Maybe just compromise. Add the 2500-5000 level so it doesn't go from 2000-4000 to 3000-6000. And the Venetian Deepstacks tournaments all have the 2500-5000 level, even the smaller ones.

Doug, ECB complains about anything and everything on 2+2. You are friends with J. McKeehan, just ask him.

You are definitely moving the goalposts to say that a monthly local tourney should have a slower/deeper structure than a bracelet event at the same price point.

Those levels would be 5.5 and 7 hours into a $600 tourney, so it's hard to see how they make it degenerate into a shove fest too soon. How long should a local monthly $600 tourney run?

Correct, my mistake, but the overall point still stands, it's much deeper/slower than a WSOP $1k.

Chainsaw isn't on the payroll.

Huge lol at the "my friend played the tournament and everyone on his table agreed" argument. Man stfu and get a life.

Great job Doug. Thanks for responding to these cry babies and bringing all this attention to poker. It wouldn't be the same without you.

Vlodge#3 was so good. I’ve changed my mind. Doug can charge whatever he wants.

Not like I’m going to be able to go to Texas anytime soon.

Charge those fish. That 99 call against you is so brutal.

Hi Doug:

I wish things were simple, then it would be much easier to figure out what the optimal rake would be. But one thing to always consider, and this is my opinion, there should be a specific rake that is both good for the players and good for the poker room (in the long run), and this includes the juice on the tournaments.

Best wishes,
Mason

I don't doubt this or your interest/care for the poker world or that the decisions you've taken with the room have solid reasoning behind them and are probably necessary.

I just think it's important (inasmuch as what I think is important for you matters, which is not at all) for you to reflect back on some of your previous comments on people like Negreanu where you reacted to reasoned arguments and actions taken to help the entire poker ecosystem with "LOL HE SAID MORE RAKE IS BETTER!".

That response was unfair and it felt like you trumped it up for attention and clicks. You can't be that surprised when people come after you for doing what seems like exactly the same thing you previously condemned.

Can you slobber anymore on him dude? JFC. What's next for you, washing his drawers?

Fair, thanks. Despite my post, I'll still be there this weekend.

I play at the Lodge 1-2x a month, including on livestream, and I live in San Antonio. Doug would recognize me in person most likely. I had a large text group that brought this to my attention where people were complaining about it, based on a review that was left on The Lodge's PokerAtlas page. I'm very deeply integrated into the Texas poker scene and know lots of players there. This is definitely something that is being talked about beneath the surface if you will. Bottom line, even if Doug didn't change a thing I'd still go to the Lodge. It's a fantastic room and their cash games are extremely cheap, and I love what they've done so far. This is overall a small issue with the room contrasted to a long list of great things about it.

You just described ECB's whole 2+2 existence.


Rake as a % of the prize pool would have been much easier to solve if buy ins kept up with inflation. If WSOP keeps these absurd $400-500 events, in a few years they will have to rake 30% just to keep the lights on. Same applies to players - you need a 100% ROI in <$3k events just to break even on travel expenses and food, all of which doubled in just past few years while most buy ins stayed the same.

Rake in the tournament is in line with industry standard. Low stakes live tournaments are a cesspool, what do you expect? Lock the thread.

I feel like the people getting upset about the perceived hypocrisy don't even understand what Doug was criticizing when it came to "more rake is better." Daniel was acting like increasing rake is better because it mean that the good players won't want to play in high rake environments, thus making the games softer. He never said that casinos shouldn't charge rake, and anyone that knows about putting on a low-stakes tournament would understand why the casino has to charge what seems like a large amount. Whether it's a 3000 dollar buy-ing or a 150 dollar buy-in, the staff still needs to get paid and the lights still need to be on.

I agree, more rake is actually better

Ban all these structure nits. At least chainsaws funny to hear complain about this stuff. These people are insufferable

Good luck with that.

"[Your honor] I was not paying for sex, it was a membership fee, a bed fee, and an access fee, I know this seems like semantics but from the perspective of not soliciting prostitution its an important difference."

Hey, you never know. Supposedly, the whole game of 10-pin bowling came about because ninepin bowling became illegal. By adding the 10th pin, organizers could say, "Nope, we're not playing that illegal game with nine pins, this is clearly something different."

The jury is still out as to whether or not the bowling story is merely apocryphal, but if it's at all accurate, it just illustrates how little technicalities or semantics actually do play into the way laws apply.

There is also a hack in California in which an event organizer can hold an event at which alcohol is sold, even if they themselves are not licensed to sell. Instead of selling drinks, the organizer sells drink tickets or vouchers or whatever they want to call it. A caterer, who is licensed to distribute alcohol but not sell it directly the guests, instead exchanges drinks for these vouchers. At the end of the event, the organizer gives the money from the voucher sales to the caterer. Both parties can rightfully say they didn't exchange money for alcohol. Goofy, seems like you're cheating, but it's a pretty standard practice for things like reunions.

There are certainly other examples of ways in which a law can be circumvented to altering a detail to achieve the same outcome as something otherwise illegal (the bump stock comes to mind). Thus, charging a membership fee in lieu of rake at a poker room doesn't seem THAT far out of line.

Or the third-party corporations who bank table games in California casinos. Casinos aren’t technically allowed to serve as bank for blackjack. They just deal the game while a third-party private group takes the monetary risk as dealer. That’s a loophole exploit if I’ve ever heard of one.

More rake is better for the poker room, worse for the player.

Doug is on the other side of the table now, don't act surprised.

Please don't be ridiculous. Doug always does what's best for the game itself.

I appreciate the optimism that Doug and others in the Texas poker world have that their "its not a rake its a membership fee" explanation will work long term but I'm hugely skeptical.

Texas politics blows and there are too many possible negative externalities for long term success.

That being said, I hope I'm wrong.

Doug ignored this post but responded to everything else... hmmm

He’s not a sociopath, he’s setting market rate. His MTT rake is slightly high, yet they sell out the tournament. That’s how the market works. If it’s too expensive, eventually people won’t show up. There’s plenty of card rooms in Austin.

My guess is that you are taking the piss, but I'm not too sure. If you are not, then it's a pretty serious accusation.

Pretty serious allegation - Any proof to this?

And let's say that happened (It probably didn't)... It's Doug club, Doug's rules and if you don't like it, I suppose it's a civil matter in the state of texas or would that be a criminal matter? Such as "Theft by deception."

Do these Texas poker clubs have any sort of laws or government regulation in terms of how the game is played or would any legal matter be handled like I had just described?

I bring this up, in the context of the OP's original point regarding rake.

Many tribal and state regulated gaming operators must "Play by the rules" in terms of money coming in, money going out. For example, some poker rooms try to charge staff fees in addition to tourney fees where that may or may not be legal in all/some jurisdictions. So I suppose the texas poker rooms just go off of whatever rules are printed on the tourney sheet?

All of these laws and regulations I referenced above can easily be reviewed through Cornell Laws website. Just search through state regulations and you can see all of the bounds for any type of game, including poker.