I dont know that higher RB for higher VPIP will or will not incentivizes better games.
Recreational players are not trying to maximize EV, so they will play whatever they want to play.
So this only really affects pros. And from what I can see, even at highstakes with low rake environment, the VPIP that change all that much. My guess would be at 2kPLO your VPIP at most is at the low 30%+(maybe 30-35). How much are you going to decrease the rake at 200PLO that I would want to change my VPIP from high 25%+ to low 30%+?
I do think this is implementable in normal games, but not in RIO Poker given how splash pot works. So unfortunate even if this is true, they cant implement this. Unless they change the nature of splash pot all together. lol
March 18, 2019 | 9:28 a.m.
Run It Once Poker Hand #32495973: Omaha Pot Limit (€0.25/€0.50) - 2019/03/17 20:59 UTC [2019/03/17 21:59 CET]
Table ID '32482719' 6-Max Seat #6 is the button
Seat 1: Alton A (€70.57 in chips)
Seat 2: Ryder Q (€51.28 in chips)
Seat 3: Oscar X (€255.61 in chips)
Seat 4: Wesley O (€50 in chips)
Seat 5: Dylan A (€63.48 in chips)
Seat 6: Kitsune (€60.40 in chips)
Alton A: posts small blind €0.25
Ryder Q: posts big blind €0.50
* HOLE CARDS
Dealt to Kitsune [Jh Jc 7d Td]
Oscar X: folds
Wesley O: folds
Dylan A: raises €1.25 to €1.75
Kitsune: calls €1.75
Alton A: raises €5.50 to €7.25
Ryder Q: folds
Dylan A: calls €5.75
Kitsune: calls €5.75
FLOP [3d Jd 2s]
Alton A: checks
Dylan A: bets €10.93
Kitsune: raises €41.97 to €52.90
Alton A: folds
Dylan A: calls €41.97
TURN [3d Jd 2s] [5s]
Dylan A: checks
RIVER [3d Jd 2s 5s] [4s]
Dylan A: checks
Dylan A shows [Js 2d 6s 8d] for Flush [Js 6s 5s 4s 2s]
Dylan A collected €126.30 from pot
Total pot €128.80 | Rake €2.50
Board [3d Jd 2s 5s 4s]
Seat 3: Oscar X folded before Flop
Seat 4: Wesley O folded before Flop
Seat 2: Ryder Q (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 1: Alton A (small blind) folded before Turn
Seat 5: Dylan A showed [Js 2d 6s 8d] and won €126.30 with Flush high Js
Seat 6: Kitsune (button) mucked [Jh Jc 7d Td] and lost
sry guys, was running so fcking bad I had to "rage" quit. I dont rage much, but I was so tilted that all my focus had to go into my breathing. If I dont talk is it still consider streaming?
March 17, 2019 | 10 p.m.
What is Fair Rake?
This two days players have been going off on the RIO Poker Discord about fair rake. Is the rake high or is the rake low or is the rake fair etc. To even begin talking about this I think we need some basic premises that we can agree on, if not there is no point talking about fairness.
- Entrepreneurs or corporations must stand to make enough money to incentivize them to invest into the industry.
- We want professional poker players, therefore games must be beatable across the board.
I am not here to argue whether number 2 should or shouldnt be true, but that is the premise we are talking about when we talk about RIO Poker. (i think?)
I dont have any data on premise 1, so I wouldnt know how much the cost of running a site will be once initial investment is recover and wont be talking about this too much. But I do want to say the problem with big corporations and public companies is that it must grow. Like it or not, you cant always grow in profits. So they cut rakeback which basically increases rake. For all we know they were already making a "FAIR" amount before the rakeback cut.
I do have a lot of opinions about premise 2. I cant remember who was it, but I remember reading it. During the whole PS cutting SNE debacle, I remember reading someone saying somewhere along the lines that there is something wrong with online poker if 200NL is full of professionals. While I do agree with the overall statement I dont know if I agree with the limit he set. I do think he was more familiar with live poker and 200NL live is a more casual stake. With multi tabling online, i think we might want to drop that stake to 100NL. But I digress.
This did weighted heavily on me, a "casual" stake shouldnt be fill with professionals. Now I do want to make a distinction between regular and professional, a regular might be a casual poker fan that will come play 1-2 hours every day but a professional is actually trying to make money from poker, if he or she fails, they will starve (aka me).
