Why I think NL hold em has hurt the poker scene (2 Viewers)

[rummeraises]

After decades of playing poker in casinos and home games, I am confident that the popularity of NL hold em, via the television has had a negative impact overall , in the current era. It resulted in so many players entering NL hold em, that these players bankrolls were wiped out much faster then if those players had stuck to limit games and games like 7-stud / 7stud hi-lo . The weak players could have played for many more years if NL hold em did not become so popular.

Back in the 1990s , Nl hold em was NOT the most spread game in many casinos. I used to go to Atlantic city every weekend, and the poker rooms were packed and games like limit 10-20 or 15-30 or 25-50 7 stud and stud hi -lo, were very popular. I used to have to wait to get a seat and there were many tables of these games being played. This type of action has largely dried up and places like Tunica and Atlantic city have seen MASSIVE closures of their poker rooms and if they do have a poker room , its gonna mostly be a few table of NL hold em.

Back in the 90s, the max casino rake was $5 on a $100 pot. I called 12 casinos in Florida and all of them are now raking $5 on a $50 pot and they take $2 out for bad beat hand . This means on a $50 pot, they are taking out $7 . This is a enormous increase from not long ago.

The $2 rake for the bad beat jackpot , is something I have always despised because I am confident that casinos dont always give out all the money they take in on bad beat rake. A casino could take in $200,000 before the bad beat is hit, and the casino could say they only collected $100,000 for the bad beat jackpot payout.

In this modern age of casino poker, the players are really getting screwed not only thru heavy rake/ bad beat rake but also because NL hold em has caused so many weak/average players to lose so much money, so quickly.

I wish casinos would stop the bad beat $2 rake on a $50 pot or allow each player to opt out of it when they sit down at the table . I am confident the casinos are making a lot of money with bad beat payoffs, by not paying out all the money they collected.

 

[Josh Kifer]

...... Huh.

 

[abby99]

I'm not a fan of casino BBJs either.

I used to play at Horseshoe in East Chicago, mostly around 2008. They took either $1 or $2 for "Player Promotions." It irked me because they took it from cash games but used it for tournaments. I heard they used it to meet guaranteed payouts, and I believe that.

Gaming laws cover what casinos can do with these funds.

 

[rummeraises]

The guy that replied " huh" ?

great reply ! LOL

 

[Josh Kifer]

The guy that replied " huh" ?

great reply ! LOL

I pride myself on great replies. The best replies.

 

[rummeraises]

I'm not a fan of casino BBJs either.

I used to play at Horseshoe in East Chicago, mostly around 2008. They took either $1 or $2 for "Player Promotions." It irked me because they took it from cash games but used it for tournaments. I heard they used it to meet guaranteed payouts, and I believe that.

Gaming laws cover what casinos can do with these funds.

When it comes to money and humans, they often find ways to cheat. I am confident many casinos do not payout as much as they take in, when it comes to a bad beat payout. Usually tight and conservative players do not benefit from extra rake for bad beats or high hands.

 

[Rhodeman77]

The Cleveland Jack lowered the rake by $1 from $6 max to $5, but increased the “promotion fund” drop to $2. They no longer offer a BB jackpot though. They realized when someone hits a very large payout that money doesn’t stay in the poker community, they use it to pay bills or into the bank. They also realized that it often brings in people from outside the local player pool that paid for it in the first place trying to hit it. And when they do they take it back to their city and again out of the local poker community. They now pay out a lot of high hands, splashed pots and other such payouts that the players usually put on the table since they are usually about $500. I would prefer no promotional rake at all. But of the 2 I prefer this method of distribution by far. Bad players chase hands with every small pocket pair and suited connector hoping to hit a $500 HH, in the meantime they lose a lot more chasing all of those draws!

 

[rummeraises]

I think most players that have played for a living, understand that raking every pot for a bad beat payoff, is not a beneficial aspect of the game overall. Unfortunately many casinos are now doing it. Its bad enough that the house rake went from $5 on a $100 pot, to $5 on a $50 pot, but to then also take a additional $2 out for bad beats or high hands, is just brutal as far as sucking a lot of money off the table.

