Higher Stakess Game Schedule

[Quads]

James and I were talking last night in my garage which was a continuation of a conversation that BIG Kahuna and I were having in my garage a few nights before.

The topic of conversation was a higher stakes game.

So, prior to sending an invite out, I know that everyone would not be a sure thing, but I wanted to get a sense of how many people would like to see a higher stakes game (higher than what we are typically playing at .03 or .04 cents on the dollar) and if I should attempt to fill two tables, or just one.

Game would be NL Hold'em
$100 Min Buy in $300 Max buy in
Rebuy / Add on anytime your chips stack is under $300 (chip value)
Cash Out Anytime
Stakes would be .10 cents on the dollar.
$100 buy in would get you $1,000 in chips.
$25/50 blinds.

Everything else would be the standard / traditional format.

Interested? Schedule it?

I'd play, assuming the schedule would work...

[Hagar]

That's a bit out of my league, but I'd be happy to come and deal for oyu all (maybe you could talk everyone into throwing a fiver my way or something?)

That's a little steep for me as well!! But I would host it!! I know that you can't win what you don't bet......but I just haven't gotten to the point where I can jusitfy that kind of money for poker yet!!! The garage is all yours if you want it!!

[BigKahuna]

Of course you know I am in! Since we are on this subject, for the tourneys I am planning, I want to hear from Hagar, Jesus, Dic, Daddy, etc.......whether or not a buy-in of $60 is going to be out of your league with possible add-ons through the first 3 rounds of the tourney? Figire it is only $20 more than normal so most people would not have a problem with it.

Let me know who is in for that amount because I only need 20 or so fomr the regular group to make the first tourney of mine happen.

[Quads]

I'd be good on that too.

Might be a good idea to start that as a new topic and get comments from everyone on a $60 buy in tourney.

Of course you know I am in! Since we are on this subject, for the tourneys I am planning, I want to hear from Hagar, Jesus, Dic, Daddy, etc........

HMMM...I wonder how I should take that. Kahuna...Do you really think I'm a Dic? What did I ever do to you???

:lol: :lol: :lol:

You boys are talking about high stakes poker, fellas. Lemme give it to you straight. This here is entertainment for me. I'm not trying to get rich and I don't wanna lose a week's wages when I sit down at the table. Playing in a $100 game is no more fun than a $25 game for me. It's just more stressful. (Not to mention what lil' Mrs Doc would do to me if she found out I was putting a few hundred dollars on the line with y'all).

So...To be honest...It's rare that I come to any of our games with more than $100-$120 at risk. I'm prepared to come to a $30-$40 game with 3-4 buys in my pocket, but that's about it. That definitely leaves me out of a $100 cash game, and probably out of a $60 tourney with the need for add-ons and a cash game afterwards.

Sorry, Buds. Wish I could compete with your big swingin' wallets, but you try putting a teenage girl through a private high school. MAN that's expensive!!! :cry:

[Hagar]

Kahuna -

My questions (before I can answer yours):

- How many rebuys?
- How many chips for rebuys?
- Conditions of rebuys?
- Projected number of players?
- Projected number/value of payouts?

One of the reasons I don't care for rebuy tourneys, is that unless the chips you get for the rebuy is enough to seriously get me back in the hunt, it feels like throwing good money after bad.

If the tourney is $60 (which I have no problems with) and I get a full stack of chips (or more) for a $20 or $30 rebuy, then it's usually worth it to give it another go or 2.

I've seen plenty of tournaments where the rebuys are great bargains compared to the initial buy-in - to the point where it's really stupid not to do them.

If the rebuys offer fewer chips than a full buy-in, then I would not be interested in doing the re-buys. Depending on how extreme it is, I may not participate at all. Even a fresh full stack at the third level is pushing your ability to compete, but less than that basically puts you into a "shove next decent hand" mode. I wouldn't buy back in if my best hope is to play for one or two good hands in the next few orbits.

Proper rebuy considerations require me to evaluate the maximum $ I might invest vs. the possible returns.

For the record: The other reason I'm not a fan of rebuys is that "action guys" tend to get a little crazier then if it's freezeout - they feel like they have a little insurance, another chance if they bust out quickly. Being a slow and steady, "pick my spots" kind of guy, doesn't work well in a shove fest. (This is just a personality preference.)

So, before I can answer your question "Would I...?, I'd need to know the answers to my questions.

I HATE REBUYS OF ALL TYPES. Cheapens the game/risk/bet/call.

but thats just me.

[jkramer5]

$100 buy in is too steep for me and I also wouldn't play in a rebuy tournament.

