How often do you have your game? A discussion about long term sustainability. (1 Viewer)

[Quad Johnson]

So I started a regular home game about 2 months ago and I've been having it weekly.

Last night's game was one of the craziest we've had since starting it. A lot of big hands vs big hands.

My game is 25c/50c and outside of the one attorney I have, the stakes is a reasonable sum of money for my guys.

I originally set the max to $100 and tried to change it 2 weeks ago to $50 for the sake of keeping things friendly and less intimidating for newcomers; I was met with nothing but whinging.

This was before last night. Before Nightmare On Fifth Street. Flopped straights vs sets, trips vs boats, AA vs KK, set vs set, etc.

We've seen all these before but last night RNG decided to deal us a nice solid cluster of them throughout the course of one evening. I don't think my game has had that many all ins. One guy was stuck $200 before he left. Another was down $120 before he decided to sit out the remainder of the night (he rode with a friend who was still playing). There was over $1100 in play on my single table of 8-9 players throughout the night with a 50c big blind.

I myself lost $100 last night (I had yet to bust in my own game), both coolers. I won't get into the finer details but it opened up my eyes to some things:

Preventing fatigue as a host/organizer.
Sustainability for the future.

If I changed it from weekly to something different I might do twice a month. With the cash game being say, the first or second Friday of the month and tournament third or fourth.


I see some of you good folks host your game monthly. Others more often. What do you find works best for you and why? How often does your game run? Did you used to run it more often but changed it later? What made you change? Did you decide to lower the stakes at a later time for sustainability? Would you run it more often if you were able to?

 

[JustinInMN]

It's smart that you are thinking of sustainability.

I play in a game about once a week and host about once a month. All through a group on meetup.com.

When I host the stakes are also .25-.50 but I use an initial buy in of 40, but permit later buy-ins up to the big stack (rounded down to the nearest 10.). So I'm not sure if that counts as any more controlled. Iirc, last time I hosted I got in for 180 and clawed back to 160.

So my instinct is cutting the initial buy to 40-60 in your case makes sense. And it only takes a couple bad nights to make a player quit.

If players complain. Offer to have .25-.75 or .50-1 one week a month with a 100 max.

 

[Quad Johnson]

It's smart that you are thinking of sustainability.

I play in a game about once a week and host about once a month. All through a group on meetup.com.

When I host the stakes are also .25-.50 but I use an initial buy in of 40, but permit later buy-ins up to the big stack (rounded down to the nearest 10.). So I'm not sure if that counts as any more controlled. Iirc, last time I hosted I got in for 180 and clawed back to 160.

So my instinct is cutting the initial buy to 40-60 in your case makes sense. And it only takes a couple bad nights to make a player quit.

If players complain. Offer to have .25-.75 or .50-1 one week a month with a 100 max.

Yea, I think I am going to have to cut the buy in. I appreciate the words of wisdom Justin. Running a game is new to me all together. Sustainability is on my mind because I've invested in 2 different chip sets for cash and tourney (china clays, but still; a lot of initial capital to get this thing going), a table, quality cards, etc. and I didn't get all this stuff to not have a game going in say. 3 months, 6 months, 1 year etc.


Also Justin, so long as you're in this thread, maybe you can help me out with a situation I have currently brewing.

The attorney I spoke about in the OP. I've known him for years, good guy. However he's an attorney that also happens to be Cuban that is a former Miami Hurricanes football player.

Needless to say; he's a ball buster. Which is fine, but he busts the balls of people he likes the hardest.

I think you know where this is going; I know he's joking but it's a little hard to maintain order at a game where people are getting intoxicated and the guy trying to maintain order gets his nuts cut off every 5 seconds.

I'm not sure what to do. His behavior is nothing new and any other time (say a football night in front of the tv for example), it's all taken in stride, dished right back to him and we all have a good time with smiles on our faces. However questioning me every time something comes up makes hosting unenjoyable for me but 86ing him will definitely hurt his feelings and possibly put a strain on our friendship because I know he's going to take it so personally. That old "the guy with the biggest mouth is the biggest softy in the room" definitely rings true for him.

And last night when I tried to explain to him why we handle things the way we do, I get met with "It's not a big deal, it's such a small sum of money".

Not everyone is an attorney with an hourly rate of $500/hour, Jorge.

 

[detroitdad]

Our games are also .25/.50 blinds. We used to do a 60 dollar buy in. Now we do a 100 buy in. I find that there is less "gamble" with the 100 buy ins. Bigger stacks seem to lead to less all ins at my house (every group is different). I usually end up with the same amount of money on the table whether its 60, or 100 max buy ins.

