i've never fully understood your differentiation between a homegame and a
casino game.
It's probably difficult to understand, at least in part, because I am
putting a bit value (for non-computer geeks: that's a yes/no value)
against something that's actually a spectrum. Your characterization of a
"pure home game" is pretty accurate, in my view. The PL home game I've
told you about (run by the person I call "Andrew" in my journal) is much
more what is a typical home game: dealer's choice, goofy games, for stakes
that don't matter too much to the people who attend.
As we've talked about in email before, I think it's hard to move around
on that spectrum (i.e., moving a home game to more of a casino-style
game with higher stakes). As I've told you of in email long ago, I've
seen home games die and people quit playing over escalating limits and
peer pressure to play higher. You managed that well, and evolved your
goofy $1/$2 home game into a nice casino-style game. I probably
didn't adapt as much as I should have over the year and a half. It's
hard to see how much things have really changed when one shows up
nearly every week for more than a year. As you pointed out, I'm the
top attender according to the RSVP data, so I, more than anyone, have
missed the changes as they've evolved over time.
Greg added:
i think the only primary solutions are: 1) put on some thick skin, and 2)
treat it more like a 'casino," if that's what it takes.
The thick skin I have, after all, I play at Foxwoods and other
(sometimes-)unfriendly casino environments! I agree with your solutions,
and think that I'll probably implement them. I'll be headed in this
week in a casino mindset. It means, for me, being a bit less myself and
more formal (like I would show up for a business meeting; that's
typically the mindset I have when I play very serious poker). But, I
think it's the right thing to do. I should bite the bullet and admit
that you're game is more casino than home game these days, and, like one
should in all poker situations -- adjust.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
casino mindset
Date: 2005-01-04 02:44 (UTC)Greg wrote:
It's probably difficult to understand, at least in part, because I am putting a bit value (for non-computer geeks: that's a yes/no value) against something that's actually a spectrum. Your characterization of a "pure home game" is pretty accurate, in my view. The PL home game I've told you about (run by the person I call "Andrew" in my journal) is much more what is a typical home game: dealer's choice, goofy games, for stakes that don't matter too much to the people who attend.As we've talked about in email before, I think it's hard to move around on that spectrum (i.e., moving a home game to more of a casino-style game with higher stakes). As I've told you of in email long ago, I've seen home games die and people quit playing over escalating limits and peer pressure to play higher. You managed that well, and evolved your goofy $1/$2 home game into a nice casino-style game. I probably didn't adapt as much as I should have over the year and a half. It's hard to see how much things have really changed when one shows up nearly every week for more than a year. As you pointed out, I'm the top attender according to the RSVP data, so I, more than anyone, have missed the changes as they've evolved over time.
Greg added:
The thick skin I have, after all, I play at Foxwoods and other (sometimes-)unfriendly casino environments! I agree with your solutions, and think that I'll probably implement them. I'll be headed in this week in a casino mindset. It means, for me, being a bit less myself and more formal (like I would show up for a business meeting; that's typically the mindset I have when I play very serious poker). But, I think it's the right thing to do. I should bite the bullet and admit that you're game is more casino than home game these days, and, like one should in all poker situations -- adjust.