poker

I wanted to know how a poker game is run. what i mean is lets say i wannted to start a poker game how does that work were does the money come from, how do i get money out of it and how do people win the money in the pot do i have to put lets say 200 bucks in a pot for the players and charge them 50 buks to play some one who knows what they are talking about please let me know.

In the casinos and poker clubs, in what is referred to as a "ring game" (don't ask me why) the players provide their own money. Depending on the game that's being played, they bet at various intervals and the winner gets the entire pot, minus the "rake" -- typically a 5-10% commission that the "house" takes from each pot, which covers refreshments, a dealer, and the house profit.

In a tournament like you see on TV, the players pay an entry fee, and are provided with tournament chips which have no value outside of the tournament.

The game proceeds as above, execpt for the 5-10% commission, and the winners divide the total amount paid in as entry fees, minus, again, a commission for the house, based on a pre-specified prize structure, i.e. so much to the winner, so much for second place, third place, etc. depending on the number of entrants.

Thanks but still a little confussed could you get in to more detail set an example for me.

What exactly are you confused about? What do you need an example of? If you understand how poker is played, you should understand what I wrote.

I'm happy to help you, since this is a subject about which I possess no small amount of knowledge, but I'm not sure what you want to know.

Maybe we should go down to Miami and "teach" him first hand, Plaw -- he could learn by example.

thanks guys i know what you mean now i did a little poker research and you guys are more then welcomed to come to miami any time

OK....but what are you thanking JG for?

Any more specific questions, feel free to ask.

Fine. I'll add my 2 cents... :rolleyes:

We used to have a friendly game almost every week or two, but alas it's been a while since some have moved/gotten married, etc. I miss it. But anyway, it was very small stakes -- nickel/dime/quarter with a $5 buy-in. Everyone would put in $5, and they'd get 5c/10c/25c chips. (If you ran out of chips, you could buy more - in fact, you were encouraged to! )

We didn't play Hold'em, though. It wasn't as popular back then as it is today. We played various 7-card games. The deal would rotate after each hand, and the dealer would pick the game. The dealer would also ante for everyone at the table to keep things easier.

Sometimes we'd play one of those games where the pot rides until there's a winner -- in those games one could easily double or triple -- or even more -- their initial investment. These weren't "poker" so much, tho - like "Acey-Deucey" where you bet whether your third card will come between your first two dealt cards. Everyone antes in this one. You win, you get the pot, you lose, you MATCH the pot! I've won big and lost big in this game, as the pot can get up there. It was up to $60 one time. One time I was dealt K-3 and lost bad cuz I got another King :rolleyes: The game continues until the deck runs out, or, there's no winner.

We rarely played 5-card draw games, but a dealer could call it. I prefer 7-card stud, or some wild-card variation of it. I REALLY want to play Hold'em though the next time we get a game together.

May i suggest that you play with free/play money at partypoker.com. You need to download the software. They have other games too.

Hey PLaw, I have a poker question for you. You'll probably think, "yea right", but this actually happened and I want to know if I was given the right answer. Probably the only sports-type question I'll ever ask.

Years ago, in my twenties, I had weekly poker games; penny ante stuff. If you won $25 that was a good night. :p

Anyway, we were playing 5 card draw poker. Myself and another person both got a Royal Flush believe it or not. We weren't sure who won so I called this guy that was into almost every sport and good at poker. He said that when that happens it goes by suit. If I remember correctly I had the RF in diamonds and the other person in spades, and he said spades got it. Also, does the same hold true to any flush or straight if the are exactly the same?

Geez, probably the only time in my life I'll have that problem to worry about.


TIS

To tell you the truth, in traditional poker, all suits are equal. If you and your friend both got a royal flush, technically you would both win (I guess you'd split the pot). In other games, like spades or hearts, suits matter in a hand. In poker, suits don't matter unless you have them for a flush.

Is that right? I could have sworn that suit did matter. So if in Vegas this happened in high stakes poker, they'd split the pot??? (granted this was far from a high stakes game though )


TIS

From what I've read, all suits are equal, and I believe that's correct. I merely made an assumption in saying the pot would be split. I imagine that's what would happen, but I'm not certain.