I host once a month. There are 2-4 of us in the area that also hosts once a month. I think I'm pushing three straight months with playing every weekend.

 

[Quad Johnson]

Our games are also .25/.50 blinds. We used to do a 60 dollar buy in. Now we do a 100 buy in. I find that there is less "gamble" with the 100 buy ins. Bigger stacks seem to lead to less all ins at my house (every group is different). I usually end up with the same amount of money on the table whether its 60, or 100 max buy ins.

I host once a month. There are 2-4 of us in the area that also hosts once a month. I think I'm pushing three straight months with playing every weekend.

For me it would be that nothing really changes, but players that would lose it all in one hand that would then be busted out might still have a buy in or two left to keep them at the table and having a good time for the night.

 

[Mojo1312]

$1100 on the table is not much when you have a $100 max buy-in, especially considering the unusually high number of bad beats. Stakes are dependent upon the players in the game and what they can afford to lose. I played in a full ring $20 fixed buy-in NLHE game where there would be 40 to 45 buy-ins any given week. I play in a dealer's choice Omaha-Hi/NLHE game with a $100 min buy-in that primarily consists of mill workers. Having $3000+ on the table is not unusual. Seeing players lose $300 to $500 is a common occurrence.

I have yet to play in a game where the host has reduced the stakes. The games have either been static or their stakes have grown. I began hosting a weekly .25/.50 game with a $40 to $60 buy-in to offer something different from the $20 home games that were common in my area. I wanted to set the min-max buy-in at $60 to $100, but those stakes were too high for the home game crowd I was drawing from. Previous to the cash game, I had run a weekly MTT during the winter months. Some of those players missed the tournament format, so in addition to Thursday's cash game, I began hosting a $45 tournament every other Sunday. This lead us to having a mixed game on the alternate Sundays of the month.

Again, the players determine the stakes and the frequency in which games can be hosted. If you don't have the appetite for the higher stakes because you want to minimize your risks, then reduce the spread of the buy-in, but that doesn't appear to be the issue here considering the amount of money you had on the table. As far as the frequency, I enjoyed hosting a game twice a week, while others prefer to host once a week or once a month. As a host, the decision is yours.

 

[Rhodeman77]

For 8-9 people with $100 max buy-in $1100 on the table with all those cooler hands is surprisingly low!!!

In a normal home game with a $100 buy-in and lots of cooler hands I would expect at least $2,000 on the table, and most cases even more.

So it sounds to me like your group is already pretty conservative and not very aggressive. One strange night is just that, one night. I would guess the next week will be more typical.

I host a weekly game, going on 4 months now. It’s a $1/2 $300 Buy-in game with rebuys up to $500. I usually have 7-9 players each week. I have a player pool of about 40 to draw from, with 4-5 very steady regulars and the other seats filled by the pool each week as needed.

I am always searching for more players to add to the player pool.

 

[Quad Johnson]

Yea, after I typed up the post $1100 with a $100 max buy in I realized that is not that much, we have 3-4 players that always do the $100 max. The remainder do anywhere from the min ($25) to $40, $50, $60, $80, etc. I guess just so many coolers and one guy being down $200 only 1.5 hours into the session was just jarring for me.

I'm not going to do any changes now, going to see what happens. I just know that 3 of those guys from last night definitely won't be back next week. lol

 

[Shaggy]

Regarding the discussion with Jorge. Talk with him one on one some other time. Definitely not when drinks are involved. Let him know that the constant ball busting is hindering you as the host... can you give some specific examples? Were there rulings on errors that were questioned? Let him know that the ball busting really lessens your enjoyment of the game. Point out to him that this is a lot of money for some of the players. Have any other players shared similar concerns? If he persists, then you can uninvite him without regret.

 

[Quad Johnson]

Regarding the discussion with Jorge. Talk with him one on one some other time. Definitely not when drinks are involved. Let him know that the constant ball busting is hindering you as the host... can you give some specific examples? Were there rulings on errors that were questioned? Let him know that the ball busting really lessens your enjoyment of the game. Point out to him that this is a lot of money for some of the players. Have any other players shared similar concerns? If he persists, then you can uninvite him without regret.

Influencing table talk is a big one with him. When I speak up to nip it, he gets salty and the remainder of the night is comments of "Don't worry. Don't want anyone to need to change out their tampon".

When dealing last night, he went to put the river down early before the turn action was done. Myself and one other person both were like "hey wait a minute" because there were still people to act. It's met with a "SHUT THE FUCK UP!" (again, ball buster. nothing new for him. smile on his face after he said it) because he had planned to put the card face down, just to "have it ready". Then he explains he wasn't going to put it down, I tell him he confused a few of us at once cause it looked like he was about to put it down. He said something to the effect of "Don't worry about me, I know what I'm doing. Worry about yourself". Meanwhile, the people in the hand had a mild heart attack as they thought he was about to drop the river.

