Request Blackjack

Would you toke for a tiny pot? What do you consider too small for a toke?

Answer 1:

A book of matches.

Answer 2:

I toke once per dealer regardless of whether or not I have won a pot; I do not toke per pot won. The amount I toke depends upon the limit I am playing and upon the quality and courtesy of the dealer involved. IMO you should set your own standards and you should not be concerned about the size of the pot.

Answer 3:

I’m no Diamond Jim Brady but…. Big John gets a small no limit game going at Commerce on the occasional Friday night. The blinds ar $1 an $2 and the game can get off to a slow start. The dealer is getting a down in a nearly dead game during prime time, when in any 3-6 games it would be good for an average of at least a buck a pot. I will do my part to pay for the help and my table image at the same time. I’ll take a swing at the blinds with some piece of
cheese (32s a favorite) and if I win the blinds I’ll table the hand and toke a buck from my $3 profit. Somebody’s got to do it.

I’ve been playing low limit hold’em for some time now (regularly in casinos inColorado, with the occasional trip to Vegas and CA) with general success, but in low limit games it seems to me that my profits are too heavily taxed by the rake and tips.  In my experience the *average* 2-5 winning pot is only around $30 to $40. With the house taking 10% up to a limit of $3 to as much as $5, plus a dollar thrown to the dealer, I’m paying 12% to 15% out of each winning hand. If the “tax” dollar figure is the same on higher limit, then the percentage goes down. So, my questions: In higher limit games, what is customary regarding rakes and tips? Is the rake formula constant, or does it go up with higher limit?  What level of tipping is proper in higher limit games?

Answer 1:

As you move up to higher limits, the effect of the rake/button drop/time collection declines dramatically. And generally, players at the higher limits toke the same $1 per pot. As you have seen, overcoming the “pot tax” at lower limits can be brutally difficult, and, in the opinion of many of us, impossible over the long run.

Answer 2:

The cost of playing poker is usually close to the same in all games (after all, it costs the house the same amount to run $3-$6 as $300-$600). When a rake is used, it is often the same (or close to the same) in all games (although obviously bigger games will hit the cap more, so will be paying a little more absolute rake and a lot less rake as a percentage of action). Sometimes (inCali, for example) a button charge is used, which is the same (3$) in all games.  Another variant is to use a time charge, sometimes just for the bigger games. These charges usually work out to being a little bigger for bigger games, but not much ($12-$16/hr in the PL/NL games I play in). Toking, in my experience, often goes down as you go up in limit.  In 3-6 games everyone is a recreational player, willing to tip $1-$3 every pot (I’m talking aboutCalilow-limit).  When you go up to 15-30, there a lot more grinders who don’t tip for small pots and only tip 1$ for big ones. Offsetting this is the fact that in the bigger games, someone who is winning a lot of money (especially someone who is not a pro) is fairly likely to toss a larger chip ($5 or $10) after scooping a big or lucky pot. I am not sure how these factors balance. I was very surprised when I got into bigger limit games and saw what tight-fisted misers most of the pros were. To me, one of the great things about playing higher limits is that the rake and tokes are a much smaller fraction of the action, and so it’s a lot closer to “pure poker” without a drop.  So you can tip the dealers and the floor decently without it cutting into your profits too much. If you are playing 6-12 or smaller and trying to win, toking for small pots and toking more for bigger pots is going to seriously cut into your win rate, that’s just the sad truth. You are already fighting uphill to beat the rake. One of the interesting things I’ve realized in the gambling world is that the principle of “winners pay” is such a powerful one. Cocktail waitresses and pit dealers get tipped big by winners, but the losers don’t get to take money from them. So they profit on swings & on action, because with enough action there will always be some big winners, so there will always be people throwing money around. To those people, they have been hit by a bolt of lightning, and are delighted to give back a little (not everyone who wins, but a lot of people), but statistically, there is always going to be someone. And the people who win are much more likely to keep gambling, so the house is in the great position that when it loses, it often gets many more shots at the money. The same is true of poker games – when people win, the pros often get many more shots at that money.  This is why “hit & run” is looked down on – it is an attempted peer pressure technique of creating a cultural rule that helps the pro’s make more money. After a while you realize that a lot of poker traditions, behind their deceptive veneer, have that (like the game) as their purpose. In fact, poker players get a *double* advantage – when their opponents win, they often play again with the money, and when they lose, they often start playing worse so the pro’s edge goes up! As long as there is action and swings, the pro’s, like the cocktail waitresses, are benefiting. Only when action is low does that hole in the middle of the table become so important (I’m talking about NL/PL, obviously the stupid house-invented game of limit poker makes swings & action smaller).

