Quote:
Originally Posted by AKQJ10
Sounds like they're wise not to let weak players get in over their heads, at least not until we've established whether the site can support a deeper NLHE game. I know that slaughtering everyone for the max possible in the first week of deep stack hold'em sounds like a lot of fun, but winning players are really better off with sustainable games that produce somewhat less expectation in the short term.
I've heard this multiple times, but 1/3 is a pretty cheap game .. and the difference between buying in $300 or $500 is pretty small to a bankroll ..
$1000 would be a difference.. but i think there are plenty of people at Fortune with deep pockets that can sustain such a game..
I know that I play better with a bigger stack (just because it would hurt more to loose $1000 than $300) -- $300 max stacks gets boring .. and I'm not sure I have the patience to grind out those games.
I'm not a good player - i just like games with more money on the table -- super tilting to have to play against folks who have $100 in front of them waiting for a pocket pair.
as you consider what is right for the small stakes NLHE games, I'm probably one of the target demographic .. (1) - play recreationally (about 3 sessions a month) .. (2) no set bankroll, i just bring 2 to 3 buyins per session .. (3) just there to have a good time, care more about the experience, than showing a profit.
I dont know very much about how a game sustains itself, and whether its more about recreational players or daily customers who come in to drop one buyin per day.
Fortune as a card-room has some much higher games than the 1/3 (i'd say the 1/3 is almost at the bottom of the totem pole as far as cost) -- just consider what it takes to keep the 10/20 going .. or the 10/20/40 game .. and they have a list most nights.
Last edited by ricardo-sf; 03-06-2017 at 03:16 PM.