Last night a situation came up where a player realized on the flop that he hadn't paid the blind (limped pot). He goes to muck his hand and says he would've folded this preflop.

I told him whether he mucks or sticks around, he owes 50c to the pot because he still saw a flop with those cards and therefore, still has to pay for it.

Jorge interferes and argues with me on this, "it's no big deal, it's only 50c, it's such a small sum of money. Why do you take this so seriously?". I explain to him you can't just see a flop for free and then decide to stick around or not and that I'm trying to make a fair game for all of us and it's met with more ball busting. The player had no issue with it and put what he owed to the pot but Jorge didn't see it as a big deal and very vocally let all of us know.

 

[BGinGA]

Sounds like a dick. Talk to him; either he straightens up or finds a new game.

 

[JustinInMN]

Regarding the discussion with Jorge. Talk with him one on one some other time. Definitely not when drinks are involved. Let him know that the constant ball busting is hindering you as the host... can you give some specific examples? Were there rulings on errors that were questioned? Let him know that the ball busting really lessens your enjoyment of the game. Point out to him that this is a lot of money for some of the players. Have any other players shared similar concerns? If he persists, then you can uninvite him without regret.

Shaggy is giving as good an answer as I could.

I also would like to know what is happing that this would interfere with your ability to host. Is it rulings or other processes? Is he chiding players for playing for so little? That's would require intervention on your part, probably away from the game.

It's good to know you are thinking about these things, that gives your game a good chance.

 

[TexRex]

Quad, I'll say a little about stakes, but will mostly address timing and sustainability.

I started playing in 1981. A poker pro taught me this about stakes. In a limit game, 40-60x the max bet should be the buy-in. In no-limit, 200+ the ante. He said anything less and you weren't likely to be able to play out big hands without tapping out, thus cutting your winnings if you won. He never worried about limiting losses.

I've always tried to think of games in those terms. It's probably old school, but when I hear $.25/.50, I think $500-1000 buy-in and twice that for $.50/1.00, and that's just above my budget. Maybe I need to come watch a $.25/.50 game to see how people really play because a $40/60/100 buy in seems very low to me for no limit. I'm not sure this is helpful, but when I hear of cash players bailing out because of losses, I often suspect they have no real idea what their losses might be. Take all that for what it's worth to you.

Sustainability can be difficult. A regular day and time will help. It sounds like you have that. I used to do an ad hoc game monthly until one player told me to do a regular time and more would come. We play on Fridays generally. I picked that day because it didn't compete with any other games in the area that I knew of. I decided on the third Friday because it never interferes with any major holiday.

Weekly games can be difficult to sustain with just a few players. Eventually everyone is going to go through a stage of life where other things interfere. It may be kids activities, or even things in their own life. I had to stop our Friday games in the fall for my son's football games. Sometimes you might be able to shift the night, though that didn't work well for my group (tried moving it to Saturday, but several couldn't come on Saturday).

One thing I would do is survey your players and ask about days and times. I've found that invaluable for helping me pick days. It can help on frequency too.

I can't always do 3rd Friday, but I put a schedule out early in the year. If something changes, I give players as much notice as possible. That's really the best you can do. If doing weekly, you might be able to shift some games, but I suspect that is harder.

You might consider something like this -- 1st and 3rd Fri, 2nd and 4th Sat. But you will eventually have the calendar bite and those nights will be next to each other (like when the 1st of the month is Saturday). You could do, 1st & 3rd Fri, and the two Saturdays following. Just realize those aren't regular on calendar so that may negatively affect attendance at times.

Weekly, bi-weekly, and monthly (or other) can all work. For players who might go through a bad streak, 3 months of weekly losses can kill their desire to play, whereas a year of monthly games is easier to sustain losses for. As yourself this -- If YOU took bad losses 12 games in a row, do you have the ability to keep going? If you can't do that, you need to rethink stakes, frequency, or both.

The most important factor in sustainability is ABR -- Always Be Recruiting! Players are human and things will happen in their lives to stop their poker playing. I've see the following types of things kill games -- a player dies, one player moves, one player has a kid, one player changes jobs or schedule, etc. Those things happen to everyone at some point. So, you must have a steady supply of replacements. To me, the ideal game is not 10 players who will be there 90% of the time. I'd rather have 20 players who will be there 60% of the time, or 30 players who will show up 50% of the time. The more you have in your game, the less dependent you are on one person.