 

[honkydevil]

I agree with the bad beat jackpot being dumb. Before they closed the poker room at my local casino to make space for high stakes black jack, they did the $2 BBJ rake but they would drop it immediately upon seeing a flop. Didn't even have to be $10 in the pot or anything.

 

[rummeraises]

I agree with the bad beat jackpot being dumb. Before they closed the poker room at my local casino to make space for high stakes black jack, they did the $2 BBJ rake but they would drop it immediately upon seeing a flop. Didn't even have to be $10 in the pot or anything.

Call me cynical, but I feel many casinos do a bad beat- high hand rake, because they keep a portion of that money and do not pay it all out when its time.

 

[Highli99]

Before I add my comments, can the OP please clarify which grievance is being addressed in this thread? Are we limit players bemoaning the existence and current dominance of big bet poker or toke savvy regs decrying the coerced lottery ticket purchases from jackpot drops? Depending on response I may bring different pitchforks.

 

[Alex Lundstrum]

Never worked in a poker room, but I've dealt BJ at a number of casinos. Basically a universal truth is that table games and poker rooms are not there to make money, they are there to lure in potential slot money. Based on that, I'd imagine it wouldn't be worth the risk to keep promotional dollars if the casino has stated they will be paying it all out. All it would take is one person tracking the room over a few days to find out the promotional fund is light. That kind of negative publicity would far outweigh the potential gains by the casino.

I do agree with the demerits of the BBJ though. I far more favor the smaller payouts, but would prefer removing the promo gimmicks altogether. I think I'm in the general minority with that thought tho. Many people come in to play specifically for the "high hand of the hour" promotions, and choose to ignore that they're being paid with their own money.

 

[rummeraises]

Before I add my comments, can the OP please clarify which grievance is being addressed in this thread? Are we limit players bemoaning the existence and current dominance of big bet poker or toke savvy regs decrying the coerced lottery ticket purchases from jackpot drops? Depending on response I may bring different pitchforks.

Im just making sound observations of how NL hold em, wiped out most of the 7stud styled games that used to be so popular in the casinos. Usually, 7stud games were LIMIT . I do not remember seeing any regular NL 7stud games at the casinos back in the 1990s . I used to play in the 15-30 or 25-50 or 100-200 -7stud games. Nl hold em has basically wiped those off the map in the casinos.

Im sure the casinos are glad that hold em destroyed the 7stud games, since the casino can get much more rake off hold em, due to it being dealt much faster.

 

[BukNaked36]

The main way average players negate the high variance of NLHE is to play tournaments.

For most players, after playing NLHE, limit just feels like a slowed down version with the frustration of an inability to bet big to protect against draws.

I like PLO, but 1/2 PLO is a higher variance game than 1/2 NLHE so I don't think that helps the scene.

Not a fan of bad beat jackpots, but as Rhodeman mentions, it seems like rooms are getting better about high hand and splash pot promotions which are a better way to approach it.

 

[rummeraises]

Never worked in a poker room, but I've dealt BJ at a number of casinos. Basically a universal truth is that table games and poker rooms are not there to make money, they are there to lure in potential slot money. Based on that, I'd imagine it wouldn't be worth the risk to keep promotional dollars if the casino has stated they will be paying it all out. All it would take is one person tracking the room over a few days to find out the promotional fund is light. That kind of negative publicity would far outweigh the potential gains by the casino.

I do agree with the demerits of the BBJ though. I far more favor the smaller payouts, but would prefer removing the promo gimmicks altogether. I think I'm in the general minority with that thought tho. Many people come in to play specifically for the "high hand of the hour" promotions, and choose to ignore that they're being paid with their own money.

Yes, I am in the minority also when it comes to despising additional rake for hi hands and bad beat payoffs. I have been a conservative grinder for 40 years in poker, and having a extra $2 rake taken out for such gimmicks like BAD BEAT, only hurts players like myself. It usually results in much more money being taken off the table and that money is often given back to loose players that may piss it away at slots or pay bills with it. Id much rather the money be kept on the table in in the game.

