Hey guys, I have a question that I am afraid is going to come across as a dbag brag but that is not my intention at all. Guessing some of you may have been/are in similar situations so thought you might have some advice.

I play in a home game that grew out of a small weekly tourney that now probably has 30 rotating players. In the last 2 years the game has grown and started to play a lot of cash each week with growing action, typically 1 table after the tournament with 2-4k in play that will see 12-13 players go through a night.

It definitely started as a group of buddies, has expanded a bit to have some more semi-serious rec players, but is still a very friendly group of generally IRL friends.

The game probably has 3 winning 2/5 (live) players; 4-5 winning 1/2 players; and the rest generally losing live players who are ok losing 100 bucks a week amongst friends. 5-6 players will play for $300-$500 in action each week, the rest will only risk $100/$200 a week, sometimes running it up but usually leaving empty.

Over the last year specifically the game has grown a lot in stakes/action. In that time I have been a big action player in the game, playing with a lot more loose action/gambling style than at a casino due to the soft table and because it is just more fun!

While the money is nice, at my home game for me it is more about having a good time with other people who are semi-serious about the same hobby. Playing for material stakes is an important part of the challenge for me.

In the last 12 months I have pulled close to 20k out of this local poker group, which has been a combination of being one of the top 2 players in the game and probably being on a heater. While I don't think anybody (as the players rotate somewhat) would think it is anywhere close to that amount it is definitely noticed that I leave most weeks with massive stacks and 'get lucky all the time'. I certainly don't win every week which helps, and in fact have some of the biggest losses due to playing a higher variance style, but I have almost all of the the top highest winning sessions of the last 18 months (some of that is b/c some players win small and leave).

We have had 2-3 regular of the larger players who have lost a lot of money to me in that time, and I am up on every regular player in the game. We have started to have more and more players who are not showing up to play or are saying their bankrolls are busted. My results are getting more and more discussion (not the kind I like). The game is still going fed by the rec "lose $100 and leave"; but the bigger action and bankrolls are starting to dry up quickly.

Questions

1. In this game amongst friends, I never ever want to play and take somebody's 'pay the bills' money. I feel with a couple of guys they are close to this line, but obviously nobody talks about it so it is difficult to read? Is there a way to sense/prevent this? I know the default answer is it is their issue/responsibility; but I genuinely want no part of taking $500 bucks off somebody in a night if that $500 is going to cause life issues for them. Obviously this isn't how I approach poker in general at casinos, just this specific game.

2. How do I balance playing hard every week/every hand with not winning so much to bust bankrolls and therefore the game?


What I Do Currently


I do the following to try to help...

1. Always stay till the game busts when I am up (this actually makes the issue worse though as most of the players play really bad when stuck at end of night. I often go from even to +500-1k in the last 30 min of night)

2. Always play whatever games/stakes/mix of games that others want.

3. Always exaggerate my losses and underrep my wins (i.e. when people text/talk about it after). If somebody says "I heard you took all the money last week" I'll respond with something like "Well I got crushed early and was in for a bunch but came out ok"

4. Always emphasize when I played a spot bad, or someone made a great play on me to win a pot, or when I sucked out on a river and got lucky

5. Generally try to be humble and deflect talk to other players wins/successes

6. Giving lots of action in coinflip or gamble situations where in a casino I might wait for a better spot.




Again not trying to be braggy, the success is cool and I don't want to stop it, but it is also super important to me that I don't bust up a great game I have played in for 10 years or cause IRL money issues for guys I am truly friends with.

Advice or suggestions welcome!

I have a couple of questions:

Is Hero the host or a guest?

Is it more important to win or maintain the health of the game?

Has hero been accused of cheating?

Has Hero heard whispers about being uninvited? Or if Hero is the host, is the game bleeding players? ( for that matter, is the game bleeding players in general?)

Is this really a raked / for profit game or a no rake / fee home game?

DrStrange

I'm usualy always the host when we play in a game that usualy has between 5 to 7 players. Two other guys and myself are winning regs while the others usualy walk away with less than they started with.

Without the losing players there wouldn't be enough people to hold this game together. When hosting the next game after having a winning session I'll throw some of my previous winning to food and drink for all. I'm looking to have a good time and hang out with friends. I'm not looking to skin anyone. I want everyone to enjoy themselves and feel like any money lost was worth it for just the food, drink, and night out. (Conversely, some of the other players, win or lose, started to do the same after I started doing this, knowing that I do it to give back to the group,)

I know this isn't a direct answer to your question, but I figured it may give you another point of view into someone else's game where you're problem could easily cause the game to crumble.