It's always amazed me how with a one table game, something happening to just one player can kill the game. I've seen that happen several times. One game is the last, and no one has any idea. The talk at the table is "next game," but one player can no longer play, it's a bad night for two others, and the next thing you know, the game died. That happened in a game I played in about 2 years ago.

Another thing that will help on sustainability is knowing what players like. I know in our group, I have several that can't play on Saturdays, but a few who quit coming because they can no longer play on Fridays. I know that about 40% of my players won't play in re-buy tournaments, but we have some who would like to play re-buys and on Saturdays. So, tonight I planned a special re-buy tournament (it's Saturday for those reading this later). I have a third fewer signed up than our lowest attended game in a year. I'm disappointed, though we'll do it and have fun. Maybe I shouldn't have done both on the same night. I now realize I didn't cross check to see if those who can't play on Friday are among those who won't do re-buys. Maybe it's just an off night for players for some reason. Whatever it is, it's like to only be one table.

Surveys help you figure out what your players like. I think providing what the highest percentage like helps keep the game going. So I try to see it as I provide an evening's entertainment. If they like the offering, they will come.

One other thing about sustainability is recognizing what keeps your game going. Losing players (I refer to them as donators) are what keeps the game alive. If you offer up something that discourages them from coming, your game will die. I'll give you a made up example to illustrate.

Wade is the biggest winner in your game; Larry is the biggest loser. Wade would like to control as many things about the game as possible. The more he controls, the more he wins. Let's assume Wade is a nice guy who makes suggestions and gives good reasons for them. Larry makes suggestions, plays for reasons other than winning, can't really support his ideas, but doesn't really like Wade's suggestions. I'm guessing most hosts will follow Wade's suggestions and Larry will one day quit, never to return. Why? He won't be willing to sustain the losses for things he doesn't like, and he'll have a bad taste in his mouth about your game. You aren't getting Larry back, but the chances are good, he's never going to tell you why.

Wade may or may not see Larry as a big loss. He should see keeping Larry in the game as profitable, but he may not think about it that way. Larry quits, and now the burden of sustaining the game goes to the next biggest loser.

If instead, you had tried at least some of Larry's suggestions, Larry stays in. What about Wade? He is likely to come because it's profitable. He will play in a game he doesn't like a lot of things about precisely because it's profitable, and that's really what he's interested in. He probably won't ever tell you that. If Wade drops out though, he's not a big loss to the game. It's easier to replace Wade as a poker player because anyone who plays could be brought in. Most won't be the actual drain on the game Wade is. Even if Wade is a very popular player, he's draining the money from other players. If he kills off the Larry's how do you replace the Larry's? They are much harder to replace, but replacing them is the key to keeping your game going.

So the lesson is, pay attention to what is important to the donators. They are your real customers if sustainability is a goal.

 

[Quad Johnson]

Quad, I'll say a little about stakes, but will mostly address timing and sustainability.

I started playing in 1981. A poker pro taught me this about stakes. In a limit game, 40-60x the max bet should be the buy-in. In no-limit, 200+ the ante. He said anything less and you weren't likely to be able to play out big hands without tapping out, thus cutting your winnings if you won. He never worried about limiting losses.

I've always tried to think of games in those terms. It's probably old school, but when I hear $.25/.50, I think $500-1000 buy-in and twice that for $.50/1.00, and that's just above my budget. Maybe I need to come watch a $.25/.50 game to see how people really play because a $40/60/100 buy in seems very low to me for no limit. I'm not sure this is helpful, but when I hear of cash players bailing out because of losses, I often suspect they have no real idea what their losses might be. Take all that for what it's worth to you.

Sustainability can be difficult. A regular day and time will help. It sounds like you have that. I used to do an ad hoc game monthly until one player told me to do a regular time and more would come. We play on Fridays generally. I picked that day because it didn't compete with any other games in the area that I knew of. I decided on the third Friday because it never interferes with any major holiday.

Weekly games can be difficult to sustain with just a few players. Eventually everyone is going to go through a stage of life where other things interfere. It may be kids activities, or even things in their own life. I had to stop our Friday games in the fall for my son's football games. Sometimes you might be able to shift the night, though that didn't work well for my group (tried moving it to Saturday, but several couldn't come on Saturday).

One thing I would do is survey your players and ask about days and times. I've found that invaluable for helping me pick days. It can help on frequency too.

I can't always do 3rd Friday, but I put a schedule out early in the year. If something changes, I give players as much notice as possible. That's really the best you can do. If doing weekly, you might be able to shift some games, but I suspect that is harder.

