How long can a game stay good? Possible stupid question.

[steamboatin]

If a lot of money is leaving the game on a regular basis, won't the game eventually dry up?

Of course this will depend upon many variables, like is it mostly locals or is there plenty of of outside money coming in the game. What other conditions would cause a game to dry up or remain healhty?

[CardSharpCook]

Economy dependant. For many people gambling is gambling and they allocate a certain portion of their discretionary (sp?) income to this form of entertainment. For addicts, while they need their fix, they need to be able to finance it, and the degree to which they can finance it depends on the economy ("should I sit at 3/6 or 6/12?") Finally, long-term economic fluctuations effects the number of college age kids with significant amoutns of money to "invest" in poker. I think the best thing we have going for us is that those long-term factors (trust-fund babies) should remain constant for at least two decades. That part of our market should remain economy independant.

[MicroBob]

nice answer card-sharp.


[ QUOTE ]

If a lot of money is leaving the game on a regular basis, won't the game eventually dry up?

[/ QUOTE ]


possibly (kinda/sorta).

But consider the number of gamblers at other -EV games such as blackjack, craps, roulette and slots.
Lots of money getting taken from the customers in those games....and we don't exactly see them 'drying up'.
If anything, we see them continuing to thrive EVEN THOUGH there have been SO MANY casinos built all over this country now.

When it was just Las Vegas and Atlantic City (25 years ago or so) there was no way ANYONE thought this country would be able to support 1 or 2 more states with legalized gambling.
I mean, there just aren't THAT many people out there willing to lose THAT much money, are there? No freaking way.

Well, all the casinos all over the place now are proving that YES...there are PLENTY of people willing to just lose and lose and lose in IN, IL, IA, MS, LA, MO, MN, MI etc etc etc.
25 years ago there would have been VERY FEW people who would have EVER thought this was possible.


The lesson evidently is that there are SIGNIFICANTLY more Americans willing to lose LOTS MORE money then anyone previously thought.

[StevieG]

CardSharpCook and MicroBob both make good points: people are willing to play when they have -EV. These people are playing because gambling is inherently fun for them. They enjoy the controlled risk taking.

The upshot if this is that you are responsible for making sure the games do not dry up. Keep them having a good time.

Even if you are not the kind to chat up a table, you can keep the games attractive. Dress neatly for the card room, do not berate the fish when they suck out, do not gloat when they drop a stack. None of that requires that you turn into Prince Charming, just be polite.

[steamboatin]

I knoow that part, I am curious about a specific game at a specific location. I didn't want to come right out and say which game but WTH, The 6-12 at Caesar's IN is like incredibly loose and often very aggressive. There is a lot of money changing hands and I was just wondering if there was a danger of the game dyring up. Maybe the losses are spread out between enough people that it won't have a serious impact.

[steamboatin]

Oh, I am the ambassador of 6-12. I make it a point to speak to the other players and I understand that most low limit players are there for a good time and I do everything in my power to keep them having fun.

[StevieG]

I believe it. I should have written we in place of you, because the spirit of the post was that anyone who enjoys winning poker needs to do their part to keep everyone coming back.

[lefty rosen]

Many low limit games will stay good forever. What cost 6 bucks ten years ago generally cost 8 or so now, so a 6/12 game will be 5/10 game in terms of discretionary income in a few years. Plus you won't believe the end that bad degenerates will go to play all forms of gambling. Now many higher staked games dry up quickly if they aren't in larger cities where they have alot of whales....... [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[MicroBob]

There's a danger that a couple of the regular wild-ones will eventually run out of money and the game will simply not be as good in the future.
There I agree with you.


Wild games like the one you speak of frequently happen in areas where poker is fairly new. Obviously the room at Caesar's is pretty new....and while there are other rooms up the river, it's not like there is a HUGE amount of competition.


The games in California were supposed to be INSANE when they first legalized hold-em.
I talked with a couple of people who said the same thing was happening currently in Vancouver (80 person wait-list for 4/8 sometimes....you can imagine the urge to gamble it up for some players once they finally got a seat).

While the games in California are still quite good (so I hear...I've never played there), the long-timers there will tell you that it's not even close to how crazy they were when it first started up.

mason is very opinionated on this very topic and has written a bit about it in his Poker essays book (which I believe I saw Steam mentioned that he had...but maybe I was hallucinating again).


The Caesar's Indiana situation might be a bit different though since there are so many people pretty much coming from a 100-mile radius to specifically lay in Louisville.


So I guess it's up to your best judgement as to what might happen in the future.
If it's the very same 2 or 3 guys getting REALLY crazy virtually EVERY single night then it's going to be up to those guys to keep it going (will they get bored of the game?? can they afford significant long-term losses??)...because obviously if they leave then whoever steps in to replace them will probably not be quite so insane.

Now....if it's a variety of semi-regulars who keep the game pretty wild...including a rotating cast of 'never-seens' who always seem to be donking it up then I suspect that tells you that the general cast of characters in your area might be sufficient to keep it going strong.


Just some general ideas.
I haven't been playing long enough really to have my own observations of this stuff.
Really just going off of what I've read in some threads here and in Mason's posts and essays.

[steamboatin]

Yes, I have all three of Mason's Poker Essays and I highly recomend them. He writes a lot about keeping a cardroom healthy and what a player needs to do to help keep a game healthy and I try to hold up my end.

I may be asking a question that can't be answered. It might be like most questions regarding poker, the answer is, "It depends". It depends on the supply of new money coming into the game, the number of good players vs bad players, if the floor does a good job of promoting the game and keeping the tables full and probably many other factors.

I think that in the short term, the game will stay good because there is a lot of excitement around the WSOP circuit events and the new poker room. All this activity has to be good for all the games at Caesar's IN.

Many of the former $5-10 crowd don't seem to like the $6-12, which I find really interesting. The $6-12 is considerably looser and oftem more aggressive, so the weak tight players don't do as well. I always thought that the $5-10 game was a good structure for the tight passive player.

I realize that I am not objective regarding the $5-10 game because all the time I was playing $5-10, my game had more holes than a tennis racket but a single chip structured game generates less action.

My game is much better now although still to loose and not enough aggression but Rome wasn't built in a day.