Do you keep losers happy?

[jbay]

I've this problem in reverse. Since I graduated from college 9 years ago, my poker friends have slowly moved out of town and left me with few to get a regular game together. I've relied on invitations from other hosts for live games and found them to invariably be waaaay soft. Several times now I've cleaned a game out twice and not been invited back the 3rd time. Most recently I received a 3rd invite and attended (20 dollar buy in with unlimited rebuys and escalating blinds), and cleaned the table out again...(up 180 end of night with 6 players). I'm not trying to own, but the game is soooooo soft. I've about a 10-15% roi at low limit sngs online so I'm not a shark by any stretch, but I've found myself folding better hands to the host of my most recent game on several occasions. one time I checked a set through hoping someone would bet out and I could fold (I was already up a bunch and only the host and one other player was left), but no one bet out and I was questioned about my play when we turned the cards over. I want to be invited back, but I don't think I will be if I don't start losing...but that's hard to do with this group. I bring cigars and beers evertime and joke around and compliment others' play consistently, but it's hard to hide the fact that you quadruple your buy in (or better) everytime you play. I've tried playing lag, and win. And I easily win playing tag. I'm not trying to brag, but wondering what you all would do. Should I start playing some really crappy cards for one night while folding the good ones? Would one night of giving back be remembered? Advice?

[bmk67]

It's really in your best interests to keep the losers happy, especially if they are friends.

We have an occasional home game - usually there's two, maybe three good players, and the rest donate. This is a .25/.50 NL game, and typically there's 600-800 on the table by the end of the night. Not huge stakes, but it's high enough that it matters for most of the guys.

Most of these guys are friends, people I work with, or people brought by one of the above. Most of them are going home broke, and most of them know it. Some of the biggest donators come back time after time, because we treat them right.

We don't ever berate bad play. We DO needle, but only the players that we know can take it and dish it out the same.

If I'm hosting, I make sure that there's enough food and drinks. I see a couple bottles of booze as an investment, and a lot of our players don't mind losing a couple buyins if they have a good time. Just like in Vegas - so I make sure there's booze for the donators (and a couch for them to sleep it off on). Create a fun atmosphere that your players want to play in (OMFG, I sound like Martha Stewart, LOL).

I would also watch the cutthroat plays. Heads up, some players take a checkraise personally. Same with bluffs - don't make a point of showing them.

WIth all this being said, there are lots of players who take losing very badly and won't be back no matter what you do if you keep busting them. Not much you can do except find donators who are good losers.

[Abbaddabba]

Most [censored] players like it when you play "well".

They resent you when you make what they think are bad calls.
They resent you people slowplaying (they hear people complain about slowrolling on tv - equate the two, and feel as though they're justified in that resentment).
They resent you for "sucking out".
They'll hate you forever if you hit hit a gutshot against them.
They'll insult your mother if you "river" them.

They WANT to give you their money.

And most people who lose genuinely think that they're good enough to win. Case in point, probably hte majority of people who browse poker forums.

[JJNJustin]

Is a loser ever happy?

-J

[Lottery Larry]

"I play in a home game a couple of times per week"

You play in a home game that runs a couple of times a WEEK? What kind of HOME game is that? Don't you people have lives?

[lef1000]

[ QUOTE ]
There are many other important skills needed to be a long term successful poker player (professional or otherwise), other than just 'technical' poker skills.

One of these skills is keeping the fish happy. And this extends to more than just refraining from berating their play when they outdraw you. Sometimes little actions like not being absolutely merciless when in a pot with a fish can be +EV in the long run even though they are -EV in that particular pot. In the given example, the reasons not to take the opponent's last few chips might extend further than just not wanting him to leave the game that night. If you go a little easy on him every now and then it might make it more likely that he comes back tomorrow night as well. Of course, if he had substantial amounts in front of him that you think he'll call you with then you've got to bet 'properly'. But it is not always +EV to adopt a strategy that can win a few extra chips, if that strategy might antagonise a weak player and prevent him returning to the game.

The classic example of this is the check-raise. Now of course you should be check-raising when it is right to do so. However, if a good natured, slightly drunk millionaire sits down in your game to 'gamble with the boys' then you need to be careful about things like check-raises at certain times. If you think the check raise would allow you to win an extra bet, but would antagonise this opponent and make him see that some players are playing a rather more cut-throat game than he wants, then it may be -EV. If your check raise angers him enough to leave the game then you could potentially have cost yourself a lot of money over the next few hours by trying to win that extra bet. It is definitely +EV to promote a 'gambling with the boys' type of atmosphere, even if this occasionally means you have to refrain from making the perfect (technically) poker play.