I think that if I were going to shell out that kind of money it would be in a tournament format. This is just me but rebuys, on a lower monetary level are nice cuz it keeps you in the game without breaking the bank, but at $100 a shot I would fall victim to someone with deeper pokets than myself. Just doesn't sound fair. Yes I understand that if I played better it wouldn't matter but that's just not an option........i suck!! LOL!!!

[Quads]

Why do some people have the logic of "It's OK with me that I spend $25 to buy in to the tourney and $25 for a rebuy or add on, but I'm not willing to spend $60 on a buy in"

Does it make it any less if you spend the same amount in smaller incriments?

If someone is willing to show up with a hundred bucks in their pocket to play poker for the night, what's the difference in a $25 dollar game / tourney with a rebuy or add on versus 1 $50 dollar game?

quads, i'm with ya'

I'm specifically not down with a $100 tourney w/ rebuys b/c of the deep pockets issue. $20 w/ rebuys or $60 straight up is all the same to me.

[Quads]

Jesus,

Yeah, I posed the question because it seems like some people are willing to spend the same amount, if not more, in some scenarios in smaller increments rather than in one chunk. I don't get that logic.

And there are the others that say, I'm in it for this much, and that's it.

I guess it's the different way people manage money.
Same thing could be said for chips I guess.

If someone is willing to show up with a hundred bucks in their pocket to play poker for the night, what's the difference in a $25 dollar game / tourney with a rebuy or add on versus 1 $50 dollar game?

OK...I can answer that question very straightforward...

I am more interested in "a higher likelihood of winning a little" than I am in a "lesser likelihood of winning a lot." Over the long haul, I am very confident that my smaller wins in cash games are greater than my larger (but far fewer) wins in tourneys would be.

It's pretty simple for me in that respect.

And...Also...I prefer the steady pace and the predictable action of a cash game. It's more "fun" for me.

[Quads]

Perfect logic Doc.

I think on one level it IS purely mental. You see $25 dollars going out and don't think that much about it. You see $60 go out and it's a little different. plus each extra buy in is another $60.....two buy ins and you are above what you would normally spend. It is completely a different mind set. If I had the money I would have no problem plunking down $100 to play but I don't so I DO have a problem with it. I don't think there is a right and wrong way of thinking about it....just different ways.

[jkramer5]

For me it's both monitary and mental. I've gambled alot altho I'm fairly new to poker. I prefer a table (Craps, Black Jack) Wit a lower minimum bet because I feel it gives me a little more breathing room. I ALWAYS gamble on a budget and I play more than 1 game a week live and also play online so I try very hard to stick to it. If I enter a cash game or tournament that takes my whole budget for that game for 1 buy in , I therefore have 1 shot at leaving a winner. If I can buy in and have a reserve for rebuy's say in a cash game, I can prchase more chips to offset a loss or choose to leave if I want.

Poker and gambling for me are generally for fun. If I win, great, If I lose then oh well, try again later, that's part of the deal. At $100 stakes just to enter the game, that makes it more stressful and less relaxation.

And overall rebuy tournaments are not my thing, I tried it at my game and also in some other tournies and found that I prefer letting the single chip allotment and the players stratagey rather than the bankroll decide the winner.


2 cents lol

[BigKahuna]

Sorry Doc or is it Dic? Boy that "i" key is close to the "o" key. You are the Doc of course with a stupid mistake on my part.

If all of you read my post again, I was talking about "add-ons", not a re-buy tourney. I do not particularly like re-buys and the reason I was doing the limited add-ons is to raise some more booty before the night is over.

Hagar, I will not be answering all your questions in this post an ask that you take it as a hypothetical right now and give me your best guesstimate. Treat it as a $60 buy-in only (freezeout) with top 6 places paid out of 30 entries. Humor me.

I understand your logic Doc, the entertainment factor of playing poker....being prepared to lose $40 or so for 6 hours of fun. I can respect taking that stance.

My stance is I want it all......I want to have fun, make friends, and take your money all at the same time. Possible? Who knows......but I will have fun trying.

For those of you getting the "brain freeze feeling" trying to contemplate spending all this money on high stakes tourneys, no worries about answering my post anymore. I will just wait for your answer in October when I put the official invite out with all the details. At that point, it's as simple as your in or your out.

Look forward to all these ideas hopefully coming to fruition.

Booyakasha!

[Hagar]

Kahuna -

I won't commit to any game until I understand the full structure of it.

A $60 freezeout wouldn't bother me at all. A $100 freezeout (now and then) and I'm in. If you start adding rebuy/add-on parameters I need to understand specifically what the deal is before I will yay or nay anything.

(Not to go back there, but that's part of the reason I have issue with Quads' big tourney plan - it's very vague.)

That's just the way I am.

Sorry dude.