I've been in this spot once or twice. I've had a couple games die because of it—though much smaller games than this, and much shorter-lived games, with people who were out of their comfort zone with even the low stakes we were playing.

It's not an easy thing to deal with because obviously you want to always play your best, and sometimes your best absolutely crushes your opponents. Combine it with the fact that your approach is a LAG/bully style, which can tend to rub people the wrong way, and it's easy to see how it can affect the game negatively.

Be specific. What kind of discussion? This can matter a lot.

This can happen, especially when you're playing against people who only have money to play as big as they play because they won it elsewhere (as opposed to having an income that supports this loss level on a regular basis).

The game may well thin out, and there's not a lot you can do about that, short of maybe not showing up for a while. Even that might not do it. Some poker games simply don't last forever. Unless you can somehow lower the stakes or something, you can't really stop people from going busto.

Unless this explicitly comes up, it's not something you can be too bothered about. You may not want to do it, but in any game, there can be players who are in over their heads or who have serious gambling problems, and if you're crushing the game, there's a chance you'll crush them, and they probably won't even tell you.

Your approach so far is good, though see my notes. Other than that, just be a gregarious player. Keep people having a good time as much as you can. Tell jokes. Bring snacks, drinks, etc.; generally show a little generosity with your winnings. People like that stuff. Make people like you enough that it's hard for them to be upset at you for winning.

This can be a double-edged sword, as you mention. Also be aware that it's super-memorable when you bust the game at the end of the night, which obviously can't happen if you take off early.

Again, a potentially double-edged sword. If you're dramatically better than the other players at the games they want to play, you're just going to beat them worse than at NLHE or whatever the go-to game is.

This is all pretty good, but try not to oversell it. People know you're winning because you're good. Most of them will see your downplaying for what it is, though since you're the big winner so often, some may appreciate your compliments of their play. Use your judgment, of course.

This is the closest thing you can really do to throwing the game on purpose, and there's nothing wrong with this. Also don't be afraid to take small gambles that are outside your comfort zone (e.g., sports bets, card games other than poker, whatever makes them happy) to give them a chance to beat you at something. People can quickly tire of playing with someone who only plays when he has the best of it.

Yeah, it's tough. From the sound of it, this game is a pretty nice source of side income for you, in addition to being a favored social activity.

The answer you probably don't want to hear is "Stop crushing their souls," but that may truly be the only thing you can do to stop from killing the game. Like I said, maybe take a break, give other players a chance to pass some money among themselves, give the game a chance to regenerate, and give other players a chance to be the big winner once in a while. That's what keeps people coming back. If they never (or almost never) get that, they'll start dropping off, like you've been seeing.

Either:

they're poker friends, not friend-friends, in which case, game on;

or their friend-friends but don't care about the money, in which case, game on;

or they're friend-friends and the money is starting to matter (either for them or the health of the game), in which case you have options. Amongst the options, one is to lower the stakes, another is to play a different style.

In my poker circle (as in yours no doubt), I am the one who is far and away the best/most studious. I am a reg live up to 2/5 and online up to NL100. They're mostly donks. For my home game I am the strongest advocate for lower stakes, not higher ones, and I play a pretty passive style vs them, when I could clearly beat on their ridiculous ranges relentlessly. I just want to have a few beers and lots of laughs, and the $ would only be a fraction of my annual poker income. Clearly your situation is different in this regard. I don't know how easily I could walk away from 20K.

I'm not saying you need to do those things I mentioned, and I'm sure more than one response wll be that I'm some level of wrong. But they are options. As with any aspect of poker, I think we benefit when we have a clear understanding of what we want to accomplish, and them do the things that will help us achieve it. There are always multiple goals that we need to balance; it will be up to you to decide what your honest goals in this situation are.

Sort of neither. The game has been going for 10-11 years now on 5th location. "The Game" owns 2 tables 2 sets of chips and cards. It is run sort of like a democracy by about 7-8 of us that have been going for 5+ years. We take a small amount out of each tourney buy-in for a year end freeroll to players who qualify (basically anybody who plays more than 1/3rd or year). Out of that fund we pay for any expenses (usually just replacement cards, and sometimes we will send flowers or something if somebody has a death in the family etc).