You might consider something like this -- 1st and 3rd Fri, 2nd and 4th Sat. But you will eventually have the calendar bite and those nights will be next to each other (like when the 1st of the month is Saturday). You could do, 1st & 3rd Fri, and the two Saturdays following. Just realize those aren't regular on calendar so that may negatively affect attendance at times.

Weekly, bi-weekly, and monthly (or other) can all work. For players who might go through a bad streak, 3 months of weekly losses can kill their desire to play, whereas a year of monthly games is easier to sustain losses for. As yourself this -- If YOU took bad losses 12 games in a row, do you have the ability to keep going? If you can't do that, you need to rethink stakes, frequency, or both.

The most important factor in sustainability is ABR -- Always Be Recruiting! Players are human and things will happen in their lives to stop their poker playing. I've see the following types of things kill games -- a player dies, one player moves, one player has a kid, one player changes jobs or schedule, etc. Those things happen to everyone at some point. So, you must have a steady supply of replacements. To me, the ideal game is not 10 players who will be there 90% of the time. I'd rather have 20 players who will be there 60% of the time, or 30 players who will show up 50% of the time. The more you have in your game, the less dependent you are on one person.

It's always amazed me how with a one table game, something happening to just one player can kill the game. I've seen that happen several times. One game is the last, and no one has any idea. The talk at the table is "next game," but one player can no longer play, it's a bad night for two others, and the next thing you know, the game died. That happened in a game I played in about 2 years ago.

Another thing that will help on sustainability is knowing what players like. I know in our group, I have several that can't play on Saturdays, but a few who quit coming because they can no longer play on Fridays. I know that about 40% of my players won't play in re-buy tournaments, but we have some who would like to play re-buys and on Saturdays. So, tonight I planned a special re-buy tournament (it's Saturday for those reading this later). I have a third fewer signed up than our lowest attended game in a year. I'm disappointed, though we'll do it and have fun. Maybe I shouldn't have done both on the same night. I now realize I didn't cross check to see if those who can't play on Friday are among those who won't do re-buys. Maybe it's just an off night for players for some reason. Whatever it is, it's like to only be one table.

Surveys help you figure out what your players like. I think providing what the highest percentage like helps keep the game going. So I try to see it as I provide an evening's entertainment. If they like the offering, they will come.

One other thing about sustainability is recognizing what keeps your game going. Losing players (I refer to them as donators) are what keeps the game alive. If you offer up something that discourages them from coming, your game will die. I'll give you a made up example to illustrate.

Wade is the biggest winner in your game; Larry is the biggest loser. Wade would like to control as many things about the game as possible. The more he controls, the more he wins. Let's assume Wade is a nice guy who makes suggestions and gives good reasons for them. Larry makes suggestions, plays for reasons other than winning, can't really support his ideas, but doesn't really like Wade's suggestions. I'm guessing most hosts will follow Wade's suggestions and Larry will one day quit, never to return. Why? He won't be willing to sustain the losses for things he doesn't like, and he'll have a bad taste in his mouth about your game. You aren't getting Larry back, but the chances are good, he's never going to tell you why.

Wade may or may not see Larry as a big loss. He should see keeping Larry in the game as profitable, but he may not think about it that way. Larry quits, and now the burden of sustaining the game goes to the next biggest loser.

If instead, you had tried at least some of Larry's suggestions, Larry stays in. What about Wade? He is likely to come because it's profitable. He will play in a game he doesn't like a lot of things about precisely because it's profitable, and that's really what he's interested in. He probably won't ever tell you that. If Wade drops out though, he's not a big loss to the game. It's easier to replace Wade as a poker player because anyone who plays could be brought in. Most won't be the actual drain on the game Wade is. Even if Wade is a very popular player, he's draining the money from other players. If he kills off the Larry's how do you replace the Larry's? They are much harder to replace, but replacing them is the key to keeping your game going.

So the lesson is, pay attention to what is important to the donators. They are your real customers if sustainability is a goal.

Thanks Tex. I appreciate the words of wisdom. I need to get on the recruitment factor, just not sure how to go about doing it.

How do you handle recruitment? Meetup.com? I'm unfamiliar with the website and certainly don't want to draw attention from unwanted individuals.

FYI, thanks in advance to all of you on here at PCF.com. I've been on several cards sites, but this community is by far the least condescending I've come across in regard to discussing poker and organizing games. Mapping out chip sets is what eventually brought me here through google searches. Little did I know, this was the forum I actually wanted from the get go.

 

[JustinInMN]

Whoa these are pretty agregious actually.

