Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizard-50
30/60 is big enough that people don't care/notice the rake as much. It's evident by good tippers.
I'm sure that's true, but it doesn't really explain the phenomenon by itself.
I think what's really happening is a pretty good example of market equilibration. There are very, very few players in our market who actually can or want to play above about 15/30. And any game at or below about 15/30 is economically irrational, so only casual players and degenerate, lower-rolled gamblers will regularly demand them.
Put 30/60 out there, and both "high stakes" gamblers and rational players whose ideal limit would be anywhere from 20/40 to 100/200 can find their needs met.
Make it any higher (just two options today... 40/80 and 50/100) and you pick up frighteningly few new players on the top of the range and disinterest a slightly larger number of mid-limit players. Make it any lower (20/40 is the only realistic choice because of the aforementioned economics, I think) and you get into instabilities with an occasional (competing) 50/100 or lose a fair number of top-line players. You also start to disserve the compulsive, well-rolled gamblers who want maximum endorphin rush.
It's pretty likely, despite what I believe is generally total management incompetence at Ameristar, that they have found the optimization point for poker here given the fixed inputs of high rake, small market, Limited Gaming. Most changes to the steady state will either be transient (a few of us are bored and willing to start a 50/100 shorthanded AND enough tables are available AND dealers are available AND the 30/60 list is long enough that floor is okay with it...) or observably suboptimal over a short sample.
Finally, there are second-order dynamics that have crept in to ossify the market. The extended family -- literally, in much of the group, as I understand it -- that is the 30/60 regs has grown comfortable with the regularity of the offering. Most humans like things to be the same.
The wide separation between limits acts as a kind of filter for some of the poker room riff-raff. Most humans like class hierarchy, especially if they are atop it.
Stability and predictability have advantages for those of us who are occasionals. I don't want to wonder if there is an acceptable game each precious time I get to spend an evening playing a game I enjoy. I'm sure there are others like me, even if they donate less than I do. Highest-stakes games in any market are a fragile and sensitive thing, but consistency helps capture the market more efficiently.
I guess the only interesting questions for me are:
a) if the economy ever improves, and as professional poker players continue to fan out in desperation to find ways to continue to earn a living, will we see the 50/100 stabilize into a reliable game? I think this is quite possible, and it sounds like short-term results suggest it, too.
b) if Gaming ever figures it out -- and I think they will -- what realistic NL market will our demographic support? I have learned to enjoy limit for brief stints, but NL is a more interesting game. I play (or used to play, in many cases) 10/20, 20/40, and 25/50 NL. Even in some much larger, stronger markets I have witnessed these games wither away to a tiny remnant of what they used to be. Even what they used to be just a couple of years ago. I find myself wondering if even a 5/10 would go regularly in Black Hawk? (And just what would happen to the esteemed 30/60?)