I don't want the game to die first and foremost. The tournament is at little risk of dying, it is a small rebuy tourney so nobody is too exposed. The issue is the leakage into the cash game that everybody also wants to do where people really get stung.

The other issue is we have a lot of side games on say weekends that can involve a lot of the other 'bigger' players. These are fun to go to and play in (and super +EV as it involves a lot of people I don't care about taking their money); but also has tended to produce a lot of wins at the expense of the same group of my buddies.


Not at all, in this game there is a very high degree of earned trust and we will even bend rules to do what is right, i.e. if somebody tosses in a chip to call the BB and didn't notice somebody went all-in they can take it back... Or if I action was on me and I was probably going to fold and a dealer accidentally puts out next card, even if the card made my hand, I'll just muck and not do a reshuffle to mess up the other players in the hand, etc.

Intentions are always clear and we have never had an issue.


I don't think I would get uninvited from the main game as I am one of the long standing and core members.

I do think I will and have started getting un-invited to other side games (i.e. core game player hosts a weekend game with a different group of rec players). That sucks but is understandable.

The game has bled a couple of players, nothing critical yet. But I am positive that if next year goes the way the last year did (which maybe part of it was a heater that will cool off) it will really negatively impact the player pool.

No rake home game... for the tourney we take a small amount from each buy-in to fund an end of year free roll for qualified players.

This is a good idea. Once last year after a huge win I went to the store the next week and brought $50 bucks worth of drinks, snacks, etc. I thought it would be patronizing but it went over really well.

Thanks for your whole reply Jimulacrum, quality from top to bottom...

That's interesting I have always thought the LAG/action style was better for this type of home game to spur gambling and action. The table and behind the scenes talk seem to dislike the super nits who buy in for a $100 and try to wait for AA/KK to double. But the LAG style with higher variance does exacerbate wins and losses, so rather than winning $200 bucks a week I'll have weeks where I lose $500 but win $1600 the next week etc... That gets noticed a lot more. I'll think on that one.



Meh it is hard to describe, I would describe it as friendly ribbing with a twinge of jealousy. A couple have gone on so far to make clear that our game is their favorite in terms of their style but they are tired of winning elsewhere and losing it all and more here. Sometimes my results get talked about in the tourney and it scares off some of the rec players from playing cash.

Sometimes if I say something like "Man you owned me in that pot last week, I thought I had a great bluff spot and you picked me off" they might chuckle and say "Yeah now you are only up 3k on me" or something like that.


This is the problem... all the players have good jobs and the tourney will stay healthy on that. The cash game though seemed to accelerate quickly with a bunch of players who had built up little bankrolls from other games/casinos, and I know that is what I am crushing at the moment.


Totally agree.... I always leave some winnings (as does generally the top 2 biggest winners each week) to cover stocking the fridge/snacks; which is just the right thing to do but doesn't get seen by the 90% that have left/busted by then. I should spend some cash to bring pizza/beer more often.


I have no idea how to handle leaving when up. I generally think it is really negatively perceived if I leave early with a big stack since the game doesn't have that many players (i.e. if there is 6 players and 2.5k in play and I cash out for $1,300). We always close the game down at a certain time, so I have made it a habit to stay till the end if up to try to keep the game alive, but often that leads to bigger wins.


Again huge problem... pushed strongly by other players and resisted strongly by me we have started to mix in a lot of Omaha Hi and Hi/Lo. While the variance masks results a bit and can result in the worse players having some good nights, overall the skill gap is even greater in these games. I have generally been staying out of what games get played and just trying to be congenial to play whatever the table wants, but not sure if that is the best approach.




Yes, I have consistently won small (2-4k a year) in this local game which is mostly just fun money, occasionally casino trips and bankroll for slowly moving up in stakes in outside games. The last year has been a material amount of money but I know it is an anomaly.


Unfortunately, this is probably the most accurate solution.

This was a standard problem in the old days before the boom when most home game people thought even considering odds made you a wizard. The answer is to play worse. No point in burning down the house just because you can. Game preservation is a skill like anything else, and sometimes that means playing sub-optimally so you don't kill the game or not be invited back.

Figuring out how to do this can be challenging, as you can go too far and lose money. Usually this is best done by working in more passivity into your play, as that has the added benefit of making the other players more comfortable.