Listen to Tony Love - he's right. In POKER, suits don't make a difference -- you shoulda split the pot in a draw.

Even with flushes, it's a draw -- assuming that you have the same face cards...

(I'm going by Hoyles, btw - if AC or Vegas rules are different, I'd like to hear about it...)

Tony Love and JG are correct. All the poker clubs in California and casinos around the world that feature poker play by the same rules as far as I know, and the suits are equal for the purposes of deciding the winner of the hand.

The pot would be split if there are two hands of equal value.

Interestingly, though, in the game of seven card stud there is a case when the the suits do have value.

The game begins with everyone receiving two cards face down, and one face-up. Generally, in home games ("friendly" games in people's homes), the highest card of the face-up cards is usually the first to bet, or, if there is a tie, it's usually the "first" of the two, going from the left of the dealer.

But in casinos, the lowest card of the face-ups card is the first to bet, and it's a "forced" bet, called the "bring-in", and it's usually for a lower amount than the minimum bet in that particular game.

Anyway, in a case where there are, say, two deuces showing as the lowest face-up card, the forced bet is determined by alphabetical order of the suits: Clubs first, then Diamonds, Hearts, and Spades.

So in that particular case, Spades does have the highest value so to speak.

Thanks guys. I'll guess I'll have to sue to get my half.

We use to play so many different games, some seven card, but my favorite was progressive where the winner has to win twice to get the pot. It could get expensive of course, if you had a lot of people and everyone wins once. It's that last hand that is tense. It could be costly, but it was fun.


TIS

What a coincidence! I was just thinking of starting a poker thread in the sports forum when I return from the weekend and there is already one started here. I was going to ask those who play poker how much skill actually factors in over luck. I guess I should say I'm talking about texas hold'em, since that's the only game I ever play. I am sure it varies to degrees in other types of games. I still think that hold em is still a game of skill, but there are some people who think that luck is more important than skill. I don't play very often, except for cash games and tournaments with my friends probably once a week. My only experience with poker in Vegas would tend to favor those who believe it's all luck. I went all-in preflop on about the 5th hand of a tournament and my only caller was some European guy who had 7-2 offsuit! So guess what happened? He caught a duece on the river and I was out my $50 bucks for the buy-in. It was the first hand that either of us played. The only reason he had me covered was I had to fold to a re-raise when I was both big and small blind and he hadn't been either yet. So the guy put his tourney life on the line with the worst starting hand possible! (Not using mad face for fear of violating mysterious whine policy) That's what I hate about playing in casinos. $50 to some poor college kid like myself is a decent amount of money to be wagering, but it's equivalent to a tenth of a penny to some arms dealer from Switzerland like the one that busted me. So I guess I'll just stick to blackjack in Vegas. Despite my little re-enactment, I really do believe that there are people who are simply more talented at poker, just like there are better basketball or baseball players. I think that in one single tourney that skilled player still needs luck on his side in addition to his skill, but throughout the course of a year playing professionally, the skilled player will do a hell of a lot better than some random, lucky schmuck who plays the same tourney. Some of my friends still insist it is 99% luck though. Where do you stand?

Get the Rounders DVD -- not only is it a good movie, but the special features section has tips from poker champs. I believe one said the biggest skill necessary in Hold'em is reading the other players, and having balls. There are basic strategies to the game, but those are more easily mastered than the ability to prevent people from reading you, and, the ability to read others. And sure, there's a lot of luck involved in any game.

I've been playing poker for money for exactly 42 years, and fairly successfully, I might add. I'm not good enough to make a living at the game (more on that later), but I'm certain I've won more than I've lost over the years.

As far as the luck vs. skill factor goes, the old saying applies: "I'd rather be lucky than good".

In the long run, the more skillful player will come out ahead, but the "long run" can be loooooong. Sitting in a game in a casino for 4-5 hours, or even longer, may very well not be long enough to even out the luck factor.

