20 Dec 11
Don't Discriminate Against Winning Players - Dominik Kofert Blog
PokerStrategy.com CEO Dominik Kofert shares his views on more and more poker rooms seeing winning players as the enemy.
 |
Dominik  Korn Kofert |
Every dollar raked by a poker room, or won by a winning player, has been deposited and lost by a recreational player first. Without recreational players, nobody wins.
Thus, attracting and servicing players who play poker solely for fun is of key importance for the poker rooms, but also for the professional players.
"Poker is much less appealing to everyone if players get the impression that winners are not welcome"
However, many poker rooms turn this principle upside down.A recent example of this is the Everleaf network, which has started banning players who win more than €750 in a week from playing against losing players.
Some poker rooms seem to think: “if losing players are good, winning players must be bad.”
This conclusion could not be more wrong, for the following reasons:
1. Deposits
Discriminating against winning players does not cause losing players to deposit more. There is no evidence to support this. In fact, the opposite might be true due to reduced action and liquidity.
2. 'Deposit to Rake'
Apart from the total amount of deposits that are generated at a poker room, from the poker rooms’ point of view, there is another factor of key importance: the deposit-to-rake conversion.
A poker room that generates daily deposits of $1m but only coverts 20% of that into rake earns less money than a poker room that generates just $800k in deposits but converts 30% of that into rake.
Now, almost nobody in the poker industry knows that winning players play a hugely important role in increasing the deposit-to-rake conversion ratio. The reason for this is that the relative skill gap between two winning players is far smaller than the relative skill gap between two recreational players.
Having a healthy share of winning players “flattens” the average skill distribution of a poker room, thus increasing the deposit-to-rake conversion.
Consequently, by banning winning players you probably increase the total amount of cash-outs that happen in the poker ecosystem.
3. Winning Is Integral To Poker
Poker is much less appealing to everyone – recreational players and professionals alike – if players get the impression that winners are not welcome.
In fact, before I first played poker in 2004, I was extremely skeptical due to the saying that in gambling, the operator will never want you to win. This of course holds true for games such as Roulette or Slots.
However, one of the key reasons for the success of poker in the past is that the operator does not care if you win or lose – or at least, they won’t discriminate against you if you do win.
If poker rooms move away from this principle, if they start discriminating against winners, the image of poker as a whole will suffer tremendously - to the detriment of players and operators alike.
In particular, it is often the recreational players who think that poker rooms are rigged or won’t allow you to win. Do not scare them away by discriminating against winners.
"There is a line that should never be crossed, and this is when poker rooms treat players worse because they are winning too much."
 |
| Our goal is to help people become better poker players. |
However, there is a line that should never be crossed, and this is when poker rooms treat players worse because they are winning or winning too much.
I am very concerned with the latest trends in the poker industry when it comes to treating winning players well. I think that, especially after tough events post-Black Friday, people need a break.
The vast majority of PokerStrategy.com members play poker just for fun – while learning a few tricks here and there, they still lose money in return for entertainment.
However, here at PokerStrategy.com, it’s our goal to help people become better poker players. We are happy for everybody that makes it and becomes successful. As a poker school, we will certainly never teach people how to lose money.
For the benefit of all, it’s very important that this disturbing trend of discriminating against winning players is stopped before it gains ground.
We are making our opinion known to the poker rooms about this already and encourage each of you to do the same.
By Dominik
Korn KofertFor more industry insight and expertise, check out our Confidential Blog.
#2
RandomGenerator, 20 Dec 11 15:26
hmm, he says about 20-30% deposit to rake ratio for a poker room.I wonder how much this ratio for online casinos with pure -EV gambling.
Does anyone has such information?