I host a much smaller stakes cash game, and for very long time like yours! Sounds like your tournament is not a problem , but the cash games are your concern. I hate to be blunt, but I don't think there is much you can do about this except lower the stakes. I don't know if that would be appreciated by your crew or not. It would lessen the pain of the losers at least I think! IDK if you would be happy with that yourself. Personally I could not stomach intentionally playing softer or less than my best. I think your game will continue to thrive, or diminish, or die without you doing anything personally one way or the other. If you can deal with a much lower stakes game ( and the others too) that seems to be the best and easiest tonic for this situation you describe. Just one opinion.

It does create action, but it's also a brutally effective play style against certain fields. Your typical, predictable TAGs waiting for pairs and big aces and playing fit-or-fold on the flop will get destroyed by an effective LAG.

You'll be beating the hell out of them for small and medium pots, and they'll get no action but your opening raise when they finally catch a big pair and shove (or it'll be that one time you have a big hand too). Wash, rinse, and repeat until you whittle down all their chips or bust them when they shove into your big hand.

I'm sure you understand the dynamics of this well. Being on the other end of it kinda sucks. To make it worse, a lot of TAGs will convince themselves that if they just keep being patient and "get my money in good," they'll come out ahead of you in the end. But they don't, because the counter-strategy just isn't that simple, especially when you're playing shorthanded. (More on that below.)

And when you finally crush the life out of them, those players will be pretty disheartened. Some may even feel cheated (even if they never say so) because they win so consistently elsewhere but can't seem to catch a break in this game. The answer truly may be that you need to slow down on them and/or take a break.

Good. And yeah, don't be shy about reinvesting some of your winnings to keep people happy. Lots of folks play for entertainment, and food and drinks are part of that.

If I had to isolate the two biggest factors in why you're killing these players so badly, it would be these, with the first one being the bigger of the two.

Shorthanded play is a whole other animal compared to full-ring play, and in particular, TAGs tend not to adjust their hand ranges and aggression properly. Their play style is designed around the assumption of a 9- or 10-handed game, and it does tend to work there, but it falls off dramatically around 6- or 7-handed.

TAG is a simplified style that relies on teaching players to only play big hands that create simple decision-making points. It tries to strip a lot of the judgment out of playing by making it so that you usually have hands that are at the top of the rankings for a particular hand group.

At 5-handed or less, if they don't have a LAG game to fall back on, they just lose and lose and lose. In fact, most players get killed in games that short because the shorter you get, the more the play relies on the judgment that a TAG style strips out. The area where your average winning or break-even player shines is preflop hand selection (because it's so easy), and that matters less and less the fewer players there are. I'd bet that your hourly rate with this group when it's shorthanded is way higher than when it's full.

With the non-NLHE variants, it's a similar issue. Winning at unfamiliar poker variants requires judgment and adaptability. If you have it and they don't, guess what? Soul-crushing time. Combine that with a shorthanded game, and it can get ugly. These guys whose main repertoire consists of set-mining and waiting for aces in full-ring $1/$2 casino games won't stand a chance at 6-handed PLO.

You're skinning the sheep now. You've found their weakest spots and are exploiting the hell out of them. As someone who insists on always playing to win and playing as best I can, I can relate. You find that weakness and keep hitting it until the gold coins stop falling out. But it can only last for so long.

Like I said, taking a break may help, but what may help more for the longevity of the game is to restructure the game a little so you're not spending so much time in soul-crushing territory.

I'm not sure if your group would go for this, but you never know, especially if they're into non-NLHE variants. Maybe see if they're willing to try limit poker at comparable stakes to the NLHE/PLO games you're playing—so, say, $5/$10 limit or lower if you normally play $1/$2. Arrange it as a mixed-game night or something, and make sure you have vast numbers of your workhorse chip so people can have a blast stacking their chips sky-high. More importantly, limit poker will allow for more variance and send more people home winners (or at least with some money left), and it will keep the game from getting too serious.

Big-bet poker has a lot of pitfalls. It's the most popular game in town at the moment, but it can be a real problem sometimes, as you've seen. Sometimes a player can get "too good for the game," and it becomes unfair and not fun at all for his opponents. Even if you win consistently in a limit game, on the other hand, you won't be tearing everyone apart for all their money. And at $5/$10 limit, a good hourly rate will still provide a decent side income for you.

Here are several ideas that might "help". "Help" is hard to define since you are changing matters that will result in smaller wins. Thing is, the losers might end up getting mad because they aren't able to understand that they are getting helped out.

