Tuesday, December 14. 2004
Poker Politics
There are basically two places for poker players to go in order to get needed poker laws. The first one is the legislature; the second one is the people. To get a change in the penal code, the legislature is the appropriate place to get the alteration. There are lots of archaic laws on the books in many states, and the main reason they still exist is that no one has made a fuss about them. So, you need a progressive-minded state senator or congressman to get the ball rolling. There also may be progressive-minded organizations within a state that want the laws updated.
To increase the number of places that qualify for being allowed to spread poker games, the best route is to go to the people. In other words, you need to put a proposition on the ballot, which requires a certain number of signatures. Usually, a group that’s interested in getting signatures pays workers to gather the signatures. I cannot picture an army of poker players going out to shopping malls to gather signatures. They prefer to spend their time playing poker. However, I can picture them paying someone else to do it. I can also see them forming an alliance with another group that’s interested in having poker in its facility, such as a racetrack operator.
As it turns out, the main anti-gambling groups in today’s society are organizations that are involved with gambling! Gamblers are viewed as a group of people with a set amount of money budgeted for gambling. Therefore, any widening of the gambling horizons is viewed by those groups who are already approved for legalized gambling as competition for the gambler’s dollar that must continue to be shut out of the marketplace (unless, of course, the group expects to get a piece of the new pie). And guess who is a member of that monopolistic-minded group? The state itself! Nearly every state is making money from gambling these days. They worry that items like lottery revenue might decline and put an additional crimp into already tight state budgets. If the state thinks gambling money is going to be siphoned off by poker, they may well fight against it. That is why there is probably a better shot by going directly to the people, in my opinion.
To increase the number of places that qualify for being allowed to spread poker games, the best route is to go to the people. In other words, you need to put a proposition on the ballot, which requires a certain number of signatures. Usually, a group that’s interested in getting signatures pays workers to gather the signatures. I cannot picture an army of poker players going out to shopping malls to gather signatures. They prefer to spend their time playing poker. However, I can picture them paying someone else to do it. I can also see them forming an alliance with another group that’s interested in having poker in its facility, such as a racetrack operator.
As it turns out, the main anti-gambling groups in today’s society are organizations that are involved with gambling! Gamblers are viewed as a group of people with a set amount of money budgeted for gambling. Therefore, any widening of the gambling horizons is viewed by those groups who are already approved for legalized gambling as competition for the gambler’s dollar that must continue to be shut out of the marketplace (unless, of course, the group expects to get a piece of the new pie). And guess who is a member of that monopolistic-minded group? The state itself! Nearly every state is making money from gambling these days. They worry that items like lottery revenue might decline and put an additional crimp into already tight state budgets. If the state thinks gambling money is going to be siphoned off by poker, they may well fight against it. That is why there is probably a better shot by going directly to the people, in my opinion.
Monday, December 13. 2004
Absent Player Rules
When should an absent poker player's hand be killed? This subject has been a matter of debate for a long time, particularly in tournament play. I am referring to a player who was not at the table when the cards were dealt, but received a hand anyway.
At the sixth annual World Poker Industry Conference in July, there was a meeting of a group of people called the "Tournament Directors Association." They had a big discussion concerning the standardization of tournament rules. As you know, there is no such thing as a standard set of poker rules; each cardroom has its own rule set. So, it seems that if anarchy over poker rules is to be finally ended, termination of discord will be greatly aided by standardizing tournament rules. We can all be happy that poker now has an organized group of tournament directors that is trying to standardize rules.
Members of the Tournament Directors Association agreed on 14 rules they would all follow. Some are general rules of poker, such as: "If a player puts in a raise of half or more of a previous bet, he will be required to make a full raise." Others are rules that would apply only to tournaments, such as: "All cards will be turned faceup once a player is all in and action is complete." I fully agree with 13 of the 14 rules adopted by the TDA. However, I have misgivings about portions of the rule for treating the hand of an absent player; hence, this article.
At the sixth annual World Poker Industry Conference in July, there was a meeting of a group of people called the "Tournament Directors Association." They had a big discussion concerning the standardization of tournament rules. As you know, there is no such thing as a standard set of poker rules; each cardroom has its own rule set. So, it seems that if anarchy over poker rules is to be finally ended, termination of discord will be greatly aided by standardizing tournament rules. We can all be happy that poker now has an organized group of tournament directors that is trying to standardize rules.