#3
LONGPLAY66, 20 Dec 11 16:32
this is a man who in an ideal world could create the best poker room on the planet,a room that we would all trust and a room that would simply take it's cut and not greedily try and grab every dollar at the players expense,also he has the best staff in poker without a doubt.#5
MJPerry, 20 Dec 11 16:35
@2 100% in the long run ;)#6
RandomGenerator, 20 Dec 11 16:50
#5, you are, obviously, wrong. or you're just joking?#7
EmanuelC16, 20 Dec 11 17:09
@6: They are -EV. If you play enough you'll go broke.#8
RandomGenerator, 20 Dec 11 17:26
#7, that doesn't mean that nobody makes cashouts in casinos, right?if anyone ever makes cashout then the deposit to rake ratio is not 100% already
#9
Tarhonya, 20 Dec 11 17:28
Everybody thinks they're winning so discriminating has a negative effect on everyone. I mean which fish with a trainwreck graph going to say, "hey, I'm not a winner, but at least now I'm going to lose less" - none.I cannot really wrap my head around why is the rake is so high in general in today's online poker, where the skill difference between winning and losing players has been tremendously decreased over the past few years which means winning players have to play more hands to have similar winnings as they would have years ago, yet the rake is huge.
#10
shehanshah, 20 Dec 11 17:47
I think after black friday even pokerstars has changed their software to bring in more bad players#11
EmanuelC16, 20 Dec 11 19:16
#8: Ofc some people cashout or hit the big one. But if you play forever, you lose everything. That's "the long run" or "long enough". I know you would like to know how many deposits actually go busto and how many cashout some but the point is that if it's -EV for you it doesn't really matter.Compare it to 22 vs AA AI pre. You will win occasionally but if you do it enough time you will go broke unless you have infinte BR. Same goes for casinos.
#12
Riesutas, 20 Dec 11 19:46
playing poker is the same, the -ev of slots is like rake on the poker table and if at a point the edge difference between players at a table becomes less than rake, they would play until the site got all of their money (or most of it anyway)#13
gadget51, 20 Dec 11 19:51
very clever guy iwth his finger on the pulse. Respect.#14
mizeriq, 20 Dec 11 21:28
Every fish wants to be next <insert favorite poker pro here>, so if the room works against winning players, they are going to attract less fish, not more.#15
randomdonk, 20 Dec 11 21:37
hopefully they listen.#16
MJPerry, 20 Dec 11 21:59
@ RandomGenerator - yes I was joking though the statement isn't completely facetious. The 22 v. AA is a good example of what I meant.I don't know enough about the casino industry to give an accurate guess, though of course it would be a far higher %.
#17
Harnas31, 21 Dec 11 00:01
Hunting for the witches#18
Navrark, 21 Dec 11 02:09
The vast majority of Pokerstrategy members lose money? Does Pokerstrategy have stats on all of their player's performances?#19
Xantos, 21 Dec 11 08:14
@Navrark:Nope, we don't. We just get some aggregate figures from time to time that gives us an idea.
#20
LimburgCwboy, 21 Dec 11 13:09
I imagine (now winning) players will just cash out and (Ever)leave.Even if Everleaf go on with this, how can you put a fixed price on winning.
Don't they have high(er)-stakes tables or MTT's, where one win would be over the $750 already.
If they gonna do it it, should be coupled to the average Buy-In of a player, so he cannot win more then x-times his average Buy-In in a week.
(E.g.his average is $50, he can win 15 times his Buy-In ( thus $750), but an average of $100 Buy-In, gives max. $1.500)
#21
JBCD71, 22 Dec 11 09:32
To discrimanate against winning players is such a insane idea.Winning players should always be rewarded accordingly,its the reason why many poker players play .To have the stardom ,recognition,and respect for your game,and the money doesnt hurt.LOL.To take that away will hurt the game and is bad for business...period.Poker blew up in the Moneymaker stage for one reason and one reason only.Any average joe felt they could do it ..be the next moneymaker.Gave players hope that if he could do it ..why not me?#22
Gisa101287, 16 Jan 12 18:04
I think if they go on with this the make the industy more fake then it already is, how you can turn on the system to let the losing player getting win more or lose less? All internet games are controlled!!!