There is two things that RIOP needs to think about, first is winrate. How much should a professional win? how hard or easy should it be to breakeven? I see players defending RIOP saying micros are very beatable. Sure, but by how much? and how good do you need to be? If you need to be Phil Galfond to beat it at 4bb/100 at micros then clearly its a failure to me. So fair rake is not only about beating the game but the skill needed to beat it at different stakes.
And when we talk about winning players, what are the different level of winning players. I like to compare this to basketball. (assuming "pro" level starts at 200NL)
First of we have the d-league players, players that are good enough to be professional but are not quite there yet in skill to make it to the NBA. Maybe winrate around 0-2bb/100. Then there are your role players, probably coming off the bench, they are either vets or talented. Maybe winrate around 3-5bb/100. And off cause you have your starters, maybe 6-8bb/100. Then you have your all stars 8bb/100+, these guys should move up stakes. I dont know whether these winrate makes any sense or not, feel free to adjust it as you like. But do remember these are after RB, so I dont think its that crazy at all.
This are the pros, so what kind of winrate should we be seeing when we drop down stakes? This might be surprising, but I believe it shouldnt be that different, maybe just alittle bit more and as you drop stakes the differences becomes zero. So d-league player might make 2-4bb/100 at 100NL/50NL and 5-6bb/100 25NL below. I think we all know, that lower stakes will be rake more percentage wise due to max rake.
But if you think about it because the stake is twice the amount, making 4bb/100 at 200NL is twice as much as 4bb/100 at 100NL. If I can make 8bb/100 at 100NL and 4bb/100 at 200NL, I will never move up, why risk more when you can get the same hourly risking less?
I play pick up basketball a few times every week, these serious pick up players (regulars) should be able to win 100NL and lower for 0-2bb/100 or more (these guys might have aspire to be pro at one point or maybe pros that have retire). While the less serious pick up players or total beginners that just want to shoot some hoops and sweet a little will all be losing players.
Of cause this is totally over simplifying everything, at every stakes there is a player pool and when a winning player joins, everyones EV will drop. Which brings me to the second thing, player composition or ecosystem. The winrates I describe is assuming a perfect ecosystem.
Problem arises when there is not enough pickup players at professional stakes, causing winrate to drop across the board. The effect is d-league and bench players moving down. The extra winrate of d-league and bench professionals at casual stakes come from the fact that there arent many professionals and there isnt any starters or allstars. But when professionals and even starters start to drop down the casual stakes suddenly becomes the professional stake, this is really bad for everyone. Now the serious pick up players cant even win anymore.
This means the idea of fair rake is really complicated, because you cant look at any stake in a vacuum. You have to look at the whole poker ecosystem as a hold. And this also means fair rake is something that fluctuates. As winrate drops across the board and professional drop down in stakes, the rake should be lessen so professionals can make a decent hourly.
But if you are talking about a fair rake for micros, a serious pick up player that can beat 100NL for 0-2bb/100 should be able to beat 4NL by quite abit. And if they cant, maybe 4NL just doesnt make sense to begin with? There is a reason why casinos dont run 4NL.
Another point about fair rake, if we are talking about winnings in bb/100 we should be talking about max rake cap to be at a certain bb. And I do think that a 5bb rake cap is ALOT for any stake. Which means I do favor alot less rake for micro/small stakes and more rake for midstakes above (500+). Please no "more rake is better" jokes.
I dont know if these numbers are even possible, but if it is, the key is the ecosystem. Where should the buck of the poker site money comes from? If it doesnt have a healthy professional stake ecosystem, everything will crumble and its probably not possible for them to reduce the rake.
I know this is a highly controversial topic and people get really heated when talking about this, but this is just my opinion. You dont have to agree with it and WOW that was a long post.
March 14, 2019 | 8:14 p.m.
Mental Game - What Is Bad Luck?
Luck certainly have been given a bad rep in poker. Players that talk about being lucky or unlucky are look down upon. Some say there is no such thing as luck or luck averages out in the long run or luck averages in a huge sample size.
What is a long run? what is a huge sample size? I think this is where people dont quite understand how it works, at least how I think it works.
