Poker In Colorado?

[CORed]

There are, or at least used to be some illegal rooms in Denver. I haven't played in any for a few years, as I'm not really too comfortable with that scene. I don't believe players will get arrested if a club is raided, but you will lose your buyin. I also think an illegal room could be a juicy target for a robbery. They have a lot of cash and are not likely to call to police if they get robbed. All things considered, I'd just rather avoid that scene. I do know that one well-known illegal room was raided last year, and there may have been others.

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the only way you can turn a profit in a 2-5 game is to build pots for when you make hands and knowing when to save bets when you are beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't this pretty much how you turn a profit in any poker game?

[jackhigh]

[ QUOTE ]
At the risk of being accused of stereotyping, I'm going to say that a fairly large percentage of Asian players in Blackhawk play very aggressively. So, a couple of LAG Asians get in a raising war, maybe one is on a draw, and they talk in a foreign languaqe while they are doing it, and the one on the draw misses and folds on the river. "OMG, Collusion! No wonder I can't win at this game. It can't have anything to do with the fact that I play J rag offsuit and call to the river with bottom pair.".

Am I saying collusion never happens? Of course not. But I don't think it's nearly as common as the fish think. Am I saying there's a lot of money to be made in these low limit, high rake games? Of course not. But the people who blame the marginal profitability of these games on loose play or collusion are idiots. If the games were tight, with the rakes as high as they are, they would be unbeatable. Loose play, especially loose-aggressive play, makes for a high variance game, but it is also the only thing that makes it possible to win at all at these games. And the truth is, the games in Colorado are slightly tougher at times than low limit games elsewhere, because there are no higher limit games for the better players to move up to.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like I previously posted. Come on up here and take a shot! $100-$200 avg pots are here waiting for all you low limit experts. This should be a kind of Nirvanna for you low limit grinders! $100-$200 a pot free money! Most definitely lucrative enough to make a good living! (5-5 at the Lodge).

Come on up here and play... then we discuss what's beatable or not.

Posters Note: I'm talking about 5-5 games at The Lodge... not the avg 2-5 games.

[mr.bum]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
there is a gross conflict of interest in this thread.
[ QUOTE ]
alright. let me take a stab at this math as I understand it.

let the game be beatable at a winrate of x, where x = # of big bets/hour.

since the rake is capped at ~$7/pot (is this 10%?), let's assume an average rake of $5 per pot/no flop no drop.
assuming a dealing rate of 35 hands/hour, that's $175 coming out of circulation every hour out of $1750 total that's exchanging hands every hour.


although you can't calculate the true rake you are paying without your pots won/pots lost ratio, i highly doubt this game can be beaten; if it can, it's probably at 10bb/hour or more.

by all means, if there's someone out there with more math tricks, please correct me.

[/ QUOTE ]
the assumed numbers Furyion21 uses are on the conservative side.

[/ QUOTE ]
RR does this conservative math sound correct to you or not.please give reasons for your point of view.you have said and reiterated the poitnt that "these games are easily beatable". you have provided exactly zero evidence for your point of view.other than something that read like"um...im a mod and a gilpen floor who has played and won 5 times and know this to bet true...take my word for it.my intelect combined with my sample size are profound factual evidence BSBSBSBSBSProGilpenThisProGilpenThat..........."

[/ QUOTE ]

The biggest reason there are very few people beating small games is generally people that can beat small games move to larger games. Are you saying no small games can be beaten? There are games that have larger rakes than this that are smaller and are structured in a a way that rewards looser play that can be beaten. If a game is smaller with a higher rake and can be beaten there would have to be something very odd going on in Colorado to makes those games unbeatable (variance only increases the bankroll requirement, it doesn't decrease the EV of a +EV solution). And I never said it was easy to beat the games; I said it was clear they are beatable. The arugment that small games can't be beaten is not a new one, there is no need to disprove it every time a new person discovers 2+2. One thing that could bolster your argument (but appears to be false) is if you made the argument that there are better players in Colorado because they don't have a game to move up to.