I generally handle the table talk thing by just simply saying "the hand is live" without calling anyone out. That has taken care of 100% of issues without singling anyone out. (It's what good professional dealers do in my observation.)

The big blind scam is bad.

Honestly, tell him your feelings won't be hurt if the game is beneath him, but you want to keep the game going and the stake is what facilitates that and players expect to be treated fairly. This way you present him with the choice of playing along or leaving. Either answer is better for your game long term. He's going to cost you a player sooner or later of something isn't done.

 

[JustinInMN]

+1 for meetup.com. Think of it as of Facebook just spun events on to a separate website. It helps you find people with common interests. I am in a group called "Minneapolis Rounders" with hundreds of members throughout the twin cities area posting games. Usually I can pick from 2-3 a week within a 30 minute drive. (But my favorite game is a
.50-1nlhe that is Sunday nights in my own neighborhood . )

See if there may be something comparable in your area. A lot of people in these groups that used to play bar tournaments.

 

[DrStrange]

I have been hosting locally for about 15 years. I host once a week, though not weekly - every other Tuesday plus 2nd, 4th, 5th Saturdays and "once a month, mostly" for the biggest stakes games. Attendance runs from six-eight on Tuesday night and from eight to fifteen on Saturdays and the "big" game.

Most of my games have very low buy-in caps. $0.25/$0.50 blinds but a $20 max buy-in for Tuesday nights and 2nd Saturdays. Yes, yes, yes I know such short stacks are often looked down upon as "not real poker". But it is a lot more sustainable when the weaker players are "only" losing $50/night, which works out to ~$2,000 per year ( not counting the other games we play)

Half my games feature limit or spread limit betting. There is something to be said for the rush of betting big piles of chips. However, there is a lot more to be said about not fleecing the bad players too fast. Losing $50 in a long night of fun and comradery can be an acceptable price for entertainment. Losing faster and going home or losing a lot more each night is a lot less fun.

The occasional big dollar game is a great testament to how the other side of the coin works. This is a $1/$2 game with $60 to "match the biggest stack" buy-ins. Rarely the game will get bigger than $1,000 effective stacks, the record is something close to $2,000 effective stacks. Normally we top out at something like $750 effective stacks. The biggest losers are down in excess of $1,000, the best winners make $1,000+. A bad year in this game alone could cost in excess of $10,000. This game has run for at least a decade but the player turn over is significant. I think the attrition runs something like 25% a year. There are periods where we go for several months, unable to find enough interest in a game. Of the twenty(ish) original players, six remain. This means we have to recruit hard and expect to lose players frequently.

Sustainability means matching your players' threshold for losses vs their enjoyment of the game. In my case, it means spreading a wide array of games with differing buy-in structures. Few of the low stakes players play in the big game and few of the high rollers join in with the $20 max buy-in games.

I have never cancelled a Saturday night game due to low attendance and only twice cancelled a Tuesday night game. **** knocking on wood **** It has been a long and enjoyable run. The games are sustainable and people have a good time.

In the end, this is the fundamental equation, fun > risk of losses -=- DrStrange

 

[Quad Johnson]

Whoa these are pretty agregious actually.

And that's my problem. These are not things I would tolerate, however that's just Jorge. So basically, I'm dealing with his behavior at a poker table which is a whole new thing for me all together.

 

[JustinInMN]

And that's my problem. These are not things I would tolerate, however that's just Jorge. So basically, I'm dealing with his behavior at a poker table which is a whole new thing for me all together.

I would find time to converse before the next game and point out why he is harming your game. Address that the rules need to apply to everyone (relating to the owed blind thing) and that is in the best interest of the same. You can't run a game that bends to one player, nor is a game practical without simple rules and safeguards.

I'm sure others might suggest what needs addressing.

 

[Quad Johnson]

+1 for meetup.com. Think of it as of Facebook just spun events on to a separate website. It helps you find people with common interests. I am in a group called "Minneapolis Rounders" with hundreds of members throughout the twin cities area posting games. Usually I can pick from 2-3 a week within a 30 minute drive. (But my favorite game is a
.50-1nlhe that is Sunday nights in my own neighborhood . )

See if there may be something comparable in your area. A lot of people in these groups that used to play bar tournaments.

I have no groups in my area offering poker. I'd have to start the group myself as well as pay the subscription fee. It says there's 50 people with interest in it but meetup.com is a whole new territory for me!

I'll start the group and see what happens with others to determine if it's worth me keeping an active subscription or not.

 

[Trihonda]

I like the $60-100 buyin amounts. I think we play the same stakes and routinely have 2000+ on the table by nights end.

