[DeadMoneyWalking]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I ran a poker room I'd bump up the rake to 7 or 8 dollars a hand an have a bunch more promotions targeted at weak, gambly players. Something like win a hand with 72 get $50. Try and cycle as much money as possible from winning players to losing players. I would run a poker room that I as a winning player would hate to play at. Good business and keeping winning players happy are often at odds with each other.



[/ QUOTE ]

This is a terribly interesting mentality.

I've always considered myself the 2nd best kind of player a poker room could have: a player who plays a ton and wins. The best kind of player a poker room could have is a player who plays a ton, plays horribly, and never runs out of money.

The only reason I consider myself 2nd best is because without losing players, it's impossible to get most winning players. You won't find me at a table full of decent/good players for very long.

The kind of room described above would probably be the kind of room I would like to play in. That mentality is fish 1st. If the lake is well stocked and maintained, the dedicated fisherman is willing to pay a premium to cast his net there.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is based on bad logic. That because good players seek out good rakes, that bad players will flock to high rakes.