Home / Community / Forum / Support Area / Poker News /


RING GAMES COMING TO SCHOOL - Sat Nov 23, 2002, 12:00 PM
Deleted user
I am really sticking my neck out here and I know I am going to get my wrist slapped but what the heck!!

I am going to request on Monday that we focus on putting ring games into the school using school bankroll to buyin with. I believe this will place more "value" on the school bankroll and that has always been my desire.

Note that there will be some work required in order to get these going but I want to see them as quickly as possible.

I will talk with the team on Monday and let you all know what sort of timeline we will be looking at. We are going to be making some significant changes to the way the ring games work. One example will be joining a ring game from observing it and choosing your seat. I believe that we can put ring games up and continue to work on them rather than leave them in beta mode where they are really not being used at all.

I would like to introduce tournament "fees" and "rake" for the ring games too. This will make the school play much more lifelike.

Comments welcomed

Sat Nov 23, 2002, 12:18 PM
Deleted user
Ok, a comment (just a guess) ... unless there's something at stake in the ring games (leagues, sponsorship points, 'Big One Ring Game qualification' or somesuch) , they won't take off. In other words, you'll need to give a 'meaning' to bankroll, beyond personal pride that is.
People love the big-bet stuff for various reasons, but a few of them are long-term qualification chances to the WSOP, plus sponsorship chances. You'll need this kind of incentive to make ring games popular.

Good luck

Sat Nov 23, 2002, 12:21 PM
Deleted user
Sounds great ! I'm so glad you did'nt tell them Mark that this would have been done ages ago, but you were busy straightening out my family, that u got side tracked.
I like the idea of the money coming out of our Bankroll, as it is reality. Keep up the good work
Sat Nov 23, 2002, 12:46 PM
Deleted user

This is great news! I think that this is a critical step forward for PSO, but in order for this to have real meaning, I think that you need to take a holistic approach to the "value" of PSO dollars.

For instance, I don't believe you can continue to offer so much tourney added dollars unless the rake and tourney fees used to determine PSO's "budget" for the added dollars support it. I recall someone calculating that the added dollars for all the tourney's at PSO was some outrageous number, like $40K per week. So the point is that you can't give out added dollars like you can print them in the back room but then expect the dollars to have some intrinsic value.

Sat Nov 23, 2002, 01:00 PM
Deleted user
Fair point Bill. I will have to look at that too.

Glenn, I think that you may be surprised just how much value most members actually place on their bankroll.

Making ring game play use the bankroll might have an effect that surprises many.

I am open minded as to how we might keep score with ring games. I think that the bankroll will do a good job all by itself but I am willing to listen and discuss this issue this weekend before I talk to the team on Monday.

If I incentivize ring games the funding will have to come from the current funding of the tournament leagues but anything is possible.

Sat Nov 23, 2002, 01:16 PM
TrumpinJoe's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,557
Reading between the lines, I interpret this to mean the rumours of resetting the bankrolls to start the new year are unfounded.

Could we get a definitive statement on this?
Sat Nov 23, 2002, 02:24 PM
Deleted user
as one of the lucky players that built a bankroll early after the school introduced larger buy ins (than the 20$ we starteed with) i have found that the down side of this was i have never had a problem with bankroll and will join any event (freeroll or 200$) event as placing in either means the same to me (nothing in bankroll terms)

i would like that the school announces a PSO WSOP (as was stated before i joined 12 months ago) soon for a quiet period in the POKER world with supersats and large buy in events this is the only way that bankroll will have any meaning.

even telling us NOW that the school wsop will be next november will give us something to aim at. the good thing about this would be that the events would look after themselves with no additiional cost to the school as the winners would get BANKROLL and bragging rights.

the only extra work for the shool would be to copy out the schedule of the WSOP (or WPO) and add it to schedule with the sats and supersats that go with it.

there could be 3 or 4 major school events like this a year and players have to build up enough bankroll to take part in them THEREFORE givin bankroll a meaning which at present it hasnt got (apart from the i want bank in top 10 )
Sat Nov 23, 2002, 03:48 PM
Deleted user
The only way ring games will have any meaning as a
learning tool is if results for all players are available
to all players. This means that if school bankroll is
to be used in the ring game, there must be a way to
track buyins and cahsouts for the ring games. Also,
there MUST be a rake or time charge.
It's easy to say tournaments are a waste of time and
the only way make money is in cash games. I'd like
to see how many can prove this over time.
As I have noted before, some well known poker
writers say that almost NO ONE beats the low or
mid level casino cash games over time. Others estimate
that the number is anywher from less than 1% to as
much as 10% of players. This is really about the
only thing I am interested in finding out... aloha
Sat Nov 23, 2002, 04:14 PM
Deleted user
Mark, just a thought.
This idea is not my own, it had been advanced in several form quite a few times in the past on the forums. What seems to be the overriding theme in the posts here is to make the bankroll have more meaning.

