Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Poker Discussion > Brick and Mortar

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 11-16-2007, 08:24 PM
Al_Capone_Junior Al_Capone_Junior is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: utility muffin research kitchen
Posts: 5,766
Default schmuck boy right but for the wrong reasons

"Pontificating" might get you in trouble with the wpt fans. Toooo many letters. Plus I might hafta kick you in the nuts, but then I will probably do that eventually anyway.

Bad beat jackpots do suck, but schmuck boy doesn't really know why. I've played in casinos 11 years and have never gotten so much as a table share, but my failure to get lucky is not why I dislike them either. The fact they are bad for poker is why I dislike them.

You've got the players attracted to jackpots right. "Jackpot retirement plan" players are exactly the players you don't want to attract, they generally drive away the ones you want. Mostly weak-tight local whiners like big jackpots. I recall getting yelled at years ago for betting the turn in a 2-4 game at palace station because there was already $20 in the pot.

Jackpots also remove a lot of money from the poker economy. I've asked numerous winners how much of that big score will ever see a poker table again. Mostly the answer is "none." This is an old idea and not something I've just discovered.

Zero sum? Maybe not. With the reserves these places keep, all the money may eventually go back, but any given player can't win both the jackpot and all the reserves. Even lotteries may eventually get big enough to have a +ev, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to play them.

I don't mind $1 going down the slot when the money gets spread around between lots of players. Excalibur's wheel is my favorite promotion because lots of people get a little of that money, and it all pretty much winds up back on the tables.

Freerolls are generally a bad way to spend jackpot dollars, especially if they require many hours over several months to qualify. These spread a lot of tourist money to a few locals who are able to qualify.

Al
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-16-2007, 08:26 PM
goofyballer goofyballer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: THESE IZ THE OLD FORUMZ
Posts: 7,108
Default Re: Bad Beat Jackpots = Zero Sum?

It does feel fairly unbelievable; I mean, I can count on one hand the number of times I've even been in a poker room when the BBJ has been hit, and these jackpots are generally like $3000-$10000, so it's not even like hitting one would make up for paying a couple years' worth of drops.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-16-2007, 08:45 PM
psandman psandman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Vegas
Posts: 2,346
Default Re: schmuck boy right but for the wrong reasons

One local casino is running a freeroll scam.

If you read the rules the freeroll isn't free, there is a $10 fee, but the house will issue $10 to each player to enter the freeroll.

So if the freeroll is has $10,000 in prize money, and 100 players, they pay $10,000 out of the jackpot drop. But they also pay a $10 fee to the casino for each player, so they transfer $1000 from the jackpot money to the poker room revenue.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-17-2007, 07:53 AM
bav bav is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vegas
Posts: 2,857
Default Re: schmuck boy right but for the wrong reasons

[ QUOTE ]
One local casino is running a freeroll scam.

If you read the rules the freeroll isn't free, there is a $10 fee, but the house will issue $10 to each player to enter the freeroll.

So if the freeroll is has $10,000 in prize money, and 100 players, they pay $10,000 out of the jackpot drop. But they also pay a $10 fee to the casino for each player, so they transfer $1000 from the jackpot money to the poker room revenue.

[/ QUOTE ]
"There is a $10 fee, but the house will issue $10..." You're implying, I think, but not saying, that the $10 they issue is coming out of the freeroll prize pool? If so, I'd send a letter to Gaming and ask 'em to put their noses in. Or you can tell the joint to knock it off and explain why and give 'em a couple weeks to make it so before you sick Gaming on 'em.

I just don't see much reason to put up with shenanigans in a town with 50 poker rooms and a Gaming Commission to keep 'em 10% honest.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-17-2007, 08:30 AM
fatshark fatshark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 102
Default Re: Bad Beat Jackpots = Zero Sum?

[quote]
Quote:
1. Depending on the casino, many of them take a certain percentage from the BBJ pot for "administrative/marketing". It usually runs around 10%. This isn't really published information, it's something you would find in the small print. Some casinos may not take a percentage.
Most places cannot take a service charge of any kind out of a player's pool. When I say most, I mean I don't think any but I haven't been everywhere. I do know that the California Indian Gaming cannot take a charge.
I think some may be confused with cardrooms/casinos that don't take a BBJ collection and set asside a percentage of the rake for BBJ.
I would be very interested to see if anyone could confirm that Commerce actually gets away with taking a service charge of any kind out of the players pool.

As far as freerolls/high hand/aces cracked and other promotions can come out of player's pools.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-17-2007, 08:34 AM
fatshark fatshark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 102
Default Re: Bad Beat Jackpots = Zero Sum?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Gaming regulations prohibit them from raking more than 10% from a game, and raking the BBJ/HHJ drop would put 'em over 10%.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wouldn't that only be true if the $1 that constitutes the jackpot drop is also counted toward the raked pot?

For example, take a 1/2NL game with a 10% to $4 rake. The last dollar is taken out at $40, and the jackpot drop is taken out at $20.

