Libertarians get ~87.88 (repeating, of course) % of everything wrong. I'm all for personal freedoms (gol danged librul) but libertarians are just lolwrong.

Action.

-regulated online poker sites that advertise on USA TV

and/or

-unregulated online poker sites that advertise on USA TV

Step 1: steal underpants

LOL boom

Yeah PT was around i early 2000's and llts of us were playing 8+ tables using it and it was not as detailed as PT4 but still pretty effective. HUDs don't really matter.

More than anything it was just the US regulation making it difficult to deposit money.

Also much more limit vs NL back then gave weaker players a better chance to win more frequently and not lose so much so quickly when they didn't have a lucky day.

Casinos seem to do fine long term and it is no secret that odds are not with the players. They just have to be allowed to play.

#facepalm

At least it got a reply. Really, though, limit is much more forgiving. The bad players don't bust so easily, they often win huge, and they keep coming back. I've seen the same people for 10+ years. Arizona doesn't allow true NL but they have spread limit. At Casino Arizona the number of 3-5-500 has gone from appx 6-8 tables/day to 2-3. Limit provides an easier ladder to move up, all of the new, fun games (Badugi, Triple-Draw, Studdugi) are played limit. The vast majority of NL players are never going to play above 5-10 and anything higher is not spread all that much. The cap on BI amounts tells you all you need to know about how room manager view NL which also has the unfortunate feature of lowering their rake bec it's so slow. Readers ought to think a bit about what it means when somebody puts 'poker' into a thread title and then makes a post about NLHE, it happens all the time, and it's always a complaint that the game has dried up/become too tough.

Folks, there's a better game: Limit.

But... But... Doyle Brunson said, "No-Limit is the Cadillac of Poker."

For him it is, or was. He can have my share.

Is that even a compliment at this point?

Sure, one is, while being of decent quality, needlessly expensive and ecologically destructive and is advocated/sought out by people mostly based on reputation and ego.

And the other is... wait... I forgot whether I was thinking about NLHE or Cadillacs in that sentence. Nevermind.

So ill figure it u p again.


New Game
Fish Protection
New Faces
No Regulations.
Better marketing

Everything that has message "litlle efort big reward". Like Moneymaker story. Intodusing kinda very cheap mtts with huge fields and insane 1st place prize that produses "moneymaker" or "rags to riches stories" for example every moth.

Bigest problem People spreading an believing (!) that "poker isint that eazy" nowdays. So as player I can do olny thing is: stop complaining that poker isint that eazy ass it looks. For example if you want to be susefull in other areas you still need more time practice than in poker.

Other player tipes donk car ehow much they erned or lost they just want to play with some thrill (Zynga withou money still has alot off active users).If every pro would act like 1st poker ambasador poker popularyti would encrease enuormuos because alot recreational players comes to have fun and making money is second objective. They want to have fun no be berated by how bad they played.

Honestly its hard to believe tha will be another boom. Small recovery will be for shure for example after legalization in USA.

I believe that online poker is a scam because 90% of online poker players lose and most of the money lost is raked. Yet players are made believe that online poker is a skill game.

Poker overall is popular enough. If you look at the live scene it is clearly visible that poker is not really going down. The WSOP as well as poker rooms all over the world are not declining but staying flat. On the East Cost live poker has been growing with the addition of tons of poker rooms.

The problem is with online poker in particular. So all the poker industry has to do is make online poker a poker game again. I.e. change the game from being a slot machine to becoming a skill game. Online poker sites have distorted the game to make it like a slot machine.

Currently all the legalization effort are designed in protecting monopolies that then get exploit the game. This is particularly true in the US.

The problem is not with the players or people being interested in the game its that the game is scam and people realize they can't win and then quit. They tend to think the players a scamming them which is wrong but in the end they are still being scammed, just legally and not in a way they understand. So they play live or quit.

Hence we have a thriving live poker scene and online not so much.

At some point poker will be disrupted by either some company coming up with a business model that works or by decentralized poker.

My guess is that effective rake (= the difference between wins and losses) today is around 80% for cash games. I think a healthy effective rake would be somewhere around 20%.
Until then, I play poker live (because the effective rake there is roughly 30% ). I am also pretty sure that as soon as we have a poker site thats run well and comes up with a model that creates a healthy effective rake we will have a boom automatically.

THIS IS IT, we are in the boom, BOOOOOOOMMMMM

the government/black friday killed poker in the US, plain and much more simpler than this. nothing remotely close to lack of game activity or lack of fish existed.

stars and ftp were still significantly growing in 2011, dunno wtf ur rambling about. the gov't killed US poker.

Forbid any hooded autistic online pokernerd from playing infront of a tv camera.

#lolnolimits

The only way for there to be another poker boom in the US is for there to be a total ban on online poker and all the shady sites get closed down too.
Then, 10 years or so later, it gets legalised in all states.

Most players lose money precisely because it's a skill game. If you lack skill, you lose. QED.

One of the reasons for the introduction of low-edge games like SpinGos is so that 'fun players' don't go broke so quickly, because the luck factor is so big. The biggest fish in the world can win a 3-max game if everyone starts with 20bb or whatever. Regs would rather play 250bb deep HU cash against fish, because the skill edge is so much larger.

It wouldn't be very popular on 2+2, but the way to keep fish in the games is to do things that reduce the earning potential of regs. Reducing multi-tabling, shortening timebanks, adding antes in SnGs (to shorten the effective starting stack), the promotion of higher variance games (e.g. PLO), banning HUDs and table/seat-selection tools etc.
In short, to make poker more attractive to recreational players, sites need to reduce the ability of pro players to maximise their skill edges. Online poker is struggling because it's a predatory game by nature. Unfortunately, sites have allowed (or even encouraged) too much predation, so the predators are running out of prey.

pokerstars.us is the only chance.

As for live grinders, especially tournament players... if you sit at a poker table and talk about poker and only poker with the 4 people you know at the table, you should maybe stop?

Rec players don't want to play with you. Then you yell at them for playing bad? So, you don't want people to play bad against you?

I was at a live 1k event in Iowa this past weekend. My first table was full of pros and a few locals. All the pros talked about was poker! Their next stop, their last stop, their awesome scores, how many spots were at their last table, etc.

Order a ****** beer and talk about the bball game or something? The bad players, which are usually locals, who play at the casino you are visiting everyday, now feel uncomfortable when an event comes to town. This is the exact opposite of what we want.

Be nice, don't be a d bag that only talks about poker. Watch the news, read a non poker book, have something interesting to talk about. Know a little about alot. Cars, sports, current events, history, politics, scandalous jokes, etc. Stop acting entitled because you are good at poker. Give a reason for bad players to want to play with you otherwise they will continue to find a different hobby to spend their money on.

If you can't tap the table and say "nice hand" after losing to some awful beat, than you honestly should not play live poker or you are playing too high.

And in general, being a good, sociable person, that can get along with random people, is much healthier than being a d bag.

Cliffs: really long way of saying "lol live tunamelt grinders"

The most amazing this about this post was that you edited it, and it still looks this way.

Some fun live tournaments.

Imagine a tournament where players can smoke cigars and have to take a shot everytime they win a hand. A final table full of drunk players, even nerds would loose up, maybe there would be some banter. I know it's never going to happen, but that would be fun to watch, and make poker look fun for the casual viewer.

Well said.

Never going to be popular around here but anti-reg measures and making it harder to play this game professionally is pokers only chance from not cannibalizing itself

Absolutely. The whole joke used to be that the money trickled down to Ivey.
With multiple excellent players on multiple tables, it gushes.