If the bankroll/buy in system was set up so that all players had to work thier way up though a system of graduated buy-in games. I.E. If I have to refill my bankroll at some point due to poor BR management coupled with poor play, I would then only be able to play on ring tables untill I've won enough to buy on to a higher buy in table and so on all the way up to some very high buy in tables, say $1000 or $5000.

What is emediately obvious is that this would creat a set of divisions amoung the population of the school along the lines of who could buy onto what tables. This would be a good thing and force players to improve their games if they wished to play for the bigger money.
It would also provide another benefit to the players who would be playing on a table with people who were either at or above each others' skill level.

I know you have so much you want to do with the school, and you can't do everything at once, and perhaps there is a good reason why this is not a good idea. I just want you to have more to think about :lol:

Sat Nov 23, 2002, 04:38 PM
Deleted user
Paul, in principal I agree with your comments however, it leaves me with a dilemna. If everyone started at the same point your idea would be good I believe. But players have already built a bankroll and will be very protective of it.

On the other hand , in the real world we all have different bankrolls so I think everyone starting from where they are now would be workable.

I think that putting everyone to the same level to start this would be a mistake and those that have already amassed a big bankroll deserve to advance with them in tact.

I certainly feel that we need to track the movement of bankroll for all players in ring games only and tournaments seperately. I think this can be done without too much trouble but again this is a question for the team.

p.s. Joe, you will not get a statement until I have made my mind up. That is the purpose of this discussion.
Sat Nov 23, 2002, 04:58 PM
Deleted user

Actually I don't think it will be necessary to reset the bankrolls to implement what I have suggested. I will use myself as an example.
Now I'm not one of the schools' top players but some time back I did manage to win a 2.5k added tournament, and currently have about 7k bankroll. Under the system that I'm suggesting there are several things that could happen. I could get foolish and get on to a $5000 table where I am most likely to get my but kicked. I could decide that I can safely play on say $200 buy in tables where hopefully I have a better chance of winning, albeit a much smaller pay off. Or, I could play it safe and play on even smaller buy in tables and virtually never substantually change my bankroll level.

The resualt would be that we would all kind of rise or fall to our current level of competence.

As for tracking bankrolls of players, this would be good for gathering intellegence on the habits and play styles of other players, something any good poker player would do. but to me is actually a seperate issue.
Sat Nov 23, 2002, 06:24 PM
Deleted user
Mark , you stuck your neck out, now I'll stick out mine.

Ring games will never become popular unless bankroll takes on more real meaning than it currently has.

An example - the other day I played in a $50 multi, $1,000 added (or similar). There were 35 players or so ... the added money created a huge overlay. Playing a ring game at level odds, or worse -with a rake- would be madness if such an 'added money' tournament were available.

Also - PSO people put in many many hours in multis + sats in order to earn league sponsorship points. Not because this is a great way to make real money, but because it's exciting , with the bonus that one might earn a real-money tournament buyin.

Also - by playing in multis + sats we get to qualify + upgrade our entry to the Big One II, a long-term project if you like, with interesting prospects.

Playing ring games for play-money might be fun, but there will need to be a 'bankroll incentive' to make those games really popular. Fact. It's a bet, if you want. :wink: $100 to your favourite charity, as long as we can agree on terms ?


Sat Nov 23, 2002, 06:35 PM
Deleted user
glenn is always hogging the jam...glenn is always right!!! : Seriously, i dont think there will be much interest in the ring games unless there is something to play for...agree with most everything glenn said...
Great News about ring games - Sat Nov 23, 2002, 07:04 PM
Deleted user
Hi Mark

I am very happy to hear the news about the ring games. Here are a few suggestions/comments.

