I play in a regular HOE game- the competition is weak and this is a very, very good game for me.

What usually ends up happening toward the end of the night is, the game gets shorthanded and nobody wants to play Hold 'Em anymore, and often people don't want to play Stud Hi/Lo either. The venue generally discourages changing games, but will do it only if everyone at the table agrees.

The problem here is that these players get very scared and weak playing HE shorthanded, and shorthanded HE is my best game, so I figure to do very well at that round. And they also adjust really poorly to the shorthanded play in Stud8 so I can easily exploit that as well. Omaha on the other hand, while not a particularly bad situation for me, is probably the least profitable, since it's not my best game and their overly loose full-ring play is not as bad shorthanded. Also they do a "no-chopping" rule shorthanded, so we end up with some frustrating blind-vs-blind hands chopping up our own money minus the rake.

So basically this happened a couple of times and I agreed because I was a big winner in the game and the players who asked to switch were stuck big and I figured I'd just keep them happy- but at the same time I think I'm perfectly within my rights to just ask to keep the same games, as everyone showed up for an HOE game so there's no reason we shouldn't play all the games. I know this game in general is great for me, I'm already known as a very tight player which doesn't seem to bother anyone but I don't want to be disliked for being nitty at the same time and would rather that everyone was happy with the game since most of them are going to be big losers in the long run. But at the same time I'm surely missing out on a very profitable situation playing the other games. What do you guys think?

Of course you do what they want. These people are paying you quite well to not play your best games at the end of the night. You can always study omaha. You won't always get invited to this game.

There is only one answer to the guy who gives you money and occasionally requests a small adjustment to how and how quickly he will continue giving you his money that day

If you are at a true home game, you always should be trying to keep the other players happy. Unhappy people leave early or stop comming at all. Enough unhappy people and the host might uninvite you.

It sounds to me like you are going to be winning regardless, it is just a matter of the win rate. Give the losers a 'chance', it isn't going to be that big of a deal.

DrStrange

It's at a "club", not really a home game (not sure if this is the right forum). In general I'm not at all worried about being 86'ed or anything, but obviously would like the game to stay running as much as possible.

What do you guys think if I'm stuck big and the other players are winning? Is it not reasonable for me to say something like "I'd like to try to win my money back so I don't want to just split pots" or something? I feel like most fish/casual players respect the feeling of being stuck and all of that.

I like this answer, and I will probably steal it from you in the future. In fact, why wait?

DRybes and Schmedy said it best. I'd improve my Omaha game, if I were me...

We could have fun with these types of sayings, especially when drinking. I'd put on the dog collar and run past the electric fence.



Oh yeah, and to OP. If you're a consistent winner, you should be accommodating losers. If it's a mixed game that doesn't mix, you're doing them a favor by not switching to your better games. Make them say thank you for taking their money.

No way does the green plagerism freak get any credit here!
though, of course, I laughed
DRybes winning this thread so far... though:


Good thing you aren't


.......ffffffrrrrrreEEAAAKKKKK!

I'm surprised you can't just re-read your original post and answer your question yourself... or want to rewrite part of it.

You're only potentially missing out on a SHORT-term profitable situation, if you insist on getting your max advantage all of the time (especially when a big winner) in a home game.

Now, a UC might be slightly different, but you're still in the same general area of responsibility: keeping the game going.

30% ROI over a year+ is better than 60% ROI over two months.

It wasn't me. =D

We had convinced a guy who was had a PhD Internship at a prestigious Connecticut Ivy League school to do it when the girls spoke up about it being a bad idea.

See below for an example of a regular HOE

I resemble... er, resent... that remark.

In my experience, your typical loose/passive live player who tends to do terribly in FR NLHE games does a lot better in bb/100 in SH because they're basically playing the same range of crappy hands, but are now less wrong to do so (while still wrong).

That said, you play more hands per hour when the game gets SH. But it's not that big of a difference because most of the time is spent shuffling and dealing, as well as the couple initial seconds when everyone checks their opening hand and decides whether they'll play it or not.

I do welcome SH play live, but mostly because I don't want the table to break up. Also, most live regs have little experience playing SH, so having been an online player for many years prior, I do have an advantage over them. They don't adapt their play enough, and end up playing much more tightly than they should.

I think this is a bad idea. They may be bad players, but they arent so stupid that they dont realize that you are a winner almost EVERY TIME they play against you! Therefore, they will have little sympathy for YOU when you're stuck. Just be a friendly guy and quietly take their money doing whatever they want to do. This is not the major part of the session anyway, just the tail end of it. The MAJORITY of the session will be spent playing the game that is MOST +EV for you anyway.