Remember, for professionals -- the best players in the world (and I'm talking about the "grinders", guys who "grind it out" to make a living by playing $10-20, or $15-30, not the high-profile guys you see on TV) -- it's a job, and they may play 40, 50 or 60 hours a week, month after month, year after year, which is enough time for the breaks to even out.

But for the occasional visitor for a day at a casino, luck is far more important.

The above is proven by the rather unfortunate experience which you describe, JB. You don't say what you went all in with, but I assume both card were higher than the 2-7 your opponent held, which makes you the favorite what, 85% of the time?

Play the same hand 100 times, and you'd probably win 75% of the time. But obviously, one hand was not enough to overcome the luck factor. Your opponent may have been a 4-1 underdog, but 4-1 odds aren't really that long.

I would also mention that it's important to make sure that you are not in a game in which you are out of your class.

Poker players tend to move up to higher limit games progressively as they win in lower limit games.

A consistent winner in a $5 limit game is naturally gonna move up to a $10 limit if he consistently wins playing $5 limit. If he wins consistently play $10 limit, he's gonna move up to the next level.

But at some point he's going to reach a level where the other players are better than he is, and he'll start to lose and eventually drop back down to the lower level where he has proven to himself that he can win.

There will be exceptions, of course. Some players will always find themselves in higher limit games that they have no chance to win in (unless they are extremely lucky) simply because the stakes in the lower limit game are not high enough to hold their interest, but generally for the regular players that you find in most casinos, the above is true.

So start off in the lowest limit game that you possibly can, and prove to yourself that you can win consistently at that level. If you can, move up in class, and if you keep winning, keep moving up. But as soon as you find it to be a struggle, drop back down to the level at which you are a proven winner.

That's why, BTW, I'm not a professional poker player. I play seven card stud, and have found that I can win consistently playing $5-10. The trouble is, I can't win enough at that level to make a living, and as soon as I move up to $10-20, a level at which one can make a living if they're good enough, I run into a table full of professionals.

As far as Hold 'Em goes, I consider it a game in which luck is more of a factor than seven card stud.

In low limit games, players tend to be willing to stay for the flop when they can see three cards for the price of one so to speak if there is no raise, so if you have six or seven people hanging around and playing with nothing, anytime you see a pair on board after the flop chances are someone has trips.

It's also very hard to read a hand, since you have no idea what someone has in the hole, so, as JG correctly points out, it's more important to be able to read the player than the cards, which can be very hard to do if you don't know the players you are playing with.

That's why I prefer seven card stud. People tend to play with the same starting hands, and since everyone has different cards on board, it's much easier to read another player's hand.

--------------------
Listen, here's the thing: If you can't spot the sucker in the first half hour at the table, then you are the sucker. -- Mike McDermott, Rounders

Rounders is probably the all-time champion poker movie, although the field is rather limited to that and The Cincinnati Kid.

It's quite realistic, and Edward Norton gives a virtuoso performance.

But there is one glaring weakness which bears pointing out:

While underground poker clubs such as The Chesterfield or Teddy KGB's do exist, mostly run by the mob (somewhere in the "How I Got Interested in the Mafia" thread is my personal story about that), there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that the players would be allowed to act as their own dealer.

There would be a house dealer, just like in the casinos.

Worm's ability as a mechanic was integral to the plot of course, but it could never happen in real life that way for exactly that reason.

PL, Of course, I had to go back and read your post in the "How did you get interested?" thread. It was so fascinating. You obviously can tell a story well, so why aren't you writing anymore fiction? If you can remember these things from 40 years ago, and tell them in a way that keeps your reader's attention, then you should keep on writing!!

Verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry aggggggggreassive. It's just like the saying says, in the poker game of life, Plaw is the rake. The fuckin rake.

I haven't watched my Rounders DVD is a long time. It's probably collecting dust as we speak.

Thanks for the in-depth reply Plaw. I guess now that I go back and read my post you are correct, I didn't mention what hand I went all-in with. I had big slick, so I didn't have any pair either, it is just hard to conceive any thought process that would consider it good to call with a 7-2 off even if he thought I was bluffing.