[DA]

Ok...Well...I guess I'll add my two-cents worth. Or, I'll go "all in"! :)

The main reason I joined BYOC and have enjoyed it so much is that I don't have to risk a large some of money just to play and learn. I like the fact that I can buy-in to games and tournaments for a reasonable amount of money and can play more often. I understand the reason for the higher stakes and it does sound fun. It's just not something I'd participate in.

I have read about rebuys on-line as well as in books and have seen it work. I'm not a big fan, even though I used it in a tournament.

So....for me......the current $25 to $40 buy-ins work well for me.

Thanks for such a great group of people!!!!

[Ace-in-Space]

This is in response to the original post on higher stakes game:

I can afford to play the $100 to $300 buy-in NL HE game (I usually play no less than a $9-$18 limit HE game and have played as high as $20-$40 in L.A. and Vegas). However, playing the proposed $100 to $300 might take most of the BYOCers out of their comfort zone.

Nevertheless, I will gamble with you if you want to set one up. But here are some of my recommendations.

1. Go slow: Instead of jumping up the normal BYOC stakes by 6 to 10 times as proposed, we might try to just double it and give it a try. The current limit varies between $0.25 cents (small blind) $0.625 (big blind) to $0.40 (SB) /$1 (BB) in real money. Your proposed game would bring it up to $2.50/$5. In reality the BUY IN amount does not reflect the size of the game, the sizes of the BLINDS do.

2. Level the playing field: Hagar has mentioned this in another post. Paraphrasing him he basically said not to vary the initial buy in amount as the players who could afford to buy a big stack have the edge over the player who buys in the minimum.

3. Variety: Have a two-table cash game event with one at higher stakes and one at normal stakes, if you have an approximate equal mix of people for each game.

How about you run something like this as a trial:

Game would be NL Hold'em
$100 Buy In ($100 buy in would get you $1,000 in chips)
Rebuy to replenish your stack back up to $1,000 anytime your chips stack is under $500 (chip value)
Cash Out Anytime
Stakes would be 10 cents on the dollar.
$10/$20 or $10/$25 blinds.

With this game the fluctuation would be around $200-$300 a session whereas at $25/$50 blinds someone could easily drop 5 or 6 C-notes. My point is, even if we play the latter we probably won't satisfy some hardcored gamblers who normal bet nickels (re: $500) and dimes on football games now the season has started.

[Ace-in-Space]

What I like to add is that the amount that we play with is all relative. One might have a net worth of $10,000 but is comfortable putting it all on the line, whereas some like Bill Gates have been seen playing in the $3/$6 game in Vegas (he also likes to buy USED golf balls). I am metaphorically speaking a plankton as compared to a whale (Gates) in the wealth department but I will splash a G in a poker game, whereas some of the BYOCers are multi-, multi-millionaires may not want to risk $100 or $200 in a game.

BTW, there is an urban legend going around about Gates basically stating that it is not worthwhile for him to break his stride to pick up a $100 bill lying on the ground because his time is worth more than that (I myself, fortunately or unfortunately, do not have that dilemma.) Let's do the math:

$50,000,000,000 (his net worth) x 5% (annual return he could get on his money, conservatively speaking) / 60 / 60 / 24 / 365.25 = approx. $80 he makes per second.

His having to bend down and pick up the bill would take him about 2 seconds so he might as well keep walking.

One final thought: Bill, instead of giving your money to charity, pay off the deficit in the California budget shortfall so my sons could get better public educaiton.

What is the point of my post? As usual, a bunch of nonsense.

[Rob]

If someone is willing to show up with a hundred bucks in their pocket to play poker for the night, what's the difference in a $25 dollar game / tourney with a rebuy or add on versus 1 $50 dollar game?

This is the boat I sit in when I come to play. Frankly, I still consider myself to be a beginner when it comes to poker - I learn more every time I play, and make more than my share of stupid mistakes (which is the source of my learning).

Although recently I've had a fair run of good cards, my record since I started playing back in February says that I can drop two or three buyins easily. At $25 a buyin, I can sit for a while, no matter how my cards are running. At $50 a buyin, it is a more scary proposition. I almost didn't attend the first $40 buyin at your (Quads) house, because I was afraid of being blown out. Then, dropping $80 or $120 at a poker table would probablly have been my months budget for the game.

So, for me, the logic behind a smaller buyin has to do with how long can I sit and feel comfortable with my performance, or lack thereof. I'm more in it for the fun of it and playing for a while, rather than the possibility of making money.

Rob

[Rob]

Game would be NL Hold'em
$100 Min Buy in $300 Max buy in
Rebuy / Add on anytime your chips stack is under $300 (chip value)
Cash Out Anytime
Stakes would be .10 cents on the dollar.
$100 buy in would get you $1,000 in chips.
$25/50 blinds.

