Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothcriminal99
The deepest pockets don’t just win in the long run just by buying in for more and gambling more if you honestly believe that you don’t understand variance. Like I said if the game turns it’s focus more on preflop instead of post flop
I do understand variance, which is why PLO becoming a preflop game instead of a post-flop one becomes a game that favors the deepest pockets. That's because equities run super close. Getting your stack in preflop in PLO headsup means usually at best you'll be 65/35, but more often closer to 55/45 matchups. Now toss in the FOMO people get when they see a big pot brewing and your now having to showdown against 4-5 other hands that stacked off pre and your equity shrinks up.
When you're bankrolled for 1/2/5 and the deep pockets or the maniacs are turning it into a shallow-stacked 80/160 game, well, you may win some battles, but the war will be won by the deepest pockets who can afford the massive jump in variance.
Another way to look at it is the rise in all these rebuy/re-entry tournaments with unlimited buyins for 9+ levels, allowing people to buyin to Day 2's, allowing multiple bags to carry forward in a multi-flight tourney, etc. The pros already have a skill edge over the recreational players. The introduction of all these other things further tips the scales in the favor of deep pocketed pros willing to gamble it up.
The player who enters the tournament with 1 bullet is at a massive disadvantage to the Dnegs who are willing to fire 57 bullets trying to win a bracelet. The guy firing a gazillion bullets can just take so many more spots to bluff or closer calls where in a freezeout they can't.
Likewise, multiple bags forward favors the grinders who don't have a 9-5 and can fire all the flights they want while Joe Average just doesn't have that flexibility available to them, once again, furthering the divide in favor of the professionals.
Quote:
Protecting players from themselves is never the place of an institution/other players
Again we disagree. It absolutely is on both accounts. A poker room has a duty to themselves to ensure that their games are sustainable and encourage growth. Players going broke and games dying off are terrible and favor short-term gains over long-term.
Likewise, professional players can be shortsighted as well. They are trying to scoop up as much money as quickly as possible that they're willing to slaughter the sheep and risk them leaving the poker economy that feeds those pros, rather than thinking long-term about the sustainability and profitability of their poker ecosystem.
Quote:
As for the comment that uncapped games create a situation where the sheep get slaughtered too quick that’s why I think uncapped is bad for the game. It’s not good to have a gambler run up a stack and a pro cover him and take his whole stack in one hand but that has nothing to do with bingo.
We can agree on this at least.