I am familiar with other variations of poker such as seven card stud, chicago, and omaha. When we first started having our weekly games, they were very similiar to what JG described earlier. The deal rotated between players and the dealer got to pick the game. It has been a long time since we have played with that format though. Hold em has taken over the poker world, for better or worse. I enjoy playing different games as well, just for the fact it kind of mixes it up a little. I would never feel comfortable playing any game other than texas hold em in a cash game with players other than my friends, however. I really have no skill whatsoever in reading opponents. I just basically play my hand according to implied odds, pot odds, position, etc. Playing with the same people the majority of the time not only gives me a comfort level, it also gives me a pretty good read on how everyone plays. Stepping into a casino takes away any advantage I may have. For that reason, I wouldn't consider myself to be a good poker player. If someone asked me I'd probably tell them I'm about average. Then again, I would rather be underestimated than overrated. That's why I'm tanking in fantasy baseball. I'm just doing my best Woody Harrelson to set you up for football season while you keep grinding it out on your leather ass. :p

Like plaw I was "raised" on 7 card stud and it's still favourite version of poker. But like Jimmy I have noticed the popularity of Hold 'Em even on this side of the pond.

To go back to TIS' post about two Royal Flushes in the same hand, in all my years of playing, mostly house and "friendly" games, I only ever saw one Royal Flush.

The popularity of Hold 'Em can be attributed strictly to its popularity on TV.

When I'm in a casino, everyone playing Hold 'Em is relatively young, and all the stud players are old geezers like me.

As far as royal flushes go, I assume that TIS was playing one of those games witha a bunch of wild cards.

Absolutely Right.Hold'em is for the younger people like me.....sorry Plaw.... I'm playing it for over 2 years now and I really love it!

A few weeks ago I was invited to a weekly Hold'm Game that's run by a local pizzeria owner (not Vercetti :p )... They seem to know what they're doing, have decent stakes ($100+ buy-in), and have a dedicated dealer, etc. I'm just working up the balls to go since I never played it for real.

Playing for real is much more fun. But sometimes you must quit at the correct point. Dont think "I win back my money"...it just doesn't work.

Next week is a Tournament in Holland Casino..I'll join up. See were I can finish.

Probably not a good idea to win it all the first time you go anyway -- especially from Italians.

Maybe you could tell them you have a friend who'd like to play.

A trip down your way is about half the distance to AC.

Plaw - absolutely, but I wanna scope out the joint first. And I only know one or two of the guys who play, so, gotta see how it works...

Bring Don Santino Corleone Cardi with you incase things go bad :p

Plaw question for you:

What do you think about Poker Philosophy? For example: people pick up cards very slow, no high lifting..look quick...and don't make any facial impressions.

But why can't you pick up cards, give a big smile and put them down. I think it doesn't make any difference. It doesn't tell your opponent anything.

You're speaking now of "tells", I think, the unconscious mannerisms which players have of giving things away when they look at their cards.

My advice? Try to avoid them yourself. It doesn't matter how you do things, as long as you try to do them the same way all of the time.

One of my weaknesses, though, has been in picking them up in other players.

Okay, I learned a few things last night playing with Plaw online...

1 - Play conservatively
2 - So what if you have an Ace in the hole and nothing else
3 - If I have a pair of Queens, someone will have a pair of Kings

Aw shucks. It was my pleasure giving you the tips while we played.

We played in a few 10 man hold 'em tournaments first; entry fee of $660, winner gets $3000, 2nd place $1800, 3rd place $1200.

I finished second twice and third twice out of six tournaments, so I came out about $2000 ahead. JG took an o-fer.

Then we moved over to $20-40 seven card stud, where I won about $4000. JG lost about the same amount. :p

If the truth be told, however, JG was getting bad cards, in which case you're supposed to play tighter, not more loosely like he did. And he did suffer one or two really bad beats.

But I strongly suggested that he stay away from casinos for now.

Just to clarify for the others: we were betting with play money! (I least I hope so!! )

Yes, unfortunately it was only practice.

