Party - 40% played blackjack

[villafan]

From the trading update:

http://www.partygaming.com/images/pre_close_update_07_12_05.pdf

"Approximately 40% of PartyPoker.com active players are now playing both blackjack and poker. Whilst this has reduced the poker revenue generated by these players, the overall revenue generated by them during the period has increased substantially."

I understand that this number will go down, as there are probably quite a lot of players that have tested the new blackjack game with a few dollars at stake, but I find the number disturbingly high. Fish is losing a lot of money quickly by playing poker, but now they will lose even faster. And when Party states that BJ has decreased the poker revenue, the impact obviously is high and can eventually affect the quality of the games at Party.

[angst]

I haven't played one single hand of blackjack at PP, although I have played a lot of poker there since the split. No temptation to do so either - at all. I feel so not addicted to gambling. Give me a hug.

[Go Blue]

That's interesting...I definitely hope that this won't have the fish lose their money faster. Although, for someone like me, I probably have wagered a total of about $5 on blackjack yet I continue to multitable the ring games. Would I be one of these players counted in this 40%?

[tonypaladino]

That 40% includes the thousands who just played a couple of hands to check it out when it first came out.

[villafan]

[ QUOTE ]
That 40% includes the thousands who just played a couple of hands to check it out when it first came out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that's why the percentage will go down. But when Party claims that poker revenue fell due to the BJ play, then I believe that significant funds are being tossed away to Party rather than to the other poker players. The blackjack is not a good thing and may, all other things being equal, affect the games.

[angst]

[ QUOTE ]
But when Party claims that poker revenue fell due to the BJ play, then I believe that significant funds are being tossed away to Party rather than to the other poker players.

[/ QUOTE ]
What the man said (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Number=4119813).

[jomatty]

theres no doubt in my mind that the worst players are losing part of what they allotted for poker losses to sidebets and blackjack. think how easy it is to bet 10 bucks a hand while on tilt playing 10-20 and the portion of what a recreational player may be willing to lose that represents.
too bad,
matty

[BruinEric]

My problem with the blackjack present on the Poker site is that is weakens legal lobbying efforts here in the USA.

Many have been saying that poker is different from casino gambling. They say its a game of skill, not primarily of chance, so it should not be lumped in with the laws against casino games.

How will this get any traction now that sites like Party Poker, Paradise Poker, and others have casino gaming one click away from the poker table?

[MrBlueNose]

What's interesting is that more poker rooms are focusing on the house-edge-gambling side of things, rather than focus on improvements or additions to their poker rooms. It's a shame when greed takes over like that. I wonder how much research they've actually put into this. For their, and our sakes, I hope it's a lot, instead of just short-term thinking.

Completely agree.

The other glaring fact about house-edge-gambling is that opponents who lose will always blame the house online...

"That site got 21 way too many times."

"It always seems to beat me by one point." etc etc

The only reason I even agreed to design the poker game we're working on is because I like the fact that if a player loses, he's losing to another player and not to the house. At least when you lose to another person, you have the hope you can get better and come back to reclaim your losses.

Of course, these are just my views.

[charlie_t_jr]

[ QUOTE ]
My problem with the blackjack present on the Poker site is that is weakens legal lobbying efforts here in the USA.

Many have been saying that poker is different from casino gambling. They say its a game of skill, not primarily of chance, so it should not be lumped in with the laws against casino games.

How will this get any traction now that sites like Party Poker, Paradise Poker, and others have casino gaming one click away from the poker table?

[/ QUOTE ]

That was my 1st thoughts(and still are) as well. People worry about BJ causing the fishies to lose their money faster. We have to remember though casinos never seem to run out of people willing to lose money.

The real worry is how the US legal system will eventually look at online poker, and they will someday address it. Those who advocate poker need do all they can to differentiate online poker from "other" gambling.

The biggest threat to drying up fishy money is jumping through financial hoops to get a players money into a site. Not BJ on Party, multi-tabling TAGS, etc.

By the way The Poker Players Allaince www.pokerplayersalliance.com (http://www.pokerplayersalliance.com) has a great article giving a great legal arguement why poker should be viewed differently from other gambling.