There is a famous story about Wall Street investors. Say the company get a new Alumni of 10000 investors. So happen, these guys are really average and only have a 50% chance of being ahead at the end of the year. And given the cruel nature of the job, if you are not ahead you are fired. You are one of these guys, what do you think your chance of succeeding after 10 years?
You are right if you are thinking you are not going to make it. There is only about 0.05% chance you will succeed. But there is where the law of large numbers comes into play. With a alumni of 10000 people, on average 9.8 people will come out ahead EVERY year flipping coins. Have you ever win or lose 10 coin flips in a row?
The same idea was demonstrated by Derren Brown famous British mentalist where he flip a coin and got head or tails (cant remember) 10 times in a row. You might think its a trick, but it wasnt, he really did it. What you didnt know is that he was flipping coins the whole day for hours until he got a string of 10 heads or tails in a row. And if he spend more time flipping, he would have eventually gotten 11 or 12 or 13 in a row.
Now think of the whole poker ecosystem and a single entity. Hundreds of thousands or more hands played by thousands or more players everyday. While you only have a 0.05% of running that bad, SOMEONE is almost CERTAINLY going to run that bad.
And if you take poker from its conception to now, billions of hands played by millions of players, someone is almost certainly going to be at the end of the unlucky curve.
The bright side is, its really unlikely that the person is you, the opposite is true and you can be on the lucky side of the curve and most importantly we aint flipping coins in poker; we should definitely have an edge if we are serious about poker. (although from what I hear, even the best players only win about 55% of their sessions, so probably not that far from a coin flip)
What is the point of this? I dont know, I just like numbers, probability and thinking about stuff. At the end of the day, it really doesnt matter where you are on the lucky/unlucky curve, is what you are going to do about it that matters. But I will never dismiss it, cause the math checks out.
March 13, 2019 | 11:49 a.m.
Should I stream Poker?
So if you have been reading this blog, you know I wanted to stream other games initially even though I was a Poker player. Why didnt I just started with streaming poker if I was going to get into streaming?
I just didnt see much incentive to do so. Streaming is a tough gig, takes months or years to build an audience and most streamers dont get paid much at all if anything. Even at 50PLO, the swings will look so much more than what twitch can offer.
What RIO poker did is give streamers more incentive, as long as they make a certain tier they get paid in rakeback. This is really nice, but in terms of hourly, it is only a small increase from your poker winrate. From my Feb data its about 3.5euro/hr. So I might be able to get about 550-600 Euro if I go for 160hr/month. While you cant complain about free money, this money is not free, you have to work for it, hard.
And when I say its tough to stream poker, it is hard to stay focus and play your A game for 8 hours while constantly talking about hands and engaging your chat. Especially when you are down 10BI and get 4bet in a 12bb splash pot with a 225bb deep stack, you call and get shove on the flop by air except 2BDFD and your opponent gets there. Its really hard to keep a positive energy and keep grinding following your schedule.
But does this guy look like he just lost 12BI and got suck out by a runner runner flush?
Absolutely not, thats because of this.
WE GOT OUR FIRST SUB! I always had an inkling that there is something about streaming and engaging with people in a positive way. Thanks Snorkyp1e for being the first sub.
Only time will tell if I manage to grow my stream to hit the upper tiers of StreamR or twitch partner program or get another sub. I hope I do.
So is streaming poker worth it? If you are a crusher or planning to put the work in to be a crusher, money wise, most probably not. But if one sub can put a smile like that on your face, then its probably worth a shot. As cliche as it sounds, its not about the money. The extra rakeback is bonus. Thats why I mention in the earlier post I have to be a poker player first and streamer second, cause if I dont win at poker the extra rakeback and twitch isnt going to be enough to pay my bills.
P.S Now I have to go find out how to get emotes and sub badges..which will cost me, but how awesome it will be to have my own emotes and badges. :)
March 9, 2019 | 11:01 p.m.