Go home earlier. Skilled LAGs slaughter short handed tables.

Change the conditions of the game. Shorting up the stacks by limiting the size of buy-ins will make a significant difference to the biggest losers. Even so, I anticipate the losers will howl at the moon if they can't buy-in huge and hope to catch up.

Mix in some sessions of new games and play limit / spread limit to let people learn the new games. Do not play new games for table stakes.

Soft play by adding in a big gulp of passive lines. Remember the goal is the health of the game rather than making the biggest wins.

Become the "sugar daddy" for the game. Be that guy who always has pizza ordered. Fill the cooler with drinks. Introduce the gang to a keg of local craft beer. Bring a pocket full of scratchers and lottery tickets to toss in the pot as sweeters.

Bottom line is your job is to make the game more fun than it costs to play. Add something to the game and / or cut your win rate. This is one of those meta-game things the big winners need to pay attention to. Good for you that you see the problem before the situation has gotten ugly.

Good luck. Oh, and it likely isn't a heater or at least not very much -=- DrStrange

Just dump some stacks, don't see how hard it can be to take a little less profit. Call a bunch with gutshots, make terrible and unbelievable bluffs and just donk around in general. Since you crush them that hard you basically control who wins money from you so you can keep the game healthy.

Thanks folks, a lot of great suggestions and advice in this thread I hadn't really thought of.

Appreciate everybody's time in responding. Hopefully I am able to do some of it before things bust up. I can't imagine purposefully losing pots or making wrong decisions but maybe that's what I need to do especially against some key players.

Had a buddy text me today after a nice winning 1/2 session at a casino (he's a winning 1/2 casino player but a pretty big loser in our game) only half jokingly that he is never playing against us again.

Need to find that balance of winning but not too much (and if I don't win how do I just stop it all from going to the 2 other decent players who are consistent winners but normally don't slaughter).

Great input thanks all!

I don't think it's a surprise that more than a few folks who read and participate here are doing well locally.

Lots of good replies. I'll add mine, just for a little confirmation and/or variation.

Agreed. But if someone is showing up with 'pay the bills' money (PTB$), then someone is going to take it. No reason to feel bad that it's you. To their credit, I think there are a few guys in my local game that have taken games off, instead of using PTB$.

Our game is spread limit. One big positive, is that it stops players from going broke the first half hour. The drawback, is it does seem to encourage others to chase almost non-stop. There are often spots where once you put your money in bad, you've got to keep putting money in and it's good. I suspect limit will work the same with your group.

If you want to win less, or at least win slower, you'll have to change style a little bit. There are some very good arguments against bringing less than your best game.

IF you want to bring less than your best, simply tone down the aggression. Bet 1/2 pot instead of more. Check the river, and give up that last street of value, or let the best hand win (instead of bluffing). Fold more, don't punish them with a marginal hand and position.

I'm not at the point of crushing to your amount, but I do well enough on a regular basis that I can let a few bets slide, or even a small pot when I'm up big already. I know the better players notice, but I don't notice them doing the same.

If there is a specific end time, Id say keep staying until then. In addition to not being accused of hitting and running, you'll also prevent a group discussion of what to do about you A friend plays occasionally in another local game. According to him, he wins a lot early, and leaves, so as not to bust the whole table. According to another guy at the table, the perception is that he hits and runs every time. Truth is somewhere in the middle I'm sure. But keep folks happy and stay until the end.

Sounds good in theory. I'm assuming you are simply agreeing to what the table wants. If you are steering towards new games/stakes, and then crushing, then you should probably stop for the health of the game.

I think you alluded to this earlier, but I don't think anyone paying attention buys the fibs. I'd continually acknowledge it humbly when brought up. I wouldn't ever talk numbers, or let them know you keep track.


I think the same as before. Be genuine and people will appreciate it. Unless you have egos that need stroking, I think it's best to not pretend things aren't what they are.

Humble is good.


Interesting spot. If you know when the opponent wants a call or fold, I'd oblige them, without actually asking. Keep them happy.

Our spread limit game doesn't offer many 50-50 spots. It's passive enough that even if we had 2 monster hands they wouldn't get more than 3 max bets in preflop.

If the tourney runs fine, and cash game is the issue, maybe you can play a 2nd tourney instead of cash (or just start cash later)?