 

[Old State]

Never worked in a poker room, but I've dealt BJ at a number of casinos. Basically a universal truth is that table games and poker rooms are not there to make money, they are there to lure in potential slot money. Based on that, I'd imagine it wouldn't be worth the risk to keep promotional dollars if the casino has stated they will be paying it all out. All it would take is one person tracking the room over a few days to find out the promotional fund is light. That kind of negative publicity would far outweigh the potential gains by the casino.

I do agree with the demerits of the BBJ though. I far more favor the smaller payouts, but would prefer removing the promo gimmicks altogether. I think I'm in the general minority with that thought tho. Many people come in to play specifically for the "high hand of the hour" promotions, and choose to ignore that they're being paid with their own money.

I too hate all the stupid gimmicks.

I also agree and have been preaching how NL would (and now has) negatively affect poker since 2004-5. I’m about an hour from AC and was playing a lot of cash poker in the few years before the casinos first allowed NL. I’ve told this story before, but my regular home game was $2/4 or $3/6 limit. When Borgata (where mist of us played) allowed NL my guys wanted to switch. Our weekly game, that had lasted 3 years, disintegrated in a few months. Everyone all the sudden had shit popping up and couldn’t make it. Just out of the blue No one would admit it or even considered switching back because NL was now the cool macho game.

Also, those first years were nuts at the casinos. People who “learned” poker from watching selectively edited TV tournaments were playing like that in cash games. (I also think sensationalized TV poker has messed up many aspect of the game...but that is a different topic)

People forget poker WAS only limit poker for over 100 years and that probably was by design. I personally love limit poker and think it takes a lot of skill and discipline. It also keep people playing longer and with more frequency. Skilled players still always win but they sheer the sheep rather than skin them.

I had to start a new lower stakes game to get a regular poker game going.

 

[rummeraises]

I too hate all the stupid gimmicks.



People forget poker WAS only limit poker for over 100 years and that probably was by design. I personally love limit poker and think it takes a lot of skill and discipline. It also keep people playing longer and with more frequency.

Correct. I was taught to be a disciplined player and limit games like $10-$20 or $15-$30 stud, benefitted my style of play. For me, NL hold em has really destroyed the poker scene, especially at the casinos.

The way I see it, nl hold em, the higher rake and the gimmick bad beat/high hand rake has made the casinos much less attractive for those of us that remember the good ole days before Moneymaker and NL hold em took over our tv sets.

I too hate all the stupid gimmicks.



People forget poker WAS only limit poker for over 100 years and that probably was by design. I personally love limit poker and think it takes a lot of skill and discipline. It also keep people playing longer and with more frequency.

I doubt we will see 7stud games make a big comeback at the casinos. People generally want to play hold em and the casino rake is much better with hold em, then a 7stud game

 

[honkydevil]

 

[honkydevil]

I doubt we will see 7stud games make a big comeback at the casinos. People generally want to play hold em and the casino rake is much better with hold em, then a 7stud game

Let’s make a movement. I just got my home game to play mix including Stud, Stud8, and Razz.

 

[Highli99]

I hosted a limit night last weekend and it was probably the funnest night of poker for the whole group I’ve had in years. Lots of laughs and shenanigans.

 

[honkydevil]

I hosted a limit night last weekend and it was probably the funnest night of poker for the whole group I’ve had in years. Lots of laughs and shenanigans.

What kinda games were in your rotation? Any issues teaching noobs different games? That’s my biggest worry, scaring off newer players.

 

[Psypher1000]

I love me some 7-stud, but if the normal game in poker rooms today was 15-30 7 card stud I wouldn’t be able to afford to play poker in a casino other than in a tournament. In that regard, the proliferation of Hold’em helped the casinos gain at least one new patron - me. I’m not a fan of NLHE at the casinos for various reasons, but I’ll play the hell out of some 3/6 limit Holdem and I can find that damn near anywhere.

 

[moose]

Bbj at our local casino was always some weird amount like $32758.32. How could that be when they drop $1 chips? Then I found out the casino was allowed to take a 10% administration fee to keep track of the bbj. What a joke.