Run It Once Poker Hand #32050778: Omaha Pot Limit (€0.25/€0.50) - 2019/03/06 20:28 UTC [2019/03/06 21:28 CET]
Table ID '32044477' 6-Max Seat #6 is the button
Seat 1: Dan T (€58.01 in chips)
Seat 2: Ronnie K (€122.64 in chips)
Seat 3: Sean S (€135.09 in chips)
Seat 4: Kitsune (€74.59 in chips)
Seat 5: Alexander F (€49.26 in chips)
Seat 6: James G (€69.30 in chips)
Dan T: posts small blind €0.25
Ronnie K: posts big blind €0.50
* HOLE CARDS
Dealt to Kitsune [Ah Jh Qc 8c]
Sean S: raises €1.25 to €1.75
Kitsune: raises €4.25 to €6
Alexander F: folds
James G: folds
Dan T: folds
Ronnie K: raises €13.50 to €19.50
Sean S: folds
Kitsune: calls €14
FLOP [Ts Ac 4h]
Ronnie K: bets €39.90
Kitsune: raises €14.69 to €54.59
Ronnie K: calls €14.69
TURN [Ts Ac 4h] [7s]
Ronnie K: checks
RIVER [Ts Ac 4h 7s] [2s]
Ronnie K: checks
Ronnie K shows [6d 5c Ks Js] for Flush [Ks Js Ts 7s 2s]
Ronnie K collected €148.68 from pot
Total pot €151.18 | Rake €2.50
Board [Ts Ac 4h 7s 2s]
Seat 5: Alexander F folded before Flop
Seat 6: James G (button) folded before Flop
Seat 1: Dan T (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 3: Sean S folded before Flop
Seat 2: Ronnie K (big blind) showed [6d 5c Ks Js] and won €148.68 with Flush high Ks
Seat 4: Kitsune mucked [Ah Jh Qc 8c] and lost
Games are not dead, but if I dont run better, I might be.
March 6, 2019 | 10:20 p.m.
Early in the morning thoughts:
Expectations are important. Some would say the secret to happiness is low expectation. Then the secret to human fulfillment or a meaningful life is having the right expectations.
What makes a poker session a good session. Its a good session if I played good poker and made good decisions.
What makes a good streaming session. Its a good streaming session if I enjoyed myself and connect with my audience (even if its just one person)
I want to be as stoic as possible and say that we should only focus on things in our control. But the fact of life is everything in intertwine. Would a stream still be a stream if there was no on to watch? Would I still be a professional poker player if I dont win?
So what makes a good poker month?
- I played 'good' volume
- I spend 'good' amount of time studying
- I played 'good' poker
- I made 'good' money
Of cause the definition of 'good' will be up to the individual.
Im tired. Good night. Stay Zen.
March 2, 2019 | 11:24 p.m.
Streaming PLO and Channel Growth
Poker is kind of a niche game when it comes to streaming. If you dont know the rules and nuance of poker, you are probably not going to watch someone play poker on Twitch. Its really different compare to action games like Fortnite or Apex Legend. You dont need to know the meta-game or details about the weapons, all you need to know is that its a Battle Royal. And its always fun to see good players shoot down others.
And this idea I think becomes more true when moving from tournament poker to cash games and even more from NLHE to PLO. Which means there is probably only a very small group of people that would come and watch PLO on Twitch unless its High Stakes. Everyone love watching high stakes regardless of the format.
That would probably be the challenge moving from Tier 1 up. Tier 2 might be possible if I put in ALOT of streaming hours. But Tier 3 really requires me to build up an audience. I have been watching smaller streamers for a long time and hearing their stories. These streamers might average 40-100 viewers and they took 1 year or even 2-3 years to build that up. They got lots of heart for sure.
Viewer retention is important of cause. People that like you will come back to support you. Improving the quality of my stream is something I can work on (all suggestions are welcome). But I dont think I can change the "type" of streamer I am. My personality is more suited to be a more calm person and I want to make the stream educational. Watching back the 400bb Twitch clip I realize I barely flinch after winning like 5 buyins in one pot, it wasnt even splash.
And then there is like ALOT of StreamR. I recently listen to a podcast by Nigahiga with dogdog and itsHafu. One youtuber and two veteran twitch streamers. There is a difference when it comes to viewership of youtube vs twitch. Youtube videos are uploaded after the fact and Twitch streaming is live, which creates more competition.
