A friend of mine who hosts a pretty wild 1/2 and occasionally bigger cash game asked me to come up with a way to really make the game like an event. This is what I came up with - it's kind of a version of the durrrr challenge in a single table ring game. has anyone seen anything like this before? what do you think?

DEEPSTACK CASH GAME & BIGGEST WINNER POOL

$1 / $2 Deepstack Cash Game
•Minimum buy-in is $400, there is no maximum buy-in.
•If a player drops below $150, they must reload to at least $400 before they are dealt into another hand.
•Players may reload at anytime, but cash cannot be removed from the table unless the player is under $150 and does not wish to continue playing.
•Players must stay until at least midnight as long as they have at least $200 on the table.

$150 Biggest Winner Pool
•All players who want a seat at the game must also pay to enter a separate $150 “Biggest Winner” pool. Whoever makes the largest profit for the night will be awarded the entire side pot. For example, if there are eight players, the Biggest Winner Pool would be $1200. The player who has banked the biggest profit for the night [current stack minus buy-in(s)] would be declared the Biggest Winner and will receive the additional side pot.


Any and all comments appreciated.

that sounds like a lot of action for a homegame.
is it friends only or r u trying to make money from fish?
i cant imagine finding fish willing to join that scenario.

if u do, sounds like a good idea, give it a try ;p

Sorry, you're not going to like this.

I think taking a hot and juicy game and tracking results is a horrible idea.

You'd be surprised how good people are at rationalizing away losses and living in denial. When you start tracking results, and they see how much they've lost and have it paraded around in front of others, they'll stop playing.

They won't just pick up and leave right then. They'll say it doesn't matter, and they might even believe that as they're saying it. But over time they'll find other things to do. I've seen this happen multiple times.

This is a game that thrives on the concept of intermittent reinforcement. It's the very thing that keeps the games juicy and vibrant. Why would you want to remove that very aspect from the game?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

This would not be an every time thing - it would be a one-night-only special. These guys are a different breed. This game already keeps a board of buy-ins because there is so much lending going on at the table, so people know how much they're into the game for, and they keep buying in. they are all friends with a lot of disposable gambling money, and just love action.

You track buyins, or just IOUs? I recommend the latter. And remember, that doesn't track RESULTS.

It's not really the money that makes people stop playing, it's the losing "points" and shame in front of peers. I guess if it's a one-off it's not a huge deal, but what if they like it and want to keep doing it? People don't always like things that are good for them. The effects won't be felt immediately, but they will be felt long-term, I guarantee.

I remember the last guy I talked to who tracked buyins and paraded them around and said it didn't really matter. A few months later he was lamenting that his favorite loosest deepest-pocketed player wasn't showing up any more. Now he has a hard time getting together a game at all.

It could be fun, I'm just saying, this kind of thing has a tendency to have long-term negative effects on a game.

I don't track anything. He tracks buyins and payouts because they have had some issues with reconciling chips at the end of the night, and has lost a couple of hundred over the last few sessions they've had.

I am going to forward your thoughts to him - he's the one that knows these guys. I am not properly rolled to play in a game this size (though it is so good that I may need to find money for a game like this). He can make the final call. The loosest, most reliable donor in the game is the host's brother-in-law.

Well, I'd wait for some others to chime in first. Maybe I'm a negative nellie.

That was the reason the other guy gave, too. Maybe you can answer this, because he couldn't:

How does that help? If the money doesn't add up, the money doesn't add up. If the money written down doesn't match the chips in play, then what? How is having written it down changed anything?

The person controlling the money and chips is responsible for the money and chips, end of story. You give me cash, I give you chips. You give me chips, I give you cash. If I'm loaning you money, I add money to the bank and give you chips. If I'm loaning on house credit, I write it on a slip of paper and put it with the money, as if it were cash.

My sense is he is thiking they would do a night like this once every three months. they have a weekly regular cash game with normal sized buy-ins. I think they are looking for something big for a one-nighter. their first thought was to do a $500 buy-in single table winner-take-all like poker after dark... this was just an alternative to that.

I'll see what he says / thinks.

pfapfap is very correct here. You are playing with dynamite to track results.

remember, people are pretty clever, and will read between the lines if they have to to figure out how much they're losing into the game.

That's a bit outside your original question, though. As far as a winner-takes-more event night, it's simply a gambit to add variance. Seems like it would add a LOT of variance. That's usually good for a gamboooler crowd. I'd just worry that too many people are going home down that night, and only 1 is really going to score big. Tournament wisdom usually indicates a graduated payout.

$150 EACH to buy into the side pot? sounds excessive.

Interesting though, that it will usually be a laggier player that wins. Nitty players that do well in loose games over the long haul are rarely going to be the big winner of any one night. This structure will efficiently demolish people who aren't good deep-stacked.

You're really comfortable saying nobody can cash out unless they're below $200? What if someone get's called away for an emergency? you blind them down?

Good thoughts - again, I just threw this together and watned to get input. Thanks!

Interesting idea, but I think you're destined to kill off your game, unless all of the players are generally equally skilled.

Also, the play at the end of the night is going to be really wacky, as the implied odds involved make the play REALLY different.

If you guys do this for any length of time, trip report please!

Because it gives you some checkpoints, to double check the cash mid-game, that's why.

Doing it for your own reference is one thing, but I still think it's a bad idea to let players know that this kind of thing is being tracked. "How much did I rebuy tonight? Oh, THAT much? Damn, I forgot about those..." For my own sake, it's nobody's damn business how much I have on the table.

I can see how it might be a little helpful, but it sure seems like a lot of work and distraction for what should be a very simple process. You throw me the idol I throw you the whip. You give me cash, I give you chips. Why would you ever give someone chips without receiving cash, unless you're so distracted by writing it down that you forget to take it?

Errors usually come in miscounting cashouts. How is writing it down going to help that, since the number written is also wrong? The host is still responsible.

As others have mentioned, this is a great way to ruin a game/destroy some fish. Remember: You can shear a sheep many times, but skin it only once.

That said, this game sounds epic. If everyone in the game is a total degenerate (they'll come back no matter what) or a serious player, then this game could be a freaking blast.

For example, when I play here in Seoul, I play with a bunch of players who just play for fun and beers... most have never heard of EV, implied odds, kicker problems, or the term "fold." I would never think of bringing this format anywhere near this group.

When I go home to play in Grand Rapids, it's a different story. I sit down with half a dozen grinder pros (that is, they make their earnings exclusively playing poker) who are poker-hardened to the core and will happily take any action, any time. There are no fish in this game. It's poker-friends sitting down to hash it out for bragging rights and ball busting. That's the kind of crowd who will welcome the game you describe.


The forum reaction says it all: "This is terrible for your game. But, uh, trip report and invite please."

Maybe I missed some detail here, but tracking the biggest winner does not require publicizing everyone's results. At any game, when someone buys in for $400 and cashed out for $2000, it is no secret he won big, and that others must have lost at least that much collectively. The finalists will be obvious to everyone, and the host can just tell everyone the results of the top three winners...if there are that many.

They are degenerates. The guys who donate will donate no matter what. This is not a group of people that met each other playing poker, this is a group of friends who are all personally well off enough to make insane wagers. This just happens to include cards.

By the way, since this is a ONE OFF kind of night - the biggest fish in the room could win the whole shabang - then he'd never stop donating. They don't plan to make this their regular game. Just looking for an event to look forward to.

Just as an aside, this is NOT my game nor a game that my club is running. I may deal the game because I want to be there - but this is not going to be publicized.