NL vs Limit - House decision.

[Lawrence Ng]

I had a talk with the right hand lady to the big poker room manager up at the casino I usually play.

Recently in the last while they opened up a variety of 1-2 NL games with a $100 buy-in cap. The games have been popular. So popular that most of the players have shifted from playing 2-4, 4-8 over to playing 1-2 NL.

Prior to these 1-2 NL games opening up, I'd say that there would be about at least 6-8 tables of 2-4 limit running and about another 5-7 tables 4-8 limit games running. They also had 6-12 and 8-16 but usually just 1 game of each.

Now with the 1-2 NL games running I'd say they are running 5-6 games of 1-2 NL and the 2-4 limit games have dropped to about maybe 4 tables and the 4-8 limit selection is about down to 3-4 tables and the 6/12 and 8/16 no longer exist.

I talked to right hand lady about this stating that it was clearly a bad move on the casino's part to open so many NL games up. Yes, they are popular but I told them that the casino was losing money since the low limit games were now being spread thin.

Think about it this way, a full 10 handed limit game gets on avg 30 hands an hour (or possibly more now with the shufflers in the table), while a full NL game only gets about 20 hands/hour. Players do not take as long to think in limit as they do in NL and also there are usually a lot of side pots in NL which add to the progression of slowing the game down.

She tells me they rake $4 in the NL games as opposed to $3 for the limit games so that makes up for some of the lost cost. I tell her it still doesn't add up and that they should seriously consider limiting the number of 1-2 NL games and just continue to open up more low limit tables.

Of course I have my own little agenda in this as well. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

I play some low live limit 4-8 games sometimes and there's a bad beat jackpot that is only given to the low limit games. Prior to the NL games opening up, the bad beat jackpot often reached over 50k before someone won it. That jackpot size further attracted more fish which further made playing those limit games ++++EV. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

But what do you all think? Do you think the house is losing money here or am I completely wacked?

Lawrence

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

Isn't it the general idea that NL is worse because the fish lose all their money quicker and then are busted out quicker than in limit?

[TStoneMBD]

i think theyre better off just giving the players what they want.

[Chipr777]

The house is much better off with limit games. The weaker player can play longer and that adds up to more rake for the casino.

[Bremen]

[ QUOTE ]
The house is much better off with limit games. The weaker player can play longer and that adds up to more rake for the casino.

[/ QUOTE ]
Except many of the fish coming in now are macho WPT types who refuse to play limit since its not "real" poker.

[The Armchair]

[ QUOTE ]
The house is much better off with limit games. The weaker player can play longer and that adds up to more rake for the casino.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the other hand, a weak NL player can push all in with his 77, wanting to get heads up, get called by some dude with AA, and 20% of the time, walk away with another $100 to go lose at craps.

[Lawrence Ng]

[ QUOTE ]
Isn't it the general idea that NL is worse because the fish lose all their money quicker and then are busted out quicker than in limit?


[/ QUOTE ]


True, but I guess $100 or $200 here and there won't really "break the players". However, I would tend to think that it would kill the action far quicker since the casual recreational noob player base wouldn't have much fun since they can't chase as often (or if they do, they'll very likely bust out in one hand).

[Lawrence Ng]

[ QUOTE ]
Except many of the fish coming in now are macho WPT types who refuse to play limit since its not "real" poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not neccesarily true, back when the River Rock opened up last year we only had 2 tables of 3-6 NL spread. It was a packed line up to get into these games, but still the 2/4 and 4/8 games were running on over 15 tables and had long wait lists on all of them.

I'm estimating that within the next 2 months these 1-2 NL games will die. They just keep opening too many of them up and indeed the fish will get cleaned up too fast.

Lawrence

[Lawrence Ng]

If that's the case, I'd sure like them to open a 5-10 NL game with uncapped buy-in. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Lawrence

[Dominic]

[ QUOTE ]
I had a talk with the right hand lady to the big poker room manager up at the casino I usually play.

Recently in the last while they opened up a variety of 1-2 NL games with a $100 buy-in cap.

[/ QUOTE ]

I stopped reading after this abomination..

Is English not your first language??