So what do you do when the pie is small? You bake a bigger pie. The two obvious audience are people that plays PLO but are not on twitch and those on twitch but dont watch PLO. The latter is especially true for twitch viewers that would watch NLHE or tournaments but not PLO. This is just a thought, but if I am serious about being a PLO poker streamer and not doing it just because "hey rakeback" then it would seem its also my job to promote the great game of PLO to NLHE players and to promote Twitch to PLO players. Seems like alot of work but this is just a random thought on a random Saturday night.
PS. Will be streaming tomorrow.
March 2, 2019 | 5:44 p.m.
Thats 200 hours watched right there. I am really happy to manage to get to tier 1 this month. Thanks You Phil Galfond and RIOPoker team for making tier 1 so achievable and of cause thank you everyone that drop by the stream to hangout. Lets go!
Feb. 26, 2019 | 10:47 a.m.
I am Kit. I learn how to play NLHE when I was studying in Uni. Bought a bunch of books, played online and live. Withdraw my winnings after studies and move back home to start a new career in engineering. I love poker so much, so I decided to put in $500 and grind 25NL/50NL 6 max during my free time. I quickly run it up, quit my job soon after and been playing poker full time since 2010 I believe.
I switch to PLO at the end of 2016 and really started my PLO journey at 2017. Things have been a little wonky since. At the beginning of 2017 the most comprehensive PLO content was Tom Chambers book, but quickly by the end of 2017 Monker solver came into the picture. This is where things start to go down hill for me and rock my confidence. I spend alot of time studying Monker, but my results for 2018 where horrible. The more I study the more I lose it seems. I had a 5 months losing streak and it was devastating. As I cant seem to figure how did I start losing when I feel I am at the peak of my PLO knowledge. I did okay in 2017 when I knew so little about PLO compare to what Monker have shown me. It could just be variance or maybe other factors. I did switch from Pokerstars to Partypoker. I just cant seem to do well in Party poker.
At the end of my NLHE career I played mostly 200NL 6m on ACR mix with some 400NL and even some rare 600NL/1000NL when games are good. I played a mix of 100PLO and 200PLO on Party poker before I stop last year. Same username so some regs might remember me.
I have always been a PC gamer since young and was watching a lot of streams on twitch for many years. I always thought of streaming myself. First thought was Hearthstone but I didnt quite like the game and the $$ cost. But when Valve announce Artifact I thought that was something I could do, stream and play Artifact competitively. So after a 5 months losing streak, I stop playing poker (Nov 2018). I bought myself a good blue yeti mic and a logitech webcam and get myself ready to stream Artifact.
Fast forward a few months Artifact is kind of is a dead game. There are many speculation of why it failed, but mainly I think it just wasnt fun for the average player. They try to negate the RNG factor of cards games by making ALOT of small RNG rolls that have smaller effect on the outcome of the game. This is better overall for competitive play as it decreases variance but for the average player it just isnt fun. Every time you lose a RNG roll which there are many every round it just feelsbadman. And I think that is what lead to the game failure overall.
So Artifact was unfortunately a no go. However, RIO Poker came to save the day with StreamR. It was an instant no brainer for me to try this out. I mean, I already have the mic and webcam, I always wanted to stream and I know how to play poker better than Artifact. If you are reading this you already probably know how StreamR works, to move up tiers you need to increase viewer hours. I can control the hours I stream but not the amount of viewers I get. Twitch doesnt favor small streamers and I will have to be creative to get more viewers. To be honest, one of the few reason I decided to write this Poker Journal is for this very reason.
I am someone that do need some extrinsic motivation to get me going (2nd reason for this journal). So the streamR program is great in that sense. I am going to take this seriously from the start. Planning to stream 8 hours/day 5 days/week. Hopefully I can grind my viewership up by the end of March to get to 2nd tier+. I will breakdown the streams to two 4 hour sessions with a one hour break inbetween. There is two reason for that.
One is I live in Asia and I have to turn my clock upside down for this to work. The one hour break is where I will get "dinner", at 2 am in the morning. The second reason is I believe at the end of the day, while being a streamer is something that I would like to do, but if I am going to stream Poker, I have to be first and foremost a Poker player first and a streamer second. I want to play my best and be totally engage with my decisions so taking a break after 4 hours of playing + streaming is a must. I prefer shorter streams like this but with a more consistent schedule. (schedule might change if RIO Poker traffic picks up and games are good during non peak hours)
On top of that I would have to get deep into studying Monker and also stay on top of improving my stream, maybe even start a youtube channel. This is going to be schedule intensive, as I "HAVE" to play poker. Before streaming as a poker player we can take a break anytime we want to, I guess I still could but I want to try to stick to the schedule for as long as I can and only really taking a break if I am totally burn out. I forsee a challenging few months a head of me, but its the first time I am excited to play Poker again in awhile (since my downswing last year).