Since you like throwing some math out there. You have seen really bad play there. I will take your assumption that $5/hand comes off the table. If on average one person puts in a $5 bet with no chance of winning that rake shouldn't be hard to overcome. Do you think in these games people ever put dead money in the pot or do all the players have roughly equal equity in the money they put in? Ihave noticed over the years there are roughly three types of people that play small games, those that lose and don't care, those that win and take the money, those that try to win and come to the conclusion that nobody can win since they can't.

[/ QUOTE ]
5 dollar average off the table is ridiculously conservative.the actual number is closer to 10$ every single hand that gets played (including tip).so every hour 250$+ is being taken off the table and out of the poker community. could you beat a 20-40 game where caped pots were the norm but the rake pulled 80 dollars(2big bets) off the table every hand? would you play this game? or would that amount of rake in relation to the amount of money that can be put into the pot offend you as it does me? you seem to enjoy taking cheap shots at my poker ability's "there are 3 types of players.... bsbsbsProGilpenThisProGilpenThat."i spent 3 months in Vegas over the summer playing 8-12 hr a day of either 1-3 500maxnl or 2-5nl. i found these games to be easily beatable and my results reflected that fact.again this is not meant to be a brag but i do consider both those games to be a "step up" from blackhawk 2-5spread.
RR i think you should take a step back and ask yourself why this thread has has strayed so far from the op. someone asked a seemingly simple question of "is their poker in CO? yet for some reason their are now 100+ posts about how terrible the games are here.your only explanation seems to be that to have a negative opinion of black hawk you must be a losing player no matter what the circumstances are.this is a pathetically marrow minded perspective.ducy

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
there is a gross conflict of interest in this thread.
[ QUOTE ]
alright. let me take a stab at this math as I understand it.

let the game be beatable at a winrate of x, where x = # of big bets/hour.

since the rake is capped at ~$7/pot (is this 10%?), let's assume an average rake of $5 per pot/no flop no drop.
assuming a dealing rate of 35 hands/hour, that's $175 coming out of circulation every hour out of $1750 total that's exchanging hands every hour.


although you can't calculate the true rake you are paying without your pots won/pots lost ratio, i highly doubt this game can be beaten; if it can, it's probably at 10bb/hour or more.

by all means, if there's someone out there with more math tricks, please correct me.

[/ QUOTE ]
the assumed numbers Furyion21 uses are on the conservative side.

[/ QUOTE ]
RR does this conservative math sound correct to you or not.please give reasons for your point of view.you have said and reiterated the poitnt that "these games are easily beatable". you have provided exactly zero evidence for your point of view.other than something that read like"um...im a mod and a gilpen floor who has played and won 5 times and know this to bet true...take my word for it.my intelect combined with my sample size are profound factual evidence BSBSBSBSBSProGilpenThisProGilpenThat..........."

[/ QUOTE ]

The biggest reason there are very few people beating small games is generally people that can beat small games move to larger games. Are you saying no small games can be beaten? There are games that have larger rakes than this that are smaller and are structured in a a way that rewards looser play that can be beaten. If a game is smaller with a higher rake and can be beaten there would have to be something very odd going on in Colorado to makes those games unbeatable (variance only increases the bankroll requirement, it doesn't decrease the EV of a +EV solution). And I never said it was easy to beat the games; I said it was clear they are beatable. The arugment that small games can't be beaten is not a new one, there is no need to disprove it every time a new person discovers 2+2. One thing that could bolster your argument (but appears to be false) is if you made the argument that there are better players in Colorado because they don't have a game to move up to.

Since you like throwing some math out there. You have seen really bad play there. I will take your assumption that $5/hand comes off the table. If on average one person puts in a $5 bet with no chance of winning that rake shouldn't be hard to overcome. Do you think in these games people ever put dead money in the pot or do all the players have roughly equal equity in the money they put in? Ihave noticed over the years there are roughly three types of people that play small games, those that lose and don't care, those that win and take the money, those that try to win and come to the conclusion that nobody can win since they can't.