Members of the Tournament Directors Association agreed on 14 rules they would all follow. Some are general rules of poker, such as: "If a player puts in a raise of half or more of a previous bet, he will be required to make a full raise." Others are rules that would apply only to tournaments, such as: "All cards will be turned faceup once a player is all in and action is complete." I fully agree with 13 of the 14 rules adopted by the TDA. However, I have misgivings about portions of the rule for treating the hand of an absent player; hence, this article.
Tuesday, December 7. 2004
Extortion Not Part of Poker
Chip New's Note - For once, Dear Abby gets it right. Home games that take demand part of the money won or a fee are illegal and in bad taste. Contribution in the form of food and drinks are acceptable, but cash gifts/requirements are not!
DEAR ABBY: My friend "Wilma" recently purchased a house with her husband, "Ken." They frequently host poker nights and invite quite a few other friends - and friends of friends.
Since Wilma is presently unemployed, she has instituted a new policy for the games: Everyone must donate a percentage of their winnings to the house. This has offended quite a few of the players. Many of us have offered to bring snacks, drinks, etc., but the donation rule stands and is very much in effect.
May I add that Ken was shocked when Wilma asked for the money. How can we confront her without coming across as rude? - Concerned in California
DEAR CONCERNED: Why are you worried about offending someone who is extorting money from you? I don't know how many people participate in these poker nights, but with a percentage of every hand going to the house, Wilma must be making a tidy sum. It shouldn't be necessary to "confront her." If I were you, I'd alternate hosting these games among the participants.
DEAR ABBY: My friend "Wilma" recently purchased a house with her husband, "Ken." They frequently host poker nights and invite quite a few other friends - and friends of friends.
Since Wilma is presently unemployed, she has instituted a new policy for the games: Everyone must donate a percentage of their winnings to the house. This has offended quite a few of the players. Many of us have offered to bring snacks, drinks, etc., but the donation rule stands and is very much in effect.
May I add that Ken was shocked when Wilma asked for the money. How can we confront her without coming across as rude? - Concerned in California
DEAR CONCERNED: Why are you worried about offending someone who is extorting money from you? I don't know how many people participate in these poker nights, but with a percentage of every hand going to the house, Wilma must be making a tidy sum. It shouldn't be necessary to "confront her." If I were you, I'd alternate hosting these games among the participants.
Tuesday, November 16. 2004
The Worst Bet in Gambling
What is the worst bet in gambling? I have made it many times in my poker career, although never intentionally. Most of you readers have made it, as well. It happens more often than it should. The worst bet in gambling is when you pay off if you lose but fail to collect anything when you win. In colloquial language, it is simply getting stiffed if you win.
The most frequent way for a stiff to occur in poker is when the host of a home game fails to pay off. Sometimes this occurs because a losing player failed to pay. It also can happen when the host plays in the game and goes for a big number. I have been the victim of a stiff from both of these situations, and a lot more times than just once. Furthermore, a number of the people who have stiffed me are now dead (just a coincidence … ), so it’s a certainty that I’ll never collect.
I have written some columns about playing in home games, focusing on the twin drawbacks of getting robbed and getting raided. But there is a third drawback, as illustrated in the beginning of this column: getting stiffed. I once again emphasize that we poker players deserve a brick-and-mortar place to play where we are safe — and get paid when we win.
The most frequent way for a stiff to occur in poker is when the host of a home game fails to pay off. Sometimes this occurs because a losing player failed to pay. It also can happen when the host plays in the game and goes for a big number. I have been the victim of a stiff from both of these situations, and a lot more times than just once. Furthermore, a number of the people who have stiffed me are now dead (just a coincidence … ), so it’s a certainty that I’ll never collect.
I have written some columns about playing in home games, focusing on the twin drawbacks of getting robbed and getting raided. But there is a third drawback, as illustrated in the beginning of this column: getting stiffed. I once again emphasize that we poker players deserve a brick-and-mortar place to play where we are safe — and get paid when we win.
Monday, November 1. 2004
Rules for Other Poker Games
A couple of quick write-ups for Seven Card Stud and Omaha.
'Cause poker is more than just No-limit Texas Hold 'Em.
Chip News Note - I've removed these links. I apologize for any inconvenience.
'Cause poker is more than just No-limit Texas Hold 'Em.
Chip News Note - I've removed these links. I apologize for any inconvenience.
Sunday, October 24. 2004
Poker Tournaments: Part I — Why? An Article by Steve Zolotow
Many card clubs and casinos have started to run major poker tournaments. Unfortunately, they don’t always know why they run them, and therefore make some strange choices. I am going to examine several common objectives of running a tournament, and discuss some of the appropriate choices for achieving those objectives.