If they are your friends maybe you can supply food and drinks with the money you take in for the next tourny/game? Unless super rich don't see how home games can be fun losing 100+ every week. Maybe invest those earnings from your friends/locals and get new tables and chairs? Bring in curved TVs. Enhance the area. I wouldn't tank playing wise to make people feel better. But I would instead do something with the money for my friends.

You really need to reduce the stakes for your regular game. Losing 50-100 per night is much more palatable than losing 300-500/night.

Our group has been playing for more than 15 years and I have only been in on it for 7 or 8 years. All these years the game has been 10 NL and only recently (past year or so) the game has been bumped to 20 NL in some cases. It makes it really fun that whether I win or lose 3 buy-ins I can wake up the next morning and not really think about it either way.

We all have jobs and could probably afford a 200 NL game but if one of our friends had a bad streak we could bust his spending money roll which just isn't cool for real friends. In our case an all in is only 20 bucks so even when you win you can be a giant dick and needle your friends.

Make sure the game is more about having fun, drinking beer, and joking around than it is about how much money people cash out for. It is a mistake to make it about the money.

Of course you can still have some bigger games run that have outside players but for your regular game keep it smaller so no one gets hurt.

PS. Being the sugar daddy of the game is also a great idea. People hate feeling like their friends are just taking from them...be it poker or whatever.

That doesn't make them lose less and it can also be perceived as patronizing. Actually suggesting to reduce the stakes can also be perceived as patronizing because when you're beating the game for that much, why would you want to win less money?

Just play bad against the people who are at risk of losing too much and play your absolute best against the steady winners. You're probably able to dump like 50% of your winnings back to strictly the biggest losers and nobody else. You still win some money and you can make it seem like a ****ty run of cards. I mean you could just muck winners at showdown against some people.

If I thought I had to soft play or play badly to keep a home game viable, I would find another game if I could. Maybe some folks could do this, but I could not keep that up for long. Just me.

I'm the same way. I won't even let a little kid win at Go Fish. If you beat me, it's because you beat me—through luck or skill or a little of both—but never because I threw the game. I'm competitive like that, and I also consider it a part of having respect for my opponent. By softplaying in any game, it's like fighting a guy with one hand tucked behind your back. It's almost an insult: you suck so badly that you're not even worth my best effort.

But I'll admit there's a certain logic to what Kelvis is saying. If you've really got such a sick line on this game that you're winning by a dramatic margin on a regular basis, you're exercising a level of control that's usually the territory of cheats.

Think about it: from a moneymaking and longevity perspective, it's almost like you're playing your opponents with their cards face-up in many situations. Is it in your best interests to crush them again and again until they're busto, or should you optimize your strategy to contain your short-term wins in service of the long term? Is it really so important to play your best all the time that it's worth killing off a long-standing game that has brought a lot of fun and camaraderie to this group and yourself?

I'm not fully on board with throwing the game, mind you, and it feels like heresy to even talk about the merits of it, but, well, it is a choice to beat the game this badly. You can also choose to scale it back a little.

I don't think Kelvis comment is wrong for everyone. I am sure it could be an answer for some players in the OPs situation. It just would not set well or for very long for me.

Actually I am not near as dominate in my home game as the OP claims , so I don't ever plan on having to try out that method. LOL

Well OP asked how he could combine playing hard with not winning so much. By any way you scale down your winnings on purpose you are not playing your best so whether you make a few calls that aren't as good or just muck winning hands isn't important. Fact is that you can't play your best and also cause people to lose less to you.

Personally I would just keep playing my best and if I felt bad about taking money from certain people I would not play that game. OP wants to somehow keep playing but also have certain people lose less, that's his choice.

So this is the definition of first world problems...

Is your group filled with drinkers? If you brought a nice bottle of scotch or something to a lot of the games, people will have a hard time disliking you no matter how much you win.

I think if you suggest to lower stakes just to make sure it is still fun for everyone and the group can all afford it - that isn't patronizing. Just make sure you communicate it clearly that you want to keep the group going and some people have voiced concerns about bankroll. You really like everyone in the group and you want to keep it fun and friendly - not about the money.

You are always going to get the guys that say "aww no lets keep it how it is or lets play higher (often the losers). But hey looking out for your friends is always cool.

Yeah that's why I was worried my OP come across dbaggy.

No one can't buy groceries or is missing rent.

Nice bottle of scotch is a great idea!