OTOH I do know that in Vegas the gaming commission requires that every dollar taken in as a jackpot drop must be paid out in some way. If you play the Mirage they have a video poker machine in the room because several years ago they dreamed up a promo where you won a pile of money if you won a high hand bonus and then drew the exact same hand in video poker. Turns out that it was almost impossible to hit, which they realized a few months later. However the gaming commission refuses to let them cancel the promo until the money collected for it is won by someone and paid out. At least they no longer pay into that promo so the jackpot remains fixed until someone finally hits it.

 

[Old State]

I doubt we will see 7stud games make a big comeback at the casinos. People generally want to play hold em and the casino rake is much better with hold em, then a 7stud game

I miss 7 stud sometimes but only for nostalgic reasons. Once I found out about holdem every other poker game felt ...well...annoying to play. I never considered that adjective until now but that is really the feeling I got. Holdem is the perfect poker game. No having to memorize folded cards and no anti. I also remember before straight poker became the norm and hated it. I had very little interest in wild card games and still don’t. For me the greatest result of the poker boom was straight poker going mainstream in home games. The thing I hated the most about the poker boom was how tournament poker became the norm with new players. IMO cash poker will always feel like REAL poker to me and tournaments like an occasional novelty.

If the story is true, holdem was invented to allow more people to play with one deck. For that reason alone casinos would prefer it. Poker profits are already minuscule for a casino.

 

[RainmanTrail]

The $2 rake for the bad beat jackpot , is something I have always despised because I am confident that casinos dont always give out all the money they take in on bad beat rake. A casino could take in $200,000 before the bad beat is hit, and the casino could say they only collected $100,000 for the bad beat jackpot payout.

I don't know how it works in other states, but when I was working in the casino industry in WA the PSJ (player supported jackpot) funds had extremely tight regulations on where the money could be held and how it could be handled/distributed. EVERY PENNY was watched like a hawk by the gambling commission. There was no fucking around with those funds. I think it's safe to assume all other states have similar rules. Poker rooms run bad beat jackpot promos because large jackpots draw in players, not because they can dip their paws in the cookie jar.

Your conspiracy theories are funny though, I'll give you that

 

[rummeraises]

I don't know how it works in other states, but when I was working in the casino industry in WA the PSJ (player supported jackpot) funds had extremely tight regulations on where the money could be held and how it could be handled/distributed. EVERY PENNY was watched like a hawk by the gambling commission. There was no fucking around with those funds. I think it's safe to assume all other states have similar rules. Poker rooms run bad beat jackpot promos because large jackpots draw in players, not because they can dip their paws in the cookie jar.

Your conspiracy theories are funny though, I'll give you that

Its not a conspiracy theory to accept that when it comes to money, humans and gambling, their is often a lot of desire to cheat people. Casinos and people that work in casinos are no different. I have been cheated in a casino BY THE CASINO and when I caught it and called them out on it, they did not deny it . You act like im some 17 year old kid making up stories. Ive been playing poker for over 40 years at casinos and home games along with running my own games for years. I would bet money that somewhere , there have been casinos that do NOT payout the full amount they took in, for bad beat jackpots. The fact that you insinuate such a scenario is non existant or a conspiracy, is silly.

Holdem is the perfect poker game. No having to memorize folded cards and no anti. I also remember before straight poker became the norm and hated it.

If the story is true, holdem was invented to allow more people to play with one deck. For that reason alone casinos would prefer it. Poker profits are already minuscule for a casino.

Many of us would disagree . In fact, I think NL hold em is NOT the perfect poker game in many ways . One reason is the nature of the all in preflop bet , which forces players to periodically risk all their chips only seeing 2 cards preflop { which is only 28% of their total hand} and then they just sit there and watch as the dealer deals out 5 more cards and the players have no more options to fold/raise/check . IMHO, this is less about poker and more about gambling. Theres a reason why this type of play is referred to as coin flip hands. Using memory for games like 7 stud, is part of the skill factor for me , which I learned to achieve at a young age . I like such poker games that require those skills.

