Mason's Prediction On NL

[Lucky]

Mason's prediction was wrong. The question is whether or not he really believed what he was saying. The bottom line is this:

1. Casinos would prefer not to spread NL.

2. NL is more fun, especially for the very players at the greatest disadvantage.

3. As the writing partner (more accurately the business partner) of one of the world's most respected LIMIT POKER EXPERTs, Mason was clearly protecting his own business interests, just as the guy at Jiffy Lube does when he proclaims with religious fervor that you're insane if you go 3,001 miles between oil changes.

4. NL is THE poker game of the present and future.

5. Both online and B&M casinos will be spreading a lot more NL.

[SnakeRat]

How does him making some prediction protect his business interests?

The Jiffy Lube guy saying your car will break down if you dont get your oil changed is very different than Mr. Malmuth making a prediction about poker's future.
You think what Mr. Malmuth says can cause NL to be less popular, thus causing people to buy more 2+2 books?

[JTG51]

Mason may well end up being wrong, I don't know, but it's still way too early to tell. NL games are still brand new in lots of places. If the bad players end up losing a lot faster than they did at limit hold'em, the NL games will become less and less popular.

It'll also be interesting to see what happens to all of the new NL games when the public becomes less fascinated with poker on TV.

I'm sure that NL will stay more popular than it was a couple of years ago, but I'll be shocked it it becomes more popular than limit hold'em any time soon.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Lucky:

You're absolutwly right. I only made those predictions to protect my business interests.

The fact that no limit as a side game was completely dead for years untill the WPT came along last year shouldn't be considered. Also, virtually all the no limit games that are being spread have caps on the buy-ins which really makes them a little different from a standard no limit game.

Best wishes,
Mason

[smudgex68]

In this competitive era of poker gurus, it's great to hear a poker expert admitting to a mistake. I respect their views more.

[MarkD]

He was being sarcastic I'm quite sure.

[smudgex68]

Is this the thread on understanding sarcasm or irony?

[turnipmonster]

mason's predictions about NL games seem to be true of vegas, but are very wrong for everywhere else. I think the AC PL games have been going since the 90's, and we currently have 6 no max buyin PL/NL games in nyc.

also, the NL games in northern california have been around for years and years, and the lucky chances 10-10-20 shows no signs of going dry. there are multiple PLO games in missisippi and PL hold 'em has even invaded my home state of NC.

--turnipmonster

[Deorum]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this the thread on understanding sarcasm or irony?

[/ QUOTE ]

laf

[Lucky]

I think the premise upon which Mason's prediction was based was wrong. The fact that better players have a greater advantage in NL doesn't kill the games. What kept the games from gaining a foothold in America was the reluctance of casinos who wanted a lot of money moving back and forth, i.e. rake. The point is, I don't think frustration on the part of bad players will destroy NL, as Mason stated.

I have a huge amount of respect for M & S, as 2+2 and HEPFAP, TOP, etc. have improved my life immeasurably. This is because every decision M & S make is +EV....

So here's the question: If, in say 1998, Mason felt in his heart that if players were exposed to more NL in the U.S., it would be huge, especially to the action guys...

WOULD HE SAY THAT?????

[lacky]

Why not? We all own HEPFAP, now we will have to buy NLHEPFAP, probably being written as we speak.

Steve

[Mason Malmuth]

[ QUOTE ]
So here's the question: If, in say 1998, Mason felt in his heart that if players were exposed to more NL in the U.S., it would be huge, especially to the action guys...

WOULD HE SAY THAT?????

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course not. As you pointed out, it would be bad for business.

By the way, I have done so many other things that are suppose to be bad for business. An example is not linking to hundres of other web sites so that we can push more traffic around even though I get requests for links (with reciprocals) almost everyday.

But I do draw the line in some areas, and of course no limit hold 'em was it. The fact that I didn't see a no limit hold 'em game spread on a regular basis in Las Vegas cardrooms for at least 15 years -- the one or two joints that had tiny ones I never went to -- had nothing to do with my comments.

MM

[SnakeRat]

YES, he would say that if thought it.

1. Mason does not control people's playing habits with his predictions.

2. The sales of 2+2 books are not hurt by an increased popularity of NL holdem.
In fact, it probably fattens his wallet.

3. Mason does not believe either of these ridiculous propositions to be true. (assumption)

4. Therefore, this protecting business interests motivation theory is absolute garbage.

[Rick Nebiolo]

Mason wasn't wrong. He was talking about traditional no limit without a cap on the buy in. The restricted buy in format, aided by the hype surrounding the WPT and ESPN WSOP coverage has aided immensely. Some of the restricted buy in players are graduating to the unrestricted buy in games.

BTW, Hawaiian Gardens got the restricted buy in games going at least two or three deep a few years ago, well before the WPT. Hats off to Dave Simon, no limit host at HG and to the best of my knowledge the guy who came up with the idea.

Regards,

Rick