As for recruiting, I only host monthly, but find the ABR rule totally necessary. I have 60 ppl on my list and I take the first Ppl to rsvp. I recruit from people I’ve played with (local bar games, etc) or my neighbors who play. That said, many ppl on my list only play occasionally.

Local bar games have a bunch of dregs and scrubs... but I’ve done well at finding the diamonds in the rough. But most importantly is quality players over quantity. This actually helps the game grow naturally

 

[PlaidDragon]

Jorge interferes and argues with me on this, "it's no big deal, it's only 50c, it's such a small sum of money. Why do you take this so seriously?

His argument is self defeating given the logical counter: "It's such a small sum of money, so he should have just thrown it in." and/or "With hundreds of dollars on the table you're fretting over pennies."

 

[TexRex]

Meetup can be good, but be careful. Where I am, there are some really good players. I got 7 from Meetup for a game, and their play on average was way above ours. I had people say "If this is the way you are going, I'm out." So I've not done Meetup again.

Of course inviting people you know is probably the single best way to do it. One of my most productive was I was in an aquarium place one day, and the guy helping me turned out to live close to me. We got to chatting, and I asked him about poker. While he didn't play, he had a brother and sister who played. Net result was 5 new regular players to my game, and a part timer. That was several years ago. By now, 2 have moved to another state; one as our entry fee went up, he dropped out; one couple can't play on Fridays any more, but they were a significant part of our game for over 7 years. The 25% turnover per year is probably pretty normal. That's why you need new players all the time

Two things I've tried to do for recruiting have worked fairly well.

Player invites -- I tell players if they know someone, invite them. Sometimes I specifically tell them we need to increase the number of players. Someone usually knows someone who would be a fit for our game. I think this is the best way (short of your own invitations anyway). Players you trust are likely to invite those they trust.

Bar leagues -- I've recruited from bar leagues. I haven't played in a bar league game in years, but I know players who do. I also know a guy who started a business for bar leagues and his first game, I provided more than half the players. I've done other things for him, so even though I don't come and he rarely comes to mine, I'm known there. He has places 5-6 nights a week, and he has hundreds of players. Some of my players deal for him, and they look for decent candidates. I much prefer that to me having to go play there.

Playing in the bar leagues though can work well. I did that for a few years. If I felt like I really needed to grow my game and other methods weren't working, I'd go back for a while. We have at least 3 different groups I know of. I bet I could dedicate myself to going 3 times a week (once for each group) and build my game within 2-3 months. Some play in the bar leagues for lack of other options. Some really prefer the bar leagues. They are not good candidates for home games in my experience. You may also meet other hosts who are doing the same thing.

The biggest down side to me of direct (meaning me doing it) bar league recruiting is I have to go play games where I hate the structure and eat food I don't really like. I was only willing to do that for so long. But some love it. If you do, great. If you don't, go only to recruit and then drop out. Your schedule can change too! That, BTW, can be a player's excuse when they no longer want to play but they don't want to tell you that.

Other hosts can be a good way to recruit. I've recruited from other games and still have some players recruited that way. They are dedicated enough to poker that they make good long-term players, and they can help recruit. The biggest down side is you might not like that game, but you need it to recruit.

One thing I didn't mention is good rules. Players like order. Those who don't will destroy your game. Even those that might not like specific things about your rules will like the consistency of them.

We have a no harassment rule, but loosely interpret it. We use the WSOP/TDA rule, but in a home game, you may have some friends who love to razz each other and they aren't bothered by it. In those cases, we tolerate it, but everyone know that if someone objects to it, our rule will be strictly enforced. That's important. I lost a player once from two guys teasing each other beyond his comfort level, even though they weren't bothering him directly. He wanted a more genteel game I guess. You can't let it get out of hand, but it's a lot easier to enforce if you have a specific rule.

 

[Trihonda]

I have a list of printed rules... but the number one (generally only rule announced pre-game) is that my games are “douche-baggery free”. Explained, if necessary, is to say that everyone is a guest in my home, and I expect people to treat each other accordingly.. additionally, be a good sport. If you win, win nicely, if you lose, lose nicely. Don’t be a douche, get invited back.

 

[TexRex]

Trihonda, that's a good rule! I may add that, though it's rarely been a problem. Great perspective on being a guest and treating other guests well.

 

[AceFour]

We do a 0.25/0.50 and either do $40 or $60 for initial buys. After that up to $100. In a 1 table 10 player game typically 1400 - 1600 floating around. Pots are typically around if not heads up 200bb and sometimes higher then 400bb. Most folks will do 3 buys of $40 tops, some a lot more. The game is getting more and more aggressive in betting and a few folks have been chased off but really when I take a hard look at the betting it is not out of line.