Consider a gross pot of $40. $1 got taken out for the jackpot at $20, leaving $39. Only $3 got taken out for rake, because pot after jackpot drop < $40. Total rake is $3 + $.10 that will be raked from the jackpot. $3.10 < 10% * $40.

Now consider a gross pot of $41. $1 got taken out for the jackpot at $20, leaving $40. As a result, $4 was raked from the pot. Total rake is $4 + $.10 on the jackpot. $4.10 = 10% * $41.

[/ QUOTE ]

On a pot of $35 or more, the house rounds up and the rake would be $4. So the information is not correct.
The BBJ collection can be taken at what ever the house decides is a qualifying pot.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-17-2007, 08:40 AM
bav bav is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vegas
Posts: 2,857
Default Re: Bad Beat Jackpots = Zero Sum?

[ QUOTE ]
On a pot of $35 or more, the house rounds up and the rake would be $4.

[/ QUOTE ]
Uhhhh... Not even slightly true in Nevada. They CANNOT rake more than 10% ever, and they don't get to round. They rake $3 at $39, $4 at $40. I believe Posh got it completely right.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-17-2007, 08:46 AM
fatshark fatshark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 102
Default Re: schmuck boy right but for the wrong reasons

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One local casino is running a freeroll scam.

If you read the rules the freeroll isn't free, there is a $10 fee, but the house will issue $10 to each player to enter the freeroll.

So if the freeroll is has $10,000 in prize money, and 100 players, they pay $10,000 out of the jackpot drop. But they also pay a $10 fee to the casino for each player, so they transfer $1000 from the jackpot money to the poker room revenue.

[/ QUOTE ]
"There is a $10 fee, but the house will issue $10..." You're implying, I think, but not saying, that the $10 they issue is coming out of the freeroll prize pool? If so, I'd send a letter to Gaming and ask 'em to put their noses in. Or you can tell the joint to knock it off and explain why and give 'em a couple weeks to make it so before you sick Gaming on 'em.

I just don't see much reason to put up with shenanigans in a town with 50 poker rooms and a Gaming Commission to keep 'em 10% honest.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm. This might be me not understanding the design of the freeroll, but I can see how they might be working this.

If you are essentially giving each players $10 and a seat into a freeroll for $10, that I think would be okay. Basically what they're doing is shortcutting around doing paperwork on each player that would receive $10 out of the player's pool by just having them essentially buy-in and then awarding them $10 after the tournament starts and the funds are released from the Cashier's Station. Then they write the paperwork up as the 100 players X$10 +$10,000 in prizes. There is one sheet of paper that will exhaust $11,000 from the player's pool and all $11,000 does go back to the players in form of a $10 token/etc and the prizes. It probably seems like they are doing something wrong, but I doubt they are.....unless, they say that there are actually 120 players and get some extra cash and pocket it that way. The players never get to see the paperwork and the surv usually isn't as good at the podiums as it is at the cashier's cage.
I don't know. Maybe I confused everyone more! Lol
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-17-2007, 09:46 AM
Milo Milo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Canterbury Park
Posts: 3,210
Default Re: Bad Beat Jackpots = Zero Sum?

I believe Canterbury takes a bit out, but for the sake of this argument, I'll assume a BBJ that returns 100%.

The upside is that large BBJs often bring more players who like to gamboooool. This happens A LOT at CP. When the BBJ is big, like over $80K, the games get uber-loose and uber-stupid. Even stranger is that they just ADDED the jackpot for higher limit games (15/30 and 30/60 had been exempt), reportedly AT THE PLAYERS' REQUEST. In short, BBJs can bring about some very good games.

The downside of these really big BBJs is that they remove $$ from the poker economy. While a bad 15/30 player may bleed back the $20K he wins eventually, that same player probably would have bled that $20K anyway. A few months back, this 19-year-old playing 3/6 got the big end of a $150K+ BBJ. He called his Mom, and she came to join him and help him carry out 7+ racks of black. He will never return this money to the poker economy.

Which of these factors is more potent? Not sure, but over the past three years at CP, I've played 1640 hours and have been kicking about $0.11/hand to the BBJ. Assuming 30 hands per hour (a bit of an underestimate for CP) over these hours, this means I've kicked over $5,000 into the BBJ. This is not inconsequential.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-17-2007, 10:04 AM
fatshark fatshark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 102
Default Re: Bad Beat Jackpots = Zero Sum?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
On a pot of $35 or more, the house rounds up and the rake would be $4.

[/ QUOTE ]
Uhhhh... Not even slightly true in Nevada. They CANNOT rake more than 10% ever, and they don't get to round. They rake $3 at $39, $4 at $40. I believe Posh got it completely right.

[/ QUOTE ]
Really, thanks for that, I had no idea. The few times I spot checked to confirm that I guess the dealers got a little "pinchy"!
How about the commission/service charge on player's pools? can they do that too in NV?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.