To make money: This is certainly the most common objective, and even those tournaments that appear to run for other reasons (see below) are really trying to make money in the long run. The profit can be further divided into making money on the tournament itself and making money from the tournament players and their significant others in the casino, in side games, and in the bars, restaurants, hotel, and other facilities/services. You would think that anyone running a tournament to make money would realize that one of the most important ways to capitalize on their players would be to run short tournaments. This means that antes and blinds should start high and escalate quickly. Doing this lowers tournament costs (staff and services are provided for a shorter period of time). It also increases revenues from other areas, as more players are eliminated quickly and have time for side games, casino gambling, dining, and so on. Also, some players are more likely to play in tournaments when they know they will either be in the money or have time to do something else. Short tournaments prevents frustrating the players who spend long hours for no money. They are left tired and discouraged. They are unlikely to play in the next day’s event. (There are very few people with the stamina and heart to play from noon to 3 in the morning, finish 23rd, and be ready and eager to play again the next day.)
Unfortunately, short tournaments also decrease the quality of poker being played, as the events quickly become a crapshoot. The best compromise solution is to start off with high antes and blinds, escalate quickly in the beginning, and then slow down or even back up the structure as players approach the money.
Monday, October 18. 2004
Tournament Structuring
Here are a few things I believe most poker players like in the structuring of a poker tournament:
1. A comfortable amount of starting chips in proportion to the initial blind structure.
2. A schedule of raising the blinds that is relatively smooth, so that there is not a huge increase someplace and a piddling one somewhere else.
3. Enough time taken in raising the blinds so that there is play to the game on more than one betting round, instead of just playing all in preflop or folding.
4. It is OK to raise the blinds at a decent clip early in the event (especially if rebuys are allowed). But, when the money rounds approach, the blinds should go up at a slower rate, when huge sums of money may be at stake.
Since one function of a smaller multitable tournament is to build up confidence and prepare a player for a bigger event, it is a good idea to use antes to supplement the blinds, starting out at around level six or level seven. All the major tournament events that I know of use antes from about this point on, so players need experience playing with an ante. There is no question that strategy changes somewhat when an ante is used.
A sit 'n' go tournament player has a somewhat different mindset from someone in a regular tournament. (That is why he chose to play in a sit 'n' go.) He does not have a lot of time to play in the event, and he understands that the blinds are going to have to go up fast to get done in around an hour or a shade more. However, even this type of player, once he has gotten in the money or nearly so, does not mind a chance to have a little play to the game, even though he was prepared to have the blinds keep doubling before he reached this point.
There is little point to using antes in a sit 'n' go tournament. They will not come into play until the event is just about over with. And even then, they will not be in the same ratio to the blinds as in a normal tournament. For example, if the blinds when you are fourhanded are $100-$200 and you use an ante, there is only an extra $100 in the pot, as opposed to the approximately $200 that is the amount for this structure in a multitable tournament.
1. A comfortable amount of starting chips in proportion to the initial blind structure.
2. A schedule of raising the blinds that is relatively smooth, so that there is not a huge increase someplace and a piddling one somewhere else.
3. Enough time taken in raising the blinds so that there is play to the game on more than one betting round, instead of just playing all in preflop or folding.
4. It is OK to raise the blinds at a decent clip early in the event (especially if rebuys are allowed). But, when the money rounds approach, the blinds should go up at a slower rate, when huge sums of money may be at stake.
Since one function of a smaller multitable tournament is to build up confidence and prepare a player for a bigger event, it is a good idea to use antes to supplement the blinds, starting out at around level six or level seven. All the major tournament events that I know of use antes from about this point on, so players need experience playing with an ante. There is no question that strategy changes somewhat when an ante is used.
A sit 'n' go tournament player has a somewhat different mindset from someone in a regular tournament. (That is why he chose to play in a sit 'n' go.) He does not have a lot of time to play in the event, and he understands that the blinds are going to have to go up fast to get done in around an hour or a shade more. However, even this type of player, once he has gotten in the money or nearly so, does not mind a chance to have a little play to the game, even though he was prepared to have the blinds keep doubling before he reached this point.
There is little point to using antes in a sit 'n' go tournament. They will not come into play until the event is just about over with. And even then, they will not be in the same ratio to the blinds as in a normal tournament. For example, if the blinds when you are fourhanded are $100-$200 and you use an ante, there is only an extra $100 in the pot, as opposed to the approximately $200 that is the amount for this structure in a multitable tournament.
