Re: Game type problem
I've actually been accused of hit-and-run tactics while sitting at the table. I play tight, so if I do hit a big pot, people sometimes accuse me of "hoarding" it. This made me realize that at least half of the players (mostly mid/late 20's people I knew in college and still play every so often) in my game didn't care at all about the money and were JUST looking for excitement. We play loose attrition rules; that is, it's bad form to cash out early, but not strictly forbidden. It seems to work, but just barely. If the players in your game can't handle the "honor system," the host should dictate a system that will get enough players to fill a game, and still leave everyone feeling like they got their money's worth out of it, whatever that means for them.
I suspect that the players who gripe about wanting to play ring games will still show up for a tournament. They probably just don't like the idea of playing wild (fun for them) and busting out early, then spending the next three hours watching some rock fold or push every hand.
For 15 people, where a $10 buy-in get 1000 in chips, the first 8 out join a side NL ring game with a max buy-in of $2 for 200 chips. The holder of all 1600 chips gets to come back to the main table with them.
This is just an idea. I haven't tried it, but the point is most kids playing poker want action, action, action, and a NL ring game gives the most for the "action players," since they can bust and rebuy at will. If people are intent, on the hit-and-run, you can't stop them unless you can rightly keep their money in the house's pocket until the end.
Slim
|