Schedule: Sun-Wed, Fri. First session 1500-1900 (CET). Second session 2000-2400 (CET)
Game: The Great Game 50PLO 6-max (for now)
Please do dropby to hangout, chat, ask questions or lurk. I appreciate any support I can get, do follow if you like the stream.
Long Live Poker!
Feb. 24, 2019 | 1 p.m.
Another thing about big splash pot. Thinking about the variance, it actually isnt a high variance spot in the sense you are risking little to make ALOT. The EV of the situation is enormous. The high variance comes in when the 1k splash happens so infrequent. If you only get one of those pots every month, the variance is never going to average out. You are going to be way ahead or way behind throughout the year on 1k splash pots.
Feb. 22, 2019 | 9:21 p.m.
while I am not in favor of the big splash pots and agree with deep stack have less EV compare to small stack. I dont have a problem with players punting it off at the 24bb splash pots. I am actually pretty happy about it cause it gives me an edge. I am even happier to see players punting it off 100bb when the splash is only 3bb. At 1000bb splash is pure gamble cause its obvious everyone should put it in. At 24bb there is skill cause not everyone knows what to put in and what not to.
Feb. 22, 2019 | 8:53 p.m.
Interesting thought. I never really thought about a method to help me accept things as they are and that are outside of my control rather than to just accept them. To process my emotions quickly and to focus on what I am going to do next.
I would suggest reading this: What matters most by James Collins. The first chapter itself dive deep into living in fear.
I do believe fear is always an indicator of something deeper within us. It is a primal instinct. And to understand it we will have to peel it off the layers. If we try to address the symptom rather than the root cause we will never overcome it. All the best.
Feb. 22, 2019 | 9:15 a.m.
Tcallas I got no problem with that at all although I dont particularly like gambling myself (ironic I know), and if that is what RIO is trying to do that is fair enough. But I dont know if that is what RIO is trying to achieve here and if it is I would appreciate it if they say it like it is.
Secondly, it is not a bit of gamble. 10-16BI pots isnt abit when you are a 6-max grinder. It is quite a lot of gamble. My suggestion of 5bb max splash is what I would call abit of gamble as it creates a ratio similar to 23bb short stack game. So in that case I dont actually even mind "abit" of gamble.
Of cause I understand that this 5bb suggestion isnt particularly exciting but at least I am still playing poker.
Feb. 8, 2019 | 8:26 a.m.
Also note that it created a situation where you have to flip for a big pot 6 ways with a insanely huge pot which is really crazy in term of variance. Sure while being a super rare situation it would not matter for average variance over the board if you do the math for all players, but for the particular player where this does happen to, it would matter quite alot I think. Its a 16 BI or a 10 BI pot, I have played 6 max for 8 years, I probably have only played an 8-9 BI pot like 2-3 times and it was at PLO.
And while I do trust Phil on the math, I still dont see it. The person that won the 16 BI pot at that moment is winning hundreds of times more rakeback than they should be earning at that moment. How does that later average out? I cant see how it does, can someone show me the math I am missing here. Now imagine if someone can get that lucky, it goes without saying that someone is also capable of getting very unlucky.
Which brings me to another question I have. When the other 5 players do lose on that 16BI pot, how does that affects their rakeback? I am guessing that it does affects their rakeback but not by much cause the cost of variance will be share by all players in the pool. So if a huge chunk of money is remove from the rakeback pool the cost is share among all the players. And the bigger the pool the smaller the cost and the 'huge chunk' to thousands of players is not that huge, but that is only assuming you have a large player base.
Edit: Ignore that last part, just when though the RIO Poker Post #7. I understand now how the splash is calculated. The only factor affecting splash is the rake of the previous hand of that table. And if I am understanding this right the way variance happens in the rakeback is the same as the way variance happens in poker.
Feb. 8, 2019 | 7:44 a.m.
