Previous entry: 
Next entry:
No-limit (real no-limit!) poker would change everything
Buried beneath the talk of blackjack, roulette and compacts, are two words, magic words in the Florida Senate's gambling proposal: No limit.
It's two words that mean the world to the best poker players, but if you're not a regular, it doesn't mean squat.
So let me explain.
We play what is called "no-limit" Texas Hold 'em at poker rooms here. But that's a false title. There's a $100 limit buy-in. That means the largest bet you can make is $100, unless you win a hand or two. Just compare that to slots, horses and the Lottery, where you can spend as much as you want whenever you want, and you see that it's an arbitrary rule, written in by the state on July 1, 2007, presumably to "protect us."
Now, look at what the Senate is offering not just the Seminoles, but every pari-mutuel in the state: "No-limit poker."
Think of it this way: If you play for nickels at home, you likely call your opponent on every hand. If you were playing for, say, $20, you'd stop and think. Extrapolate the economics and apply to no-limit.
Real poker players, the ones with money (not me!), know the difference. That's why they never come to Florida to play and prefer to play elsewhere. When a player has to call with flush draw when his opponent likely has a pair, and it costs only $100, well, he's often "priced in." Now, make that same decision with $5,000 out there...
"No-limit should be just that. No limit," says poker pro Clonie Gowen, who on her recent visit said she wouldn't play the current $100 buy-in game because, essentially, it's not really poker.
Adds Jon Marks of Weston, a regular player who rolls numbers around in his head so much that he's part man, part abacus: "The current game just becomes an all-in Yahtzeefest."
I put out some emails for comments to poker players who know more than me. Here we go:
Chris Costenza, co-publisher of AnteUp Magazine, which covers the state: "We were placated by the no-limit concession back in 2007, thinking it would give us a chance to ply our poker skill. But in the end it was merely a mirage that turned the game into a lottery. A true no-limit
poker game where bets can be crafted to separate the chaff from the wheat has endless possibilities. Real poker players, with real money, will find their way to Florida now, and we'll benefit from the influx of gambling dollars from around the country."
Marks notes that at the Bogota the $5-$10 game is a $500 minimum buy in with a $2,500
max. The $2-$5 is a $300 minimum with a $1,500 max. You can buy in as often as you want so the upper limit is more of a guideline.
Wil Herrera, manager of Mardi Gras Poker Room, says in some ways, players lose more at $100 buy-in, than if it were, say, $500. Players push all-in for $100 a few times, then re-buy when they lose.
"He’s not going to push all in every hand if it's $500," Herrera said. "You see peple lose $1,000 by losing $100 at a time.
An increase to no-limit would bring big tournaments here, he said, because players come not only for the tournament, but for the side action cash games afterward.
"Poker would explode down here," he said. "For the player who travels across the country, the tournament is part of it, but the main part of it is the side action."
So, my point is that even if they didn't go all the way with no-limit, maybe they'll bump it up to say, $500 or $1,000 buy-in.
Meanwhile, tell me. Would any of this affect your poker habits?
NICK SORTAL began playing 3-card "gut" and "Indian poker" on high school band trips, early training for his...
Comments
i would love to see real no-limit action in florida. there is so much money and fishes down here which would make it a match made in heaven.
Posted by: john | March 25, 2009 11:29 AM
Wouldn't real no-limit be nice? But how will it be worded? It still could be no-limit, $100 max buy-in.
As with everything gambling related here, we keep making baby steps. Do you remember when the Seminoles first got poker? $10 max POT. Yeah that was a real challenge! Then the Seminoles worked around that with single table tourneys and using "units" instead of money, at least it was a heckuva lot better than $10 pots. When poker moved to Hard Rock, they were upped to $1-$2 but they were all limit games. Again though the Seminoles offered the one table tourneys. Finally we advanced to actual no-limit, but with the $100 max - we're getting there.
We have lost lots of players along the way. When Seminole Hollywood first started, the poker wait could be 2 hours or more. When it first started at Hard Rock, it was the same way. The single table tourneys always had a wait list and now they can barely get a "sit-n-go" together.
Posted by: KCK | March 25, 2009 12:45 PM
The game structure is "No Limit", nearly all poker games themselves are limited by a max buy-in. Only exceptions I've ever heard of are the "Big Game" at the Bellagio, and for some bizarre reason, the casinos in Detroit offer a no-max-buy-in $5/$10 game.
Posted by: Eric | March 25, 2009 1:58 PM
I play $2 "no-limit" at Ocala Jai Alai and you see too much of people going all in trying to lucky with their $100. It will bring more skill to the table and less luck. I look forword to it. I don't think our area of the state will see too many big players, but for South Florida, it should be great.