For anyone who has considered playing for real money on any of these on-line sites, I would advise quite strongly against it.

First of all, you don't know if you are playing against real people or a computer program designed for you to slowly but surely lose your money.

I have noticed, BTW, that the winning hands in these on-line games are generally a lot stronger proportionately than they are in real life, i.e. a lot more straights, flushes, full houses, etc. on a percentage basis than you would normally see in real life.

This makes it much harder to evaluate your hand.

For example, I've seen straights lose to flushes much more often on-line than I have in real life. In seven card stud, it seems that almost every time someone has three cards of the same suit showing, they have a flush.

You also seem to get a much higher percentage of "starting hands" than you normmally would (a pair, 3 card straight, 3 card flush, etc), which encourages more people to play each hand, so they lose their money faster.

Also, there is the danger of collusion.

While JG and I were playing last night, we were also communicating during the hand on Yahoo IM.

You can see the obvious danger in that in a real money game. Two or more people could be playing together and telling each other when to raise, when to fold, etc.

I've been on about 3 or 4 sites for poker and I've noticed as well that the hands are usually stronger. I would think that the computer program (whether the other players are computers or not) are designed to give decent/strong hands to almost everyone. If you can get 4 or 5 of the 8 people to have a "winnable hand" they are going to stay in longer (especially in regular poker) which means more money to the site.

I also think at least 1 person on those sites are a computer program, just to take money and make more than the 5% the house takes or however much that is.

edit: also when I was with plaw and jg that's now 3/8 of a table effectively playing as 1. Not only can you say when to raise etc.. you can also say I need a 2 of hearts for a straight flush and you have 2 other people who could have gotten it. So that wouldn't necessarily help you win but would definitly limit your losses.

Whether the conspiracy theories are correct, you also have to remember that you play a lot more hands online than you would during a live-table. Over a course of an hour, I don't know how many more hands you play - 50% more? 100% more? - but playing that many hands allows you to see that many more winning hands, really nice hands and passable hands alike.

At least twice as many hands per hour, probably more.

But that doesn't change the percentages.

I play a fairly conservative game, but I find that I consistently get a decent starting hand in 7 card stud a much, much higher percentage of the time than I do in real life.

I assume that everone else does, too, which leads to a much higher percentage of straights, flushes, etc. than you see in real life.

After 40+ years of poker playing, of this I am absolutely positive.

I've only played hold 'em with real money online. I rarely play since I can get my fix playing with my friends at least once a week. I play with very little money, so it's not like I'm winning big or losing big. I basically just keep playing with the same money I deposited. It goes up a little and down a little, but it is pretty constant over time. I just prefer to play with real money when I play online because playing with fake money is such bullshit. Chip stacks are so important in poker, and in practically every single fake money tourney I play online at PartyPoker, someone has 3-4 times the amount of chips as every other player at the table after the first hand because all the morons go all-in with absolutely nothing. Playing online with fake money is hardly even poker because you can't bluff people off hands. If a player put 15 chips in for the big blind, even if he has 3 high he's still going to call a 700 chip raise because he's not really losing anything. The only pure online game is Yahoo Pinochle. I prefer playing with friends or at a casino compared to online by leaps and bounds however. Even though I have no idea how to read other players, it is still more exciting when the person right next to you is putting you to the test compared to someone at another computer that is probably jerking off his dog at the same time he's playing.

What you say is true JB, but you just have to adapt your style to the game.

I find that after that first hand when the 3-4 idiots have gone all in with nothing, the remaining players usually play the game right, so to speak.

It depends....for example Everest Poker is a very good site and you don't play against machines. But when I'm entering a Casino I never play Video-poker games. I'm really careful with these things.

M.M. how do you know you aren't playing against machines?

This is for you Plawrence I am going a head and having a poker night at my house 6 guys are comming in which i will charge $40.00 buy in. which will give them $30.00 in chips and i will take $10.00 from each for setting it up and providing the drinks card ect. now there will also be rebuys at a mimnum of $20.00 my question is. how is the winner decided there is only going to be one and how should i end the game and also should i take a percent of the pot as well let me know thank you

Hey Plaw, what are you doing this weekend? Wanna hold up a poker game that I heard about?

j/k Intenzo.