 

[DoubleEagle]

Our game is every Tuesday. First Tuesday of the month is a $1/3 cash game. All other Tuesdays are tournaments with $50 buy-Ins with re-entries. Cash games we average 15 to 18 players. Tourneys are 15 to 30 players. We also have about four or five long (9 hours) tourneys each year with a $100 buy-in with re-entries. Group been together for about 12 years or so. Players come and players go.

 

[CHP TD]

Yea, I think I am going to have to cut the buy in. I appreciate the words of wisdom Justin. Running a game is new to me all together. Sustainability is on my mind because I've invested in 2 different chip sets for cash and tourney (china clays, but still; a lot of initial capital to get this thing going), a table, quality cards, etc. and I didn't get all this stuff to not have a game going in say. 3 months, 6 months, 1 year etc.


Also Justin, so long as you're in this thread, maybe you can help me out with a situation I have currently brewing.

The attorney I spoke about in the OP. I've known him for years, good guy. However he's an attorney that also happens to be Cuban that is a former Miami Hurricanes football player.

Needless to say; he's a ball buster. Which is fine, but he busts the balls of people he likes the hardest.

I think you know where this is going; I know he's joking but it's a little hard to maintain order at a game where people are getting intoxicated and the guy trying to maintain order gets his nuts cut off every 5 seconds.

I'm not sure what to do. His behavior is nothing new and any other time (say a football night in front of the tv for example), it's all taken in stride, dished right back to him and we all have a good time with smiles on our faces. However questioning me every time something comes up makes hosting unenjoyable for me but 86ing him will definitely hurt his feelings and possibly put a strain on our friendship because I know he's going to take it so personally. That old "the guy with the biggest mouth is the biggest softy in the room" definitely rings true for him.

And last night when I tried to explain to him why we handle things the way we do, I get met with "It's not a big deal, it's such a small sum of money".

Not everyone is an attorney with an hourly rate of $500/hour, Jorge.

i have a guy like this. You have to take him aside and have a "common understanding" talk about whats acceptable. This is a poison that can kill a game.

Its your house - its not a democracy. Don't let him dismiss you in your own house. Friends don't do that. if one of my friends crossed a line like that its an instant Get the F... out. and if you don't want to come back and apologize you were never a friend anyway.

this is a very tough issue. You house your rules.

He is disrespecting you and your hospitality by dismissing you. Its not about the money its about not acting like a dik at your house.

Leadership requires you to do the hard stuff. This is part a of hosting.

Basically id approach it outside of the game, have a fireside chat and make it clear that you like him and want him as a part of the game but if he cant respect you when doing it he is not welcome.

Remember the Hug slap hug approach. Start with you like him. then, his behavior is not ok. and you'd like him at the game but only if he respects you.

if he gets it he will apologize and change. If he doesn't you have to have to do it again and say your not welcome at the game anymore.

true friendships actually get better when you do this. Their respect for you will grow.

And remember - The things that you do that require courage define you.

Sadly when you shy away - that defines you as well.

Good luck and good hunting.

 

[CHP TD]

Jorge interferes and argues with me on this, "it's no big deal, it's only 50c, it's such a small sum of money. Why do you take this so seriously?".

It IS a big deal. Who the F.. does he think he is.

Your job is to uphold the integrity of the game. if you let this go and someone else does it. there has been a precedent set and you cant say no. He still owes 50 cents and you should get it with an apology to you and the person who won the hand. Or dont come back. Period.

How many times are you going to allow this guy to walk all over you?

Honestly this guy is no friend. He disrespects you in your own home!!!! He also degrades the game.

I cant believe your not spitting chunks at this.

Wake up! He is just shitting on you, your game, your friends and your hospitality.

If i saw that I'd not come back to your game.

 

[Quad Johnson]

It IS a big deal. Who the F.. does he think he is.

Your job is to uphold the integrity of the game. if you let this go and someone else does it. there has been a precedent set and you cant say no. He still owes 50 cents and you should get it with an apology to you and the person who won the hand. Or dont come back. Period.

How many times are you going to allow this guy to walk all over you?

Honestly this guy is no friend. He disrespects you in your own home!!!! He also degrades the game.

I cant believe your not spitting chunks at this.

Wake up! He is just shitting on you, your game, your friends and your hospitality.

If i saw that I'd not come back to your game.

I completely hear you, and I agree which is why I'm where I'm at. I forgot to mention that of my regulars, this is only his second attendance and first night really being belligerent. I did take control of the situation but it grinded my gears and now here I am. I planned to call him tomorrow just because I don't think I will see him before the game.