Say you are playing NLHE. You have the nuts on the river and the pot is already huge. Your weak opponent does have a few chips left in front of him, but nothing at all substantial considering the size of the pot. In this circumstance it may often be +EV not to set him in for the last of his chips. You may instead wish to just table your hand and take in a huge pot, leaving him with a few chips left. It makes him feel better and makes the game seem less cut-throat. It also makes you look like a gentleman, one of the boys, which may have unexpected and positive side-effects (one example is that this type of action may result in invites to very juicy games where they try to exclude the strong players). What you are actually doing is making the most cut-throat play of all (keeping the fish happy so you can take more of their money in the long run), but it comes across just the opposite. Of course, there may be other circumstances when it would be +EV to set the opponent in when in this sort of situation - e.g. he may start steaming because he is angry, or he may pull out plenty of money if he goes to the felt but will play on short-stacked if he has any chips left. You must judge each situation on its merits.

I play regularly with a very successful and well-known poker professional. He is the father of one of the best players in the world. And I have learned a lot about these sort of things from watching how he acts towards the weak players. He is extremely friendly to them, almost seems to court them. And he definitely does things like refraining from setting an opponent in for the last of his chips if he judges that this is the best thing to do to keep a fish happy. Interestingly, the weak players tend to really like him even though the strong players don't like him in the game (he wins too much). He actually has certain fish following him around from game to game.

I will repeat my point that there is more to being a successful gambler than just technical skill. Other, more social, skills can be almost as important. This is something that is perhaps not appreciated by those who just play online or in huge US card rooms where the player pool is constantly being replenished. In these situations, keeping the fish happy is probably irrelevant since every time a fish dies, a new one is born in his place. But in most other circumstances you may sometimes want to consider sacrificing short term EV to make the more +EV long term play.

[/ QUOTE ]

really nice post

[StevieG]

grunch response

Yes, it is in the interest of your game's long term survival to keep losers happy.

It sounds like you are playing no limit.

If so, consider playing pot limit, possibly even fixed limit. They'll keep calling their draws and second best hands, but it will damage their stacks less.

[PokerintheI]

I make a special effort for the fish in my game. Particularly the fish who understand the basics but have HUGE holes such that they still lose to all but the worst players. But, you have to be a little more careful with thier egos. They usually know enough that if you are obviously soft playing or compliment a hand that they know they sucked out with, you might end up pissing them off more than losing would have.

Keeping that calling station/Maniac in the game is usually far more important to your stack than taking whatever they have in front of them at the minute. I like to think of these players as the great equalizers.

In my game there are 3 solid LAG players (me and 2 others), 2-3 TAGs, 2-3 calling stations and one true maniac. In the absence of our calling stations and the maniac, any money in front of the TAGs is essentially out of the game as far as I am concerned. They know how I play, and they just aren't going to get involved in a pot with me unless they have truely top tier cards, and they aren't going to give me the right price for any draws. So, they only chance I have at winning money from them, is for both of us to pick up great hands at the same time.

Now, you add in 2 calling stations and everything changes. Having that extra caller means you have a much better chance to get in there with the proper odds on your nice multi way hands. Plus you can always hope that the donk will suck out for a big hand and then give you a shot at previously unavailible cash. I do everything I can to keep these guys in the game short of just giving them a pot.

I overbet to force a fold when I have the stone nuts and there is already a decent pot. Then I show them the hand so they know I wasn't bluffing. I usually do this with a comment about how they had me worried so I didn't want to mess around with them.

I usually only checkraise when I need to use it to force out one of the other decent players.

I make weak bluffs into small pots so that they can raise me off the hand and then feel great that they pushed me around.

My two favorite post hand acting jobs are:

I needle one of the other decent players when they either win or lose to the fish. I tell them how the lucked out, or tease them that they should have known they were beat and that they got played by the fish.

And when I know I have them beat(non-nuts) and that they are going to call whatever I bet anyway, I will ponder for a good long time, (15-20 seconds) then either check or bet a minimal amount. Then as I'm pulling in the pot, I let out a loud sigh of relief and make a comment along the lines of "Whew, man you really had me worried, I didn't know if I should bet or not, nice play". Letting them feel like they got inside my head gives them a nice warm fuzzy feeling. Seems to work a whole lot better than just a "Nice Hand Sir" or the like.

[Pocket3's]

One thing that helped me was bad luck. This spring, I won big 10 times in a row, and was starting to feel a little guilty taking my friends money. And, I think they were getting a little annoyed with how "lucky" I was. July and August I simply ran bad, and lost a couple hundred bucks. The others were glad and relieved to see me losing some. Now I've won 13 of the last 16, but they still remember those losing nights I had this summer, so I don't even think they realize I'm winning almost everytime again. BTW, we play 2 to 3 times per week.

So, a little bad luck can be a good thing sometimes.

[pfapfap]

When you lose, make a show of it. When you win, do so quietly.