I understand the casinos make much more money on house games instead of poker games, but I still think its is obvious that the casino would rather have hold em games, compared to 7 stud games because it is so much easier to deal and so much faster to play . This means the casino can rake 30 games per hour of hold em, compared to 15 games per hour of 7 card stud { this is just as example} . Twice the chop , just because the casino now deals more hold em, over 7 stud.

 

[APatHand]

Editor's note: Much like the OP, I suspect, this has become much more stream of concsciousness than I originally intended, but I'm creating this on a tablet that is annoying AF, from bed. I reserve the right to repost this in a more coherent fashion at a later time.

A couple things:
Based on the moaning and groaning in this thread, everyone should be playing limit Omaha/8, Razz, or A-5 California Lowball.
Most players at current NL cash game blind levels don't have a 'bankroll'; they have varying degrees of disposable income that they choose to dispose of at the poker table. A wise man said, "If you don't have a banroll, bankroll management doesn't matter."
I think the fast action of nlhe caters to an overall shrinking attention span of players that ... Oh, look, something shiny!
The mass media has introduced and nurtured the idea that every pot has to be monsterous - big bet poker generates big pots. Gamblers like big pots (and I cannot lie), poker players will take 'em as they come.
That is not to say the limit poker cannot generate big pots. Big is relative. 5/10 limit can play as big as 1/2 NL. It is the players who build the pots, not the structure.
Many players seem to have no concept that if there is no pot, there is nothing to play for. As evidence, I cite opening for $20 in a 1/2 NL game.
The Poker Devil's third greatest trick was to convince poker player's that they understood implied pot odds, the second was that they understood pot odds, and the greatest trick was getting them to ignore all that and just 'take one off'.

The Clown God loves a good schemengie and a double schemengie even more. That is why you see so many of them.

 

[Anthony Martino]

NL Hold Em hasn't hurt the poker scene, it IS the poker scene!

 

[APatHand]

NL Hold Em hasn't hurt the poker scene, it IS the poker scene!

The Emporer has no clothes!

 

[rummeraises]

Editor's note: Much like the OP, I suspect, this has become much more stream of concsciousness than I originally intended, but I'm creating this on a tablet that is annoying AF, from bed. I reserve the right to repost this in a more coherent fashion at a later time.

A couple things:
Based on the moaning and groaning in this thread, everyone should be playing limit Omaha/8, Razz, or A-5 California Lowball. st hand
Most players at current NL cash game blind levels don't have a 'bankroll'; they have varying degrees of disposable income that they choose to dispose of at the poker table. A wise man said, "If you don't have a banroll, bankroll management doesn't matter."
I think the fast action of nlhe caters to an overall shrinking attention span of players that ... Oh, look, something shiny!
The mass media has introduced and nurtured the idea that every pot has to be monsterous - big bet poker generates big pots. Gamblers like big pots (and I cannot lie), poker players will take 'em as they come.
That is not to say the limit poker cannot generate big pots. Big is relative. 5/10 limit can play as big as 1/2 NL. It is the players who build the pots, not the structure.
Many players seem to have no concept that if there is no pot, there is nothing to play for. As evidence, I cite opening for $20 in a 1/2 NL game.
The Poker Devil's third greatest trick was to convince poker player's that they understood implied pot odds, the second was that they understood pot odds, and the greatest trick was getting them to ignore all that and just 'take one off'.

The Clown God loves a good schemengie and a double schemengie even more. That is why you see so many of them.

What you label as " moaning and groaning in this thread" , I label as deep discussion on the poker scene. I may not agree with all your points, but im not gonna claim you are " moaning and groaning" because we dont fully agree.

The very nature of NL hold em, and the " all in preflop" scenario, proves that players often lose all their chips on 1 hand
{ whether thru their bad play, or bad beat} . I am merely pointing out that players can last a lot longer with their buy in , when limit games were more popular. A player that buys in for $300 in a $5-$10 limit stud game, is not gonna go broke on the 1st hand they play ...the same cannot be said for players that buy in for that same amount in a NL hold em game.

These are just factual observations that some people do not think about . It isnt moaning and groaning or conspiracy theories to discuss these things.