Posted by: Robert Huff | March 25, 2009 2:23 PM
Thanks, KCK, for the historical perspective.
True, it hasn't been that long everything was a $10 pot!
Posted by: Nick Sortal | March 25, 2009 2:33 PM
ill be happier with some set-up similar to some other casinos: 1-2 game min buy-in $100 max $300, 2-5 min $200 max $500, 5-10 min $300 max $1000.
Posted by: john | March 25, 2009 2:51 PM
Nick, does that mean high stakes limit poker also?
Posted by: David | March 25, 2009 3:15 PM
Lol, I'm only 24 and I remember playing the $20 max pots. It was a great way to kill time with friends and thats about it. We would play for hours with just a $20 buy-in. I still have a bunch of their old 25 cent chips.
Posted by: Josh | March 25, 2009 3:31 PM
This is going to be great for poker is SF. I used to play $5-$10 no limit a few times a week at the isle but ever since I came back from Vegas I can't play here any more, the game is not the same, it's so different. The $100 buy-in is rediculous. It's just not poker. I've seen people here lose anywhere from $2-4,000 in one day at $100 a pop. Bingo at its best! Can't wait for the change!!!!!
Posted by: MB | March 25, 2009 4:06 PM
This is going to be great for poker is SF. I used to play $5-$10 no limit a few times a week at the isle but ever since I came back from Vegas I can't play here any more, the game is not the same, it's so different. The $100 buy-in is rediculous. It's just not poker. I've seen people here lose anywhere from $2-4,000 in one day at $100 a pop. Bingo at its best! Can't wait for the change!!!!!
Posted by: mb | March 25, 2009 4:07 PM
David, not sure what you mean by high stakes limit.
You mean, something like a $50-$100 limit, 3 raises?
And MB, just a word of caution: This is only the Senate talking. There's still a house and a governor to persuade.
But to me, it's the least offensive to the anti-gambling folks, especially compared to, say, blackjack everywhere.
Posted by: Nick Sortal | March 25, 2009 4:36 PM
Sure I agree it's the least offensive Nick. While you can call poker gambling, it does require a lot of skill AND some luck, at least real poker does... :) It would just be nice to see it pass and made a reality
Posted by: mb | March 25, 2009 7:29 PM
"David, not sure what you mean by high stakes limit.
You mean, something like a $50-$100 limit, 3 raises?"
You got it, Nick, that's exactly what I meant. So, what do you think? Thanks, Nick.
David
Posted by: David | March 25, 2009 7:41 PM
Nick ... check out this thread in a poker forum regarding a potential poker story for you to go with ... could be big ... http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/27/brick-mortar/hard-rock-fl-150-sunday-deepstack-details-442303/#post9575541
Posted by: anonymous | March 25, 2009 9:11 PM
David:
Funny, I was talking to some people last night at Dania and they said they heard that's more vital to the card rooms than raising buy-ins, etc. They want a raising of the $5 max for limit games now going up....
I don't know if it'll happen or not but I'll watch for it. Thanks.
Posted by: Nick Sortal | March 26, 2009 7:13 AM
We haven't lost players they play at various poker rooms. When I started working for the Seminoles only they and the Mecasouki Indians had 25 cent poker. Now we have tracks with poker nrooms all over the state. No limit would bring poker tourists from all over the world. We could use the money. The tracks pay taxes thru the nose and should be given every consideration. Its good for the players ., the tracks and the public.
Posted by: Bernard Parness | March 26, 2009 8:25 AM
lol at not knowing what "high stakes limit" means .. yet you're writing a column on gaming.
Posted by: Eric | March 26, 2009 9:22 AM
Dude, I'm writing a column on FLORIDA gambling here.
There's a lot we don't know about gambling. But thanks for the love.
Posted by: Nick Sortal | March 26, 2009 1:33 PM
Bernard Parness,
If you were working for the Seminoles in poker from the beginning, you would have to say we've lost players. Don't have hard statistics, just observations and you can't count "all over the state" in referring to Broward County.
Seminole Hollywood was packed everyday for $10 poker - that's not people coming from around the state. Also the pari-mutuels got poker, while it was still under the $10 pot rules. Dania Jai-alai built what I thought was the nicest poker room in the county and it was packed. Go there now and you can throw rocks without hitting anyone. Pompano Harness was packed when it opened..... and all the meantime Seminole Hollywood remained packed.
You had to wait to play a sit-n-go at Seminole Hollywood and at Hard Rock, now you have to wait because they CAN'T get players.
I know at Seminole Hollywood, it felt like I knew every player there, now I can walk in the Poker Room and maybe recognize someone. I'm sure the players are still out there, it's just a matter of enticing them back.
Posted by: KCK | March 26, 2009 5:35 PM