Don Cardi

It depends....for example Everest Poker is a very good site and you don't play against machines. But when I'm entering a Casino I never play Video-poker games. I'm really careful with these things. [/b][/quote]You must be VERY careful playing poker for real money on-line. There are programs that many players use that reveal the other players cards to the program user.

Personally I would never gamble on line.


Don Cardi

Very funny if you are ever in Miami you have to look me up and we can get together and play

Ok Mang, chu ga a deal! If I eva near freedom town agan, I look chu up mang and we ge a gane going!


Don Cardi

First you have to tell me if this is going to be a tournament style game like you see on TV, or a "ring game" like I described in my first post.

As far as the "rake " goes, do you want to just cover your expenses (and how much do you expect your expenses to be?), or is this intended to be a money making enterprise for you?

I heard that video poker gave the best returns of all other casino games. And the video poker / slots by entrances and cashiers win a bit more often so people see/hear all the "winners".

well i want to make back what i spend on expenses witch is no more then 60.00 bucks the table and chips and playing cards i got for free. but its not a tournemnt. the players can rebuy chips if they want to. plus i want to get a feel for it also the guys i am hosting this for are really intrested and if all goes well it will become a weekly thing but yes i want to make some money out of it at least put 60.00 in get it back and make 60.00 as well something to that extent.

OK......

You're gonna play Hold 'Em right? Will it be No Limit, like on TV, or what is called a "structured" game, i.e. limits on the betting?

You're much better off with a structured game, since the players money will last longer.

If you play no limit, the whole evening could theoretically last only one hand.

Also, if six people are gonna bring $40 each ($240), and you want to take $60 for expenses and make a $60 profit, you'll be taking half the money at the table. Conceivably, at the end of the night, there will be no winners - everyone will have lost something. In fact, taking 50% of the money makes that almost a certainty, even if some of the players buy more chips.

Even if you were just taking out enough to cover your $60 in expenses, that's still a rather a high percentage of the total amount at the table to be removing from the game.

If you want this to become a regular game in which the players have fun and you make a profit, there have to be winners as well as losers.

Also, I'm not comfortable with your idea of having everyone buy-in for $40 and only giving them $30 in chips.

A steady rake of 10% of each pot like they do in the casinos. is a much better way to do it, because psychologically the players don't feel it (after all, after you've just won a pot you don't really care that 10% of it is missing) and also, the winners wind up paying more than the losers.

The danger, though, is that one pleyer goes on a hot streak early and cleans out everyone else long before you have the chance to get back your $60 in expenses, so you have to make sure that the stakes are low enough to ensure that the game lasts long enough.

With a $40 buy-in, you're gonna need to keep the betting levels at about 25 & 50 cents, believe it or not. Those stakes may be too low to keep everyone interested.

To reach your goals here, you need everyone to buy in for at least $80-100 or so, and then maybe have betting levels of $1-2.

To answer one of your earlier questions, BTW, the game ends when either everyone runs out of money except for one person, or at a certain time which you would pre-determine.

Then you cash in everyone's chips and they go home.

True and true.

The reason that video poker pays out a higher percentage than regular slot machines is because there is a strategy involved and decision making comes into play.

I don't, of course, play video poker myself, but I've glanced through a few books which outline strategy and claim that by playing "correctly" you can actually shift the odd to your favor.

ok i like your idea of 10% of each pot. and what do you think i should charge as the buy in and how manny chips should they get

If you're gonna have a rake of 10% of each pot then, as I said earlier, you give the players an amount in chips equal to the buy-in.

If you intend to cut $120 out of the game, then everyone is going to have to buy in for about $125, and I'd run a structured game with stakes of $1 and $2.

The only danger is that one or two players have big hot streaks at the beginning, clean everyone else out, and break up the game before you have a chance to get your $120.

That's why I suggest stakes of $1-2. Any higher, and people could get cleaned out too fast before you get your $120. Any lower, and it could take you forever to get your $120.

