Due to the limitations of my posting agreement with 2+2, I cannot answer this question since it is involves a room promotion.

If you will email or message me I would be glad to elucidate.

Thank you,

Dave

I won't be there this Saturday, other plans. Last Saturday was a very good game. If you are a solid player, you will enjoy the game, if you know what I mean.

With the opening event at Borgata today I'm not going to play cash there. Wait lists are crazy this week. No 2/5 runs in the city during the day. Does 2/5 run weekdays there? Side note bravo is not up to date with the BBJ again. 4 days old? Really? That's the only other reason I would drive today too. But if it's been hit I'll skip a day on the felt. Thanks

Sent from my SM-N900P using 2+2 Forums

Since I don't play here anymore (used to), I was just reading by and see what's going on.

The cell phone rule is a joke.

The bag rule was (is?) a joke.

Thanks. Sounds like I'll have to stop in Saturday.

It's probably the opposite actually but w/e this isn't a strat forum.

Last night the floor says this is the last month for Wednesday night PLO tourneys. That would be a shame. Can you verify Dave?

Are they going to do something fresh and new like NHLE?

That is correct. New schedule can be found on FB and on Twitter.

Dave, the new posting at the podium on electronic devices is excellent. It very nicely conveys a very reasonable expectation of players and clarifies the intent well.

Nicely done.

Everyone's feedback on the details was the catalyst - much appreciated

Per Harrah's Twitter

no more BBJ. Funds will freeze until it's hit. Changing to a promo dollar to make money more accessible for players

Just stopped by to congratulate all the players at Harrah's Philly for getting one of the best poker guys around as your room manager there. Known Dave for a while and he's always had the best interest of poker players at heart; so glad to see he's got a room of his own now.

That's what was posted on Facebook. I talked to one of the supervisors.

Basically, the amount in the BBJ will be frozen at 6 a.m. Friday. No more money will be added to it and once it hits, it will be the end of the BBJ. So that could be an hour, a month or a year.

There will also be no bad beat box for dealers to drop $1 into. Basically, $6 will be raked from each pot instead of the $5 max. The casino did calculations and came up with a number as a percentage that will be taken and put into a promo fund - high hands, hot seat giveaways and other, new, innovative promotions that are being approved by the gaming commission and aren't being discussed yet.

The flier says there will be bi-weekly freerolls, but AFAIK the first one isn't scheduled yet and there haven't been any 'qualifiers' announced.

As much as this will piss everyone off, it's much better for the room.

What's best for the room? $5 max take and no ****ing gimmicks

I, too, would rather they just leave the money in the pot, but I'm not sure that's best for the room. It's the bonuses that bring in the recreational and occasional players. I hear all the time "I'm just here because the bad beat is so high." or "I'll stick around to the end of the high hand period." and it encourages them to play awfully because "Of course I called your preflop raise with 72 offsuit. I could've flopped quads for the high hand!"

Although I'd rather not have the extra dollar taken out, if they're going to do it I think it's better to give more people a better chance of winning something, rather than a handfull of people winning big every few months. I'm all in favor of replacing the bbj with high hand, cracked aces, hot seats, etc. Whatever will keep the donks and fish coming in.

Why the rake increases on the tournaments? The rake was already high..

$50 tournament - $38+$12 = 24% rake (bad)
previous $40 tournament was 33+7 which was 17.5% (bad, but not terrible)

$60 tournament = $46+$14 = 23.33% rake (bad)

$80 tournament = $62+$18 = 22.25% rake

$90 tournament = $50+$15 = 23.07% rake
- has $25 bounty which should not be calculated in rake

All of this is high I think, and I am calculating the conservative way. [Some people would calculate the 38+12 as 12/38 (31.6% rake) and not 12/50.]

I know live poker needs more in rake for the dealers and whatnot, but I think this is a little too high. I would cap the rake at 20% and that only for the lowest entry tournament. I don't know why the $50 couldn't just be $40+$10, $60 - $48+$12, $80 = $65+$15 and even that I think is high.

A couple of considerations:
First, the rake divided by the total buy-in, not just the amount to the prize pool, is the correct way to calculate. - so your way is correct
Second, there is no longer 3% taken out of the prize pool for the dealers, so subtract 3% from all of those figures.
Third, as for the $50 tourney up from $40, including the dealer fee, the house percent was upped 1/2 of one percent and the dealer fee was upped a full one percent. And, part in parcel because we added two levels to the structure resulting in approx 12% more play for the players in the $50 & $60 structures.

I understand your argument completely and was trying to do my best to keep the rake in the same ball park with the fact that we were giving extended play (25 min levels after level 13) on top of the extra two levels in the $80 & $90 structures. The house fee on the Bounty perfectly reflects this, which is $11 to the house and $4 to the dealers.

I hope this makes sense. Please let me know if this philosophy is still disagreeable. Am available to discuss in person too if necessary. Your feedback is always greatly appreciated.

Thank you,

Dave

Using the term rake and its calculations for tournaments is highly misleading. In a raked game you do not pay anything additional when you lose a pot. In tournaments you always pay a fee (and often even a toke) whether you get paid or not.
A vig calculation is the only honest way of presenting the juice paid. In the case of 38+12 the 12/38 calculation for 31.58% is correct.

$9 + $3 (or $12) of the $50 buy-in is "rake."

How would you calculate 18% rake on a $50 buy-in?

I believe we are talking about two separate things. ROI would be calculated by taking the rake by the amount to the prize pool. Whereby, if your ROI in these tournaments exceeds 31.58% you would have a positive expected value of return.

I think the main point here is that 31.6% roi is pretty unsustainable even at these low limits.

Another point -- while harrah's offers more tournaments it should be noted that their main competitor offers a $95 tournament that has less rake ($10) than Harrah's $50 tournament ($12).

I think I have a solution, but it may be until June/July until I can safely implement. I see how ROI has been impacted going from $40 to $50 tournaments ($7/$33 = 21.2% vs $9/$38 = 23.6%), and assumed that this could be offset by adding two new levels of play to the tournament. Apologies, as I cannot go into great detail at this point due to the limitations of my agreement with this forum, but can say that I do want to offer additional value.

Very much appreciate the engagement and feedback and would be glad to sit down and discuss in person.

david you seem to care which is excellent. i stopped visiting harrah's for several reasons, but them constantly cancelling guarantees was definitely one of them. but you seem to care, so i will come back for a wednesday tournament in the near future

I cannot thank you enough. Please feel free to reach out to me with any concerns at any time. I should be around day time if you want to say hello.

Small derail, but no it's not.

If this tournament gets 3 tables going every single time, your ROI should be 60%+. People are absurd bad. Live small-stakes tournaments is like 2004 poker.

Your second point is a good point though.