Answer 3:

And there was the big game (15-30?) at the Desert Diamond inTucsonrecently where the double jackpot light went on at 2 am and three minutes later it was hit for $38,000. The dealer got $300.

In 7 card stud: There are a few casinos in my area that offer jackpots with qualifiers four fives beaten, ten dollars after 1$ rake & 1$ jackpot pool drop. What are the odds of this happening?

A. 7-handed game

B. 8-handed game

Answer 1:

Not really sure what you mean there by “ten dollars after 1$ rake & 1$ jackpot pool drop”…but in 10,000,000 computer simulated 7-handed ‘showdown’ deals (8-handed too complicated by not enough cards for 8 full hands), there were 648 ‘losing’ hands of four 5′s or higher (this counting anything like two straight flushes tying, and four 5′s losing in the same deal as TWO such ‘losers’)… Hope this helps…

Answer 2:

For showdown poker (no folding allowed) the numbers I published in my
Nov. 1, 1996 Card Player (V. 9, N. 22) article gives the odds as follows:

Bad Beat    7-handed  8-handed*
QQQQ       83,000-1  65,000-1
JJJJ       65,000-1  49,000-1
TTTT       48,000-1  36,000-1
9999       35,000-1  28,000-1
8888       29,000-1  22,000-1

The “*” for 8-handed is there because this column is extrapolated (my simulation was not designed for common cards). Since these numbers are for showdown, the real odds are higher. I put in some criteria for the players from Extremely Loose to Semi-Tight (see the article for definitions).  For a 7-handed game, here are my results (based on 100,000,000 hands for each figure):

Bad Beat    Ex-Loose  Semi-Tight
QQQQ       88,000-1  280,000-1
JJJJ       64,000-1  180,000-1
TTTT       49,000-1  120,000-1
9999       39,000-1  100,000-1
8888       32,000-1   87,000-1

I did not run the numbers for 5555 beaten, but Barbara Yoon’s value of 15,432-1 is in line with my showdown numbers above. My rough guess for 5555 beaten is an extremely loose game is 18,000-1. In a semi-tight game, about 50,000-1. If I have some spare time, perhaps I’ll dig up my old code and run the quad 5 case.

Answer 3:

‘Second opinions’ in these things are always helpful, either for confirmation, or unearthing bugs…  And I myself simulated another 10,000,000, getting 604 such ‘bad beats’ this time, compared with 648 the first time…

Anyone had a look at Stat King software poker results tracking tool?
Answer 1:

I have been beta testing the new stat king software for some time it is one of the best tools on the market at the present moment. It will give you the standard deviation. Whether you play to tight or to loose. It is simply the best tracker of your poker results. The version I have been testing has Mason Malmoth giving advice and keeps poker results where ever you play and can break down the results. It will predict your earnings out to the end of the year. I have been fortunate enough to have been offered a version as a beta tester. It is a new technology and only can increase your earning and is simply the best program written today to keep all your results.

Answer 2:

I am doing a review on it now, for Card Player.  I have used the old Poker Stats since 94. It was written for Windows 3.1, and not Y2K complaint.  That along with its unresolved bugs. I still found it useful—- UNITL I started testing StatKing. It will do everything you want or need in record keeping, plus track your performance, by hour, day, location, game etc.  It’s quite comprehensive, but easy to learn. Lots of bang for the buck.

Answer 3:

Wrong what my version may have more features. Since I am beta testing it my version may be different then the market version.