Casinos don't have that problem because they have people coming in and out of the game all the time. I've played in a casino for ten hours, and during the course of the time I was playing, I played with maybe 20 different people.

Your problem here is that you're trying to run a casino game without that advantage. For you to get your $120, you are going to need a very even distribution of players and winning hands.

If there is $750 in chips at the table, what you want at the end of the night is something like this, with players having approximately these amounts of chips at the end of the game:

Big Winner: $250
Second Winner: $200
1 break-even: $100
1 Big Loser: $0
1 Medium Loser: $55
1 Small Loser: $25

Your share from the rake: $120

Total: $750

Of course, if you keep taking 10% of each pot, and you get good distribution of winning hands among the players and the game lasts a long time, you have a chance to take out more than $120.

If a game like what I've described above lasts 10-12 hours and you get good distribution, at the end of the game the only winner will be the house (you).

Well let me say thank you for all the info you have given me you have been agreat help on monday i will let you know how it went i only have a pc at work but thank you agian.

wish me luck

Most of the time I play with people I know....but you are right when you say you play against unknown people. They can always run a program on the background which I don't see...

My pleasure.

Please let me know how it goes.

And good luck. I have a feeling you're gonna need it. :p

Most of the time I play with people I know....but you are right when you say you play against unknown people. They can always run a program on the background which I don't see... [/b][/quote]I see what you are saying, that's probably the only way to know for sure. Bots (programmed players that respond and act like a real person) have grown so much over the years that you could probably be in a room with 7 of them and not know fora while.

Absolutely right. But even when it's 100% sure you play against real people...I still like playing in real life more....then there is a lot more suspense.

Well the game went well every one had a good time and i made back what i spent and a little more the guys are all ready asking me when is the next one thanks agian Plawrance for all your help

Plaw - I scoped out that game tonight...

Okay, these guys are serious. I walk into the basement, and there are 5 large poker tables set up. There are 14 of us, so we have 2 tables of 7. $100 buy-in gives you "$2000" in chips -- worth $500/100/25.

Talking to some of them, they seem to practically live in AC, and some go to Vegas for $1000 buy-in tourneys. I think a couple even went to the WSOP.

I went to simply practice, and to take in the experience. I was kinda proud of myself for lasting a whole hour with the $100. This one kid at my table re-bought another $100 like six or seven times in that hour! (The same kid who told me he won 4 of 6 tourneys in AC recently - hmmm....)

Trying to think of all the details. There was a timer; apparently every 30 mins the ante (blind) went up. For most of the night there was no dealer, so I had to learn pretty damn quick -- and I did, since I was like 5th in line to deal. I didn't even know how the blinds worked, but figured it out fast enough to not make a fool of myself - lol.

Typical of me, I got shit cards ALL night. And remembering your advice, I played tight/conservatively for a long time since I had nothing. I was hoping that once I did start actually betting, that they'd get scared. But nah, nothing scares these guys. lol But with the blinds going up on a schedule, even not betting you're gonna lose.

It was a tremendous learning experience, though! Well worth the $100 for that. There was $1000s of dollars in that room...unbelievable. Right now, while I'm home, they're probably just consolidating to one table. Awesome!

Sounds like there are a few fish there. Usually there are in a group of 14.

You gonna bring me along next time?

I'm not playing w/ them anytime soon, that's for sure. I need more practice -- or a change in luck! My buddy bought in for another $100 and lost that quick, but at least he lasted almost 2 hours. When we get to know these guys better, I'll be in more of a position to vouch for others, y'know? But surely this is the place for someone at your level, so I'll work on that...

What do you mean by "fish"?

Fish.....suckers, weak players....

In any group of 14, there are bound to be a few. Like almost everything else in life, it's a bell curve. There will be 3 or 4 really good players of varying ability, 3 or 4 really weak players, and 7 or 8 who are average. That's why they invited you. The suckers eventually get cleaned out and stop playing, so the game always needs new blood.

