Re: Introducing No Limit
 

One of our problems is retaining players, we invite a new guy over and he loses $20-$40 (maybe he comes back once and loses again) and never returns. This has happened many times (one poor bastard left $100 of debt... ugly). The variety of oddball games combined with high stakes I think runs them off. So we have about 6-8 regulars which means only one game.

I'll suggest overs buttons tonight, but my guess is everyone will take one (lol). I really do fear someone raising me like $8000 though - definitely can't afford that, and one or two of them will have a wallet full.

Maybe it is time to up the stakes. Don't tell my wife.

Thanks for all the advice.

Re: Introducing No Limit
 

you can't play NL or PLO without table stakes rule. If you do then players are going to be able to essentially cheat.

I put $1000 in my pocket. If you make a big bet at me on the river that I want to call with only the chips left on the table I say I am all in. But if I like my hand enough to put $1000 more in I reach into my pocket and call your bet.

And no knowing how much other players have is a ridiculous way to play NL or PL.

You don't need a cap, but all the money should be on the table (or at least every player should have to declare how much is in their pockets before they begin).

Re: Introducing No Limit
 

With .50/$1 blinds, I would recommend that you start with a $100 max-buy-in table stakes game. If it's a friendly game where everybody brings more than $100, I'd recommend making a $100 innitial buy-in mandatory (no more, no less).

Once the game starts, players can chose to rebuy back up to $100 anytime they want before a new deal, but they can't add on to their stack if it's over $100 except by winning it. And they can choose not to rebuy, too, if that's what they would prefer.

If $100 max buy in's aren't "deep" enough, then make it $200 max buy-in. But I wouldn't go any deeper than that. Effective stacks of 200x the big blinds are pretty deep already.

Finally, you need to make sure you play table stakes only, and get used to figuring out how to set up side pots when more than one player is all in with varying stack sizes. Also, you should play chips only as long as you have enough chips. Don't let people slip cash on the table or under their stacks. It is unethical to "hide" or intentionally misrepresent the amount of money you have in play at a no limit table stakes game.

Re: Introducing No Limit
 

I'm not really sure what the main problem is. You have a regular group of enough people for a full and action-packed table, all of whom enjoy the stakes and games at play.

For a limit or small spread-limit game, I have no problem with playing whatever is in your pocket, but you can't mix in that kind of game with a PL or NL game, as those need to be table stakes. You can't switch back and forth.

If everybody is okay with higher stakes, it sounds like you're one of the people who is uncomfortable losing $40. Why do you want to force a group of people to change their game completely merely to suit your more limited bankroll? Perhaps you should either stick to the mixed spread limit game or not play NL or find a different game.

It's the oddball games that drive off people, not the stakes. Newcomers probably feel uncomfortable with a group of people who know each other playing games they don't know in a highly aggressive manner. But it's only a problem if people think it's a problem. If you have enough people for a regular game and everyone is having fun, I don't think that's a problem.

Re: Introducing No Limit
 

I've never been to a game that wasn't table stakes. I thought that went out in the 1970s.

You really have to set a capped buy-in and ONLY PLAY TABLE STAKES.

If you want to have a very different type of chip, consider getting the European poker chip plaques. Perhaps you could use these to represent $10 or $25. They are square and should be easily recognizable to your color-blind friend. You would want to get plaques without dollar amounts on them, of course [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Introducing No Limit
 

Most people seem to disagree with me, but I've always thought that limit is a better choice than NL for friendly home games. The bad players don't lose as consistently, more people get to play more hands, tensions don't run as high, and the players who don't want to put as much money in play don't feel like they will be bullied by the big stacks (I know it doesn't work that way, but a lot of people feel that way regardless).

It sounds like you should just leave the game the way that it is. People clearly want to be able to have a lot of money on the table (or access to it) and splash around with it, but you don't want to have to face large all-in bets - so just keep as a limit or spread-limit game.

Re: Introducing No Limit
 

Is it bad that I'm a huge degenerate and thought "wtf, table stakes is lame, uncapped buyins rule, OP and his fellow players have it made" when I saw this post?

Re: Introducing No Limit
 

Why would you want to change this??!?!
This game sounds like way more fun then NL.

Re: Introducing No Limit
 

We played plenty of PL last night and it worked out fine. A little cash made it on the table with all the .50 chips but having a couple $20 bills around was not a big deal. Going south was discussed and agreed upon (do not do it).

The three of us that got there on time were discussing the future of our game after an hour of sitting around waiting when the rest of the crew arrived and restored my faith in our home poker game. We had a blast. 4 dollar spread limit follow the queen 7-card stud was the only game which paid me, it's amazing when your first 5 cards flush (all natural) and then the wild card comes, then changes, but the hand still holds up. A-high flushes, boats and quads usually win that game.

Anyway I think we're ok. It's uncapped but it's got to be on the table. We played some NL as well, it worked fine.

FWIW I'm fine with the stakes. and I'm not finding another game, these are my best friends from college and we've been playing together for more than five years now. The problem as I see it is the stakes are getting too high for newbies, but, I've realized it's not a place for newbies, everyone is really quite good. We had one new guy who was thankfully not new to poker, he called the NL game after buying in for $40, he had fun and will surely return. PL Omaha Hi-Lo was called a few times and was really fun, much more fun than $3 max raise Hi-Lo. New guy played Omaha with us but got smart and sat out during booray rounds which I'm hoping will encourage people not to call it, I hate it.

Thanks for all the comments, table stakes is key, even if it gets a little weird with mixed games getting thrown in. I think a few of you have it dead right, we're lucky to be able to play all these different games and have tons of fun in the process. Maybe we don't need any new players, this would be fine if the Army didn't keep shipping them off to Kuwait. So long as they come home the game should stay intact.

Re: Introducing No Limit
 

Unlimited stakes is fine for limit poker, but NL poker is simply not NL poker unless you play table stakes. It's that important. I would go so far as to say if you're not playing table stakes in NL, then you're simply not playing NL.

Pot Limit is a complete waste of time for a home game. Any nuances between that and NL will surely be lost on anyone, and it's just way too hard to keep track of how much can be bet and raised. No fun, don't bother.

NL adds new dimensions as long as you come up with clear rules for how you can rebuy. But remember what I said, it's imperative that you know how much someone has in front of him for any particular hand, and that's the only amount they can play with.

In our home game, we have a fixed buy in. The interesting thing is that we cannot buy in again until we bust. You can never just top off. This adds some interesting tournament-type situations, but without knocking people out or raising blinds.

You might not like this, in which case you can play however you like. You can have cash play, but it must be on the table when the hand starts.

To a lesser extent, money shouldn't be taken off the table either, but personally I find this to be pretty unimportant as it doesn't affect the strategy of any particular hand.