[/ QUOTE ]
5 dollar average off the table is ridiculously conservative.the actual number is closer to 10$ every single hand that gets played (including tip).so every hour 250$+ is being taken off the table and out of the poker community. could you beat a 20-40 game where caped pots were the norm but the rake pulled 80 dollars(2big bets) off the table every hand? would you play this game? or would that amount of rake in relation to the amount of money that can be put into the pot offend you as it does me? you seem to enjoy taking cheap shots at my poker ability's "there are 3 types of players.... bsbsbsProGilpenThisProGilpenThat."i spent 3 months in Vegas over the summer playing 8-12 hr a day of either 1-3 500maxnl or 2-5nl. i found these games to be easily beatable and my results reflected that fact.again this is not meant to be a brag but i do consider both those games to be a "step up" from blackhawk 2-5spread.
RR i think you should take a step back and ask yourself why this thread has has strayed so far from the op. someone asked a seemingly simple question of "is their poker in CO? yet for some reason their are now 100+ posts about how terrible the games are here.your only explanation seems to be that to have a negative opinion of black hawk you must be a losing player no matter what the circumstances are.this is a pathetically marrow minded perspective.ducy

[/ QUOTE ]

I am done with this. It is not uncommon for someone to discover 2+2 and think they have all the answers. You do realize that the losers in poker games since the begining of time have been complaining about the bad play making them unable to win. If you don't want to learn about the games, that is your business, they are small and not really worht the time if you have something else going on, but to assume because you can't beat them that nobody can is making huge leap.

[mr.bum]

[ QUOTE ]


I am done with this. It is not uncommon for someone to discover 2+2 and think they have all the answers. You do realize that the losers in poker games since the begining of time have been complaining about the bad play making them unable to win. If you don't want to learn about the games, that is your business, they are small and not really worht the time if you have something else going on, but to assume because you can't beat them that nobody can is making huge leap.

[/ QUOTE ]
you have obv comprehended little of what i wrote in this thread. i absolutely love the quality of play there and find it ridiculously easy to exploit.
EDIT:and i have stated several times that simply because icant beat the game does not mean its not beatable...i have just never met someone who actually was beating them for a reasonable amount of money.

[bigeasy59]

I tend to belive they are unbeatable I have a friend who delt for a few years in bh and he sayes without a doubt that longterm tere is no way they are beatable his exact words were phil ivey couldn't beat that game long term he said if you get a few big tippers at the table there is around 300 bucks/hr comming off the table with three buy-ins a hour off the table I think he is right there is no way someone can beat the game long term. do some have edge yes but that just means the rake will eat them up slower imo.

[faustusmedea]

To the OP

If u live in Boulder, you should take the 119 over to Nederland and down into BH for the drive in. If mountain driving at night is bothersome, then take the recommended routes previously listed on the return home.

I head down there from Loveland a couple times a month simply to be around humans and the drive through the mountains provides one of the most relaxing and spectacular diversions possible. Traffic is almost never an issue and it only adds a few minutes to the drive. Afterwards, its nearly impossible to complain about living in CO

[Dennisa]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, is there a reason why there are only a few select cities that are allowed for gambling?

[/ QUOTE ]

Politics, pure and simple: Some casino owners and politicians from the three mountain towns got the "limited gaming" initiative on the ballot several years ago, and managed to get it through. Now the casino owners have a vested interest in limiting competition, and plenty of money to spend on advertising if anybody tries to pass another initiative that would let any competition in, and they get support from the religious and other anti-gambling folks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was moved to Colorado in 1990 when the original initiative was voted on. Originally the gambling was never suppose to get as big as it was. We were sold a Virginia City model of gambling for these small mining towns. Eg a few slot machines and a bj table in each of the restaurants or bars. Only 30% of the floor space could be allocated to machines. Only historical building were allowed to house gambling. Many of these regs no longer exists.

Now to beat these games, you have to play hands that can beat two pair. Two big unsuited cards will break even or loose in the long run. Cards need to be suited, connected. Pocket pairs also play very well, provided you play most or all of them for set value.

[Dennisa]

[ QUOTE ]
I tend to belive they are unbeatable I have a friend who delt for a few years in bh and he sayes without a doubt that longterm tere is no way they are beatable his exact words were phil ivey couldn't beat that game long term he said if you get a few big tippers at the table there is around 300 bucks/hr comming off the table with three buy-ins a hour off the table I think he is right there is no way someone can beat the game long term. do some have edge yes but that just means the rake will eat them up slower imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

It makes no difference what other people tip for your own particular win rate. It just means others will bust faster and you get new meat.