short, adjust the other legs. Lol.

 

[BGinGA]

Agreed, eliminating re-buys or limiting them to just one per player for the first hour or so are both sound approaches to curb his behavior.

So is applying an intrinsic value to NOT re-buying:

Issue a RE-BUY chip with each stack, which can be redeemed for a full starting stack at full price any time between hands for the first hour (you don't have to be busted, but you surrender any chips you have if not). Players may redeem an unused RE-BUY chip at the end of the re-buy period for a free add-on (typically 1/4 of the starting stack size).

So if your buddy re-buys, no free add-on. Those players who bust on bad beats and cooler hands can still re-buy vs being eliminated, and those who manage to get through without re-buying get extra chips for their unused re-buy option -- because it has value.

Makes early wild aggro play less about how much is in the wallet, and more about what the 'value' of re-buying really is -- along with the value of NOT re-buying. The cost to re-buy is both monetary, and ultimately, fewer chips.