Not to imply that you're one of the fish, of course..... :p

Something I noticed when I spoke about Poker with Americans. Why do they always talk about that lot of money!? Playing one evening for $100....$10-$20/$15-$30 games...damn...that's a lot of money....are all Americans that rich that they can afford that?

Just a question, not an insult to anybody!

I would say no.
You see tons of people in the U.S. (and probably all over) with high gambling debts or maxed out cash advances on their credit cards.

I think people see the life some of the poker players on tv are living and then spend whatever they have to try and get that break.

I know people who play cards with friends and never lose more than $15 for a night.

Poker is gambling, MM.

I could play for a whole night in a game in which I was risking no more than $20 or so, but that wouldn't hold my interest.

What makes it "fun", if you will, is the thrill of the possibility of losing more than you'd care to.

By no means am I rich, but at the level I play (usually $5-10, sometimes $10-20) I can afford to sustain a loss of a few hundred dollars when I visit a casino poker room, although I don't like to. When I win or lose only $20, I simply don't care.

However, as I explained in an earlier post, the level of competition generally improves as you play for larger stakes.

I have found that the line for me and my ability is the difference between $5-10 and $10-20. When I stick to the lower limit, I usually win. When I move to the higher limit I have a much tougher time.

I was a fish in this game, believe me. My buddy asked me later why I didn't buy in for more, and I said, "what's the point?" I may have an addictive personality (okay, I DO), but I'm also not stupid.

I assume, too, that the regulars there had an advantage since they know how the others typically bet. You would think that I'd've gotten some pots, though, by not betting in for a while and then all of a sudden betting/raising. But these guys didn't sweat at all.

That's what I mean...I play with friends...one whole evening (around 4-5 hours)but there's nobody who lost more then 30 Euro in that evening.

How much did the 30 Euros mean to the loser, MM?

Was it alot to him, or an insignificant amount. Everything must be considered in relation to the person's income and financial standing.

30 Euros to you may mean as much as $300 does to me.

I wish I could remember how many chips I got -- it wasn't a very big stack. As I said, the $100 buy-in gives you "$2000" in chips -- chips "worth" $500/100/25. That was a bit confusing, as I'm not used to that (I'm used to 25c/10c/5c ).

I'm trying to think what the chip values really were....

Later in the game, I just remembered, they got rid of the lowest chips and introduced $1000 chips.

Ok, you are rich . 30 Euro for a student of our kind is damn much money. You could go out for that 2 nights!!! In relation to the person 30 is indeed much.

Just for reference, 30 euro = $US 36.80

I can't track this one...is this meant as an insult that 30 Euro doesn't count because it's only $36.80??? It sounds a little bit sarcastic....

But, I can't imagine that JGeoff would insult anybody, so this probably doesn't mean anything.

I'm sure it was just for reference, MM.

I was just giving the current exchange rate, MM.

I used to consider poker a small passion of mine. Now I consider it a huge passion. I'am pretty much addicted, and my dream is to one day be a professional.

Me and my friends are always out to find games around town. Usually we play cash games but we'll play in tournaments every once in a while. The most I have ever won in one night was like 500 dollars and that wasnt even a tournament. Its peanuts compared to what I want to hopefully get to, but when your 18 it might as well be 500,000. Last night I won 100 at the casino. A good friend of mine lost 1,200

As I said before, the last game I went to, the $100 buy-in gave you chips worth "$2000". I couldn't remember how many of each chip we got, so I asked my buddy, and he thinks it went something like this:

2 Green $500 chips = $1000
6 Red $100 chips = $ 600
16 White $25 chips = $ 400

So I suppose the chip values were actually:

2 x $25.00 = $50 greens
6 x $ 5.00 = $30 reds
16 x $ 1.25 = $20 blues

A more than they nickel/dime/quarter games I'm used to!

I was searching some old topics about gambling. Plaw explained a lot there about odd's and a lot more. But where the heck are those topics? I know I have not been here for a long time, but I still know how the search button works...so...where are those topics?

Plaw? Do you know?

Uhm, read the first post of this thread:
http://www.gangsterbb.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=010623

Sorry I didn't read this...