You're a Bunch of Factors

At a couple of new venues I have been playing at since moving to the Mid North.

They give you the option of using one or both stamping cards at the first break or you can choose to use your 2nd card during the 2nd session but must be used at the 2nd break.

I personally think this is an excellent idea.

Why do you think that's a good idea?

What's your thinking behind it?


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?janqqj

In some venues you cannot prepay drinks, It can give the player a little bit longer to have their cards stamped thus encouraging responsible drinking.

The only disadvantage is if the player only uses one card their chances of being drawn out is reduced by 50%, and no effect on the lenght of the game.

seems like an ok idea for me. i think i would still try and get the stamps before the first break but if it gives the people the option, then seems ok

gundog wrote:In some venues you cannot prepay drinks, It can give the player a little bit longer to have their cards stamped thus encouraging responsible drinking.

The only disadvantage is if the player only uses one card their chances of being drawn out is reduced by 50%, and no effect on the lenght of the game.

Pre pay for drinks??? hardly seems like it would pass RSA up in the north at least.

gundog wrote:In some venues you cannot prepay drinks, It can give the player a little bit longer to have their cards stamped thus encouraging responsible drinking.

The best way to encourage responsible drinking is to enjoy them to drink less and buy meals instead. Alcohol is not the only way to stamp up.

If more responsible drinking is truly the aim surely that would be the better goal.

gundog wrote:The only disadvantage is if the player only uses one card their chances of being drawn out is reduced by 50%, and no effect on the lenght of the game.

It might not affect the length of game but the integrity and dynamics of the game would certainly be affected by increasing the "re-buy" portion of the game from 1/3 of the game time to 2/3 of the game time.

You can argue whether the changes would be positive or negative, but the difference would be felt.

I see less cards being stamped, and therefore redeemed.

Caleb Rybalka wrote:

gundog wrote:The only disadvantage is if the player only uses one card their chances of being drawn out is reduced by 50%, and no effect on the lenght of the game.

It might not affect the length of game but the integrity and dynamics of the game would certainly be affected by increasing the "re-buy" portion of the game from 1/3 of the game time to 2/3 of the game time.

You can argue whether the changes would be positive or negative, but the difference would be felt.

In what way will the intregrity and dynamics be effected ?

David wrote:I see less cards being stamped, and therefore redeemed

Thats not the case, the 2nd card is used. It just allows the player a bit longer to get the cards stamped.

Caleb Rybalka wrote:

gundog wrote:In some venues you cannot prepay drinks, It can give the player a little bit longer to have their cards stamped thus encouraging responsible drinking.

The best way to encourage responsible drinking is to enjoy them to drink less and buy meals instead. Alcohol is not the only way to stamp up.

If more responsible drinking is truly the aim surely that would be the better goal.

Encouraging players to eat meals rather than consume drinks does not promote responsible drinking. It promotes eatings meals and drinking less. Drinking less does not automatically = responsible drinking.

I agree having a meal is most often the best way to stamp up with out a doubt how ever that said, it can be quite expensive (depending on pub) and there are also time constraints on meals as it is preferred players don't eat at the table etc...

Regarding time constraints and expense, consider what the average budget of poker player would be over the coarse of a 3-4 hour night. If have say $20-$30 dollars for the night, I spent 15-20+ at 6:30pm-7:30pm on 1 meal + 1 drink, then I have a budget for only one other drinking the addition 2-3 hours I am at the venue (unless of coarse I then have to spend more). If I was to instead buy 4 drinks across the that same period I can enjoy one ever hour comfortably and responsibly.

I don't see this having a either a positive or negative effect, I also don't really see how it would impact the dynamic of game either - in the sense that, the minuscule fraction of people that would actually factor in such a structure change to the way they play wouldn't even be worth considering. I might have misunderstood that part if you want to elaborate more.

David wrote:I see less cards being stamped, and therefore redeemed.

TBH - Cards matter, but not as much as you would think. Stamp cards are the product poker leagues "sell" to the venue when signing them up - "We'll bring you X players who will stamp X cards etc..."
At the end of the day, the venues don't judge the poker service on the number of cards the TD said was redeemed, they judge the service on how full the register till's were at the end of the night. Cards on make up 2 hours of 5 hours night. Rego and first session.

Ultimately, I have always thought a better strategy for generating revenue for the venues was to reduce the stress associated with stamping up in a particular time frame and keep bums on seats for longer. The 888PL 10K one card deeps stacks are a testament to this.

1. Players player longer.
2. Players stay longer.
3. Players spend more.
4. The burden of drinking irresponsibly is decreased.
5. Players are happier.
6. Happier players play more.
7. More players = more money in prizes pools.