Just watch the Joeingram podcast with Phil where they showed and was talking about the 2k splash pot which I might be wrong but I believe it was 1000bb? And they go on to talk about another 400bb splash pot.
It is hard to imagine how everyone is going to get their fair share of 51% when there is such big splashes but I trust Phil and his team and I assume they did the math.
However that is not my issue I want to bring forth. IMO this should never have happen. I am totally against any splash amount that would remove playing poker at all. When the pot is so big relative to your stack, there isnt any poker to be played.
I am aware that players did fold and there is money to grab but I dont even know if that is a good thing for RIO Poker since they want it to be fair. And I am also aware that this is probably really rare, but it should not happen 1% of the time, it should happen 0% of the time.
I think 5bb is probably the upper limits, it make a 100bb stack have about 15.3 STP ratio while without splash is 66.67 STP ratio.
I guess the point I want to make is for smaller size splash more frequently and totally removing spash that remove poker game play.
Feb. 8, 2019 | 5:22 a.m.
DanDanDanDan No one is entitled to 51%, but that isnt the point. The money isnt the point I am trying to make. The experience is, I might totally be wrong of cause and having splash pot might for some reason make casual players experience really fun and exciting. I am just making an argument that it is probably not going to. I am actually totally happy with this if it works, higher edge for the pros. (if my 2nd point holds)
Feb. 2, 2019 | 12:15 p.m.
Bingo 123 Yes, you are correct on average. I am not talking about the math but the experience the players are having. These two are really different. For a pro that is trying to make money playing poker the math is more important but for the casual player the experience is more important than the math.
Feb. 2, 2019 | 11:33 a.m.
I feel like this will be the most controversial topic to date about RIO Poker. So I sit on my chair and thought about it awhile and this is what I currently think about this.
"We wanted a system with the fun and excitement of variable prizes like chests"
I am afraid splash pots might not accomplish this. You see a splash pot, your brain lights up with dopamine, you play your hand, loses and now you are twice as mad as before. If you win its kinda of like yay, I got my RB that I supposedly deserve. Now look at it from a player point of view at a 6 max table. Every time a splash pot occurs only ONE players walks away with the rake.
The first problem I see with this is the player experience. Even assuming through some mathematical miracle that I cant phantom everyone do get their 51%, the experience wont be felt that way. You will feel cheated 5/6 of the time. The chest offered by PS actually FEELS better because you get something regardless.
Secondly, I don’t even believe that the idea that everyone is going to get their 51% with splash pot is true. NLHE and NLHE+Ante isn’t the same game, meaning you can get an edge in these splash pots. The better player will be getting more than 51%.
Now as a professional I like it because it is a “new” game variant with random splash “free” ante and I can maybe gain more of an edge there but if I have to make a guess I would say most recreational players will hate it due to the 5/6 bad experience vs 1/6 good experience. And if I remember our human biases correctly it takes two good event to cancel out one bad event and this is REALLY working against it.
It does feel unfortunate seeing that this does slow down the bots (but who knows for how long )
This really reminds me of Artifact, the new card game release by Valve which have failed REALLY badly. The game itself is really interesting, like poker it have a lot of analytical aspect of it that is chess like with elements of a RNG like all card games do. But the RNG experience was horrible and the player negative experience vs positive experience was way too much and it lose 90% of its players base within weeks. Only the hardcore chess like players that can withstand the bad RNG experience are left.
There are also a lot of talk about how the monetization method was to blame for the failure. But if you compare it to other TCG like MTG or HS, on average it isn’t more expensive if you really want to play the game. It is event cheaper but it didn’t matter. What matters it how the players felt while playing or purchasing the game.
Do not mistake interesting for fun.
*edit: just incase I wasnt clear as a pro player I like this cause its interesting just like I like Artifact but I am afraid this might not work well for the casuals that want fun...just like Artifact.
Feb. 2, 2019 | 8:18 a.m.
Thank you RIO, as someone that have transition to PLO this pass two years and not quite getting there, I have been thinking about quitting poker. I was thinking of picking more casual games like the new Valve game Artifact and play that competitively. And with anything esport I was going to stream that game a lot. But now I think I have the option to stream poker instead once RIO Poker comes out. I am really excited and pleasantly surprise you guys are taking an esport perspective which I think is the right way to go. Cheers.