PartyPoker: 10 Tabling now permitted

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
Because it is in the best of their interest. The rake of multitabling winning players does not compensate for the deterioration of the games. Fish get hammered quicker, need more reloads or leave earlier (bust).

[/ QUOTE ]

bingo!

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Because it is in the best of their interest. The rake of multitabling winning players does not compensate for the deterioration of the games. Fish get hammered quicker, need more reloads or leave earlier (bust).

[/ QUOTE ]

bingo!

[/ QUOTE ]

Aren't you cardroom manager at the Bike? Do you REALLY think that if you took out the top 30% of your players there who put in 60% of the play that you would easily recoup it?

So sad for me to see posters I respect using such flawed logic.

Quick question, guys; Why do poker rooms allow consistent winners to continue playing in their room? Obviously, using your logic, they would be better off backing off winners, just like they do in blackjack, since that would allow the fish to swim longer.

Sounds pretty stupid, huh?

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you REALLY think that if you took out the top 30% of your players there who put in 60% of the play that you would easily recoup it?

[/ QUOTE ]

BINGO!!!!!!!

Stu

[byronkincaid]

Party made less than 10% of it's profits from the players on it's skins. Looking at the numbers playing now it looks like 20-25% of the players play on skins. Won't take too many of them to go back to party for them to break even will it?

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
Aren't you cardroom manager at the Bike? Do you REALLY think that if you took out the top 30% of your players there who put in 60% of the play that you would easily recoup it? So sad for me to see posters I respect using such flawed logic.

Quick question, guys; Why do poker rooms allow consistent winners to continue playing in their room? Obviously, using your logic, they would be better off backing off winners, just like they do in blackjack, since that would allow the fish to swim longer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Note that I no longer work at the Bike or for any other cardroom.

The situation with online poker doesn't easily translate to the B&M environment. If a public cardroom barred players who played extremely well and behaved within norms it would send a message to all that your only welcome to play until you win on a regular basis. That would obviously be a disaster since most losing players know and admire many winning players and hope to win themselves someday.

Although winning poker players don't play against the house, a poker club or room that develops a reputation for the toughest and tightest games simply doesn't do as well (other things being equal) as a club with softer games (an exception may occur at very high limits, where very rich men want the challenge and excitement that only comes with playing against the best).

Losing or weak recreational players may not keep records, but a consistent pattern of losing usually isn't very satisfying and it's hard for most to maintain financially. When these same players play against other loose unskilled players, they win often enough to keep coming back.

Party isn't banning/barring winning players. In my estimation they probably broke of the relationship with the skins in part because they noted that players from most skins were typically tougher, tighter players who multi-table. If they lose revenue in the short run, they project that they will gain it back and then some in the long run by offering better games and more action packed games.

Regards,

Rick