Interested? Schedule it?

I'd be willing to participate in a "standard format" $100 buyin game:
Game would be NL Hold'em
$100 Buy in
Rebuy / Add on anytime your chips stack is under $300 (chip value)
Cash Out Anytime (clearly this needs to be defined...)
Stakes would be .10 cents on the dollar.
$100 buy in would get you $1,000 in chips.
$10/25 blinds.

As Ace said in an eariler post: Baby steps. I'd like to get comfortable before making larger changes.

Rob

[Hagar]

Ace-

There's a huge difference between a $25 and $100 buy-in game. Yes, the blinds are a slight issue that determine how much it costs to play each orbit and will generally drive the amount of the action.

But NL is a about buy-ins and stack sizes. Most of us don't have large bankrolls. I don't know about everyone, but I bring enough for 3-4 buy-ins on each game night. That's my threashold - if that's not enough, then it's just not my night. That's $100-$200 for or regular games.

That $100-$200 would all be in jeopardy in one buy-in in a $100-300 buy-in game. One mistake and I'm done. No more bullets. That's not my idea of fun. I believe that the large majority of our players come with similar budgets. Most have at least 2 buy-ins in them nad other come with 3 or more. IF the buy-ins are too big, most will likely not get involved.

In the big scheme of things, yes I could conceivably lose $100 in one pot in one of our $25 buy-in games. I think that's the point that Ace is trying make about the blinds being the ultimate "cost" factor. But I could get back in the game for $25 if I wanted. That's the difference us "small time" players see in the buy-in strucures.

I think it's great if you guys can get a big game togehter, but do understand the budgetary constraints that a lot of us have.

[Ace-in-Space]

Hi Hagar,

I am not the one proposing jacking the limits really high. In fact I am trying to moderate the amount of increase as proposed by Quads. The stardard game we play obvious have no problem attracting 2 tables these days since the membership is continue to grow. Therefore, we should stick to that limit for now since, like you said, most players are willing to risk somewhere between $50 to $150 per session.

Again, it sound like we are in agreement about the blinds being the ultimate determination of the size of the game. As far as amount of buy-in is concerned that is just a matter of adjusting to the blind size. For example, the standard game of 10/25 blind with 1000 chips for buy-in works well since it afford relative good protection vs. the minimum bet amount so we shall probably keep that structure.

If in a two-table event Q can get enough players to play a bigger limit more power to him since I am certainly interested in playing in that game (even at $2.50/$5 blinds in real money). But we should always have a table of standard game going, whether the buy-in is any where between $25 to $40.

[Hagar]

Every host has the option to run whatever game he/she likes. We don't always shoot for 2 table events. When I host and we have a 2 table event, I always leave the door open for any game to develop that has the support for it. I'll always have the first game be a $25 game, because that seems to work well for everyone, but we usually discuss what the second game will be. One week they ran a $50 game on the second table.

It's all good - just depends on how many bodies you want to attract.

[Quads]

The ENTIRE reason this thread was posted was to find out who was interested. I hope I didn't start a big controversy and debate on the limits of the games. I just wanted to know who to invite.

If you are interested, I'll add you to the invite. If you are not, fantastic, I'll catch you at the next game.

And for Ace's reference, most of the games I host have been at .05 on the dollar with a $50 / buy in. So there have been several at those stakes. However not at .10 cents.

[Hagar]

The ENTIRE reason this thread was posted was to find out who was interested. I hope I didn't start a big controversy and debate on the limits of the games. I just wanted to know who to invite.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

You should know by now that we can't have a clean thread in this place.

[Quads]

I know I know... but tell me how proud you rae of me for not being a thread nazi?!?!? I jsut got back from Vegas and while catching up, I've been bitting my lip on a few that are still out there! (and haven't hit the little "X" yet.....)

[Hagar]

:lol: - to be honest, I've been tempted a few times myself.

[Ace-in-Space]

Let's rock and roll Quads. Maybe you could end up winning my Isthmus chips for free (although you gotta pay me for them first).

[BigKahuna]

Now your talking Quads.....Vegas is what I want to hear about. Satisfy all the rumors of Steve's exploits at a tavle with Gus Hansen, Hellmuth, and Ivey. Start a new post with the details of the trip or tell Steve to let us in on the happenings.......like how the hell do you afford to get in a game with those guys unless they were playing lower limits for the night?

[solring]

For me, I'm still learning how to play and am strictly a micro limits player online ($0.50/$1, $1/$2, $25NL). Live, I have played $2/$4, $3/$6 and $1-$4/$1-$6 spread. So, I am just part of BYOC for the fun of playing with other people. I don't have a problem with losing money, I just have to ration it out. $25 or $40 buy-ins are about the limit that I can do, at this time.