Quote:
Originally Posted by Mason Malmuth
They are needed to help start games and keep games going. If this group didn't exist, I doubt there would be many poker games.
I hear this often but have never seen any data to prove it true.
Intuitively I believe that its not necessarily true. Lets take vegas as an example. I'l guess there is a 80/20 ratio of recs/regs. Lets say there are 2000 poker players in vegas at any time. 400 regs and 1600 recs
If I understood the statement above correctly, and using an extreme example you are saying if all 400 regs stayed home for a day, then most of the 1600 recs would just sit around vegas, not play poker, wait for regs to come back and that there would not be many games ? Do you believe that is true?
In some markets or in some struggling rooms I can understand the importance of regs. But even in that case the house would be more profitable by just paying props to start games vs worrying about marketing to / attracting regs . Regs consume player buyins. Regs are in competition with the operator, not a requirement to operate.
p.s. this is all very similar to the endless argument after amaya killed the dream for online players. Online poker was supposed to die according to some regs. It didnt , that was the point of the link in prev post
EDIT
Quote:
For poker to be successful there needs to be a proper balance of luck and skill.
your quote above I totally agree with. But, regs are not needed for poker to have a balance of luck and skill.
Last edited by PTLou; 05-16-2021 at 08:10 PM.