I would like to have limit as well as pot limit.

rake or time charge are very important (even tips might be usefull)

Stats- would like to see money won, hourly rate etc

Eliminate the added money in tournies and also take a 6% rake on the prize money. Actually you could probably fund added money in 1 or 2 toruies a week with the tip money from the ring games.

Sat Nov 23, 2002, 07:06 PM
Deleted user
who knows, the ring games might take off and be abig hit, but without any incentive, i dont think they will. i also have to agree with others, in saying that bankrolls need to have some meaning. i dont know how this can be resolved, but hopefully something will be worked out.

i also like ironsides idea, about holding smoe tye of wsop event for pso. you had mentioned this 10 or 12 months ago, and we all figured it would be very very difficult to build a 10k plus bankroll, as all tournies were only 20 dollar and sats only 5 dollar. but it gave us all something to shoot for. if you were to hold some event like this, instead of having sponsorship points available to win (unless you have endless pockets mark! ) you could put up prizes of scholarships, such as free months or a year to the winner. and that way, when the following years event comes up, the current champion will still be in the school to defend the title. i am just trying to throw out some fun ideas here, if i can think of anything else, i will add to this..........

jmuzzey lsogc
Sat Nov 23, 2002, 07:22 PM
Deleted user
what if bankroll points could be traded in for seat points or perhaps trade in $100,000 points for $100 credit at a casino of choice. I don't know if PSOs' budget could sustain this but it's an idea.
Sat Nov 23, 2002, 07:55 PM
Deleted user
My 2 cents is i would like to have ring become a success,what i would do is to drop all added money to multi table events. with maybe only a weekly one on Friday or Saturday night. give Everyone in a seperate bankroll $1000 to play with from Sunday morning to Saturday at 4:00pm with top 50 players with highest money count play in a big added game of 10k no limit(all starting amount same as a multi table tourny) every Saturday night! with that money going into regular bankroll! I think that will generate more play in rings and add to bankroll no waiting for new game!24 7 play with tables of 10/20 ! might be alot of work for your team but... ring games would became popular i think :lol: ! JON "ENOCHO,"ENOCHS Isogc
Sun Nov 24, 2002, 12:21 AM
Deleted user
If you are concerned about people who already built up their bankrolls, how about seperate bankrolls for tournamnets and ring games?

I believe this is already done in the system anyway. Don't allow refills and let people use their bankroll for some type of prize. If everyone starts at $1,000 then maybe people could use, say, $5,000 to buy up a level in the next big one, you know, go from an "A" to a "B." Or something like that. And if there is a rake or time charge, it may turn out that nobody is actually mking any money. Now wouldn't that be interesting.

Peace, Starrs
Sun Nov 24, 2002, 01:50 AM
Deleted user
Using the same bankroll for tournaments and ring games is just a terrible, terrible idea. No exaggeration.

I have already posted elsewhere what scoring system I would like to see for ring games, so I won't repeat it here. Though I do think it is the best way for realistic, meaninful games, with bankroll that will mean something, along with a built in skill filter and incentive scheme.
Sun Nov 24, 2002, 04:04 AM
Deleted user
My goal is to more or less force players to be all rounders.

I believe that you can walk into almost any card room in the world (maybe with the exception of Binions during the WSOP)and find very few, if any of these rare types of poker players.

I will name a few so you can see the type of standard I believe I can achieve in pokerschool online eventually.

Doyle Brunson
Erik Seidel
Johnny Chan
Chip Reese

I defy anyone to convince me that any of the above players would be considered a fish at ANY, I mean ANY poker table. The same cannot be said for players like:

Phil Hellmuth
Phillip Ivey
Daniel Negreanu
T.J Cloutier

The above lists are by no means complete.

When PokerSchool Online was conceived I had very big ideas for it. Those ideas are all still valid and I will continue to develop them. In the beginning I had 2 dilemnas.

1. My software would only deal tournaments.
2. Everyone prefered No Limit Holdem.

It was obvious that in order for me to get the school off the ground I would need to make it lean towards the above. So, the school has always been primarily a No Limit Holdem tournament school. Coincidentally that happens to be the most popular tournament played worldwide today and attracts the largest pay days for the money finishers and of course it is the WSOP main event game.

I believe that focus on NLHE has helped towards the achievements in the last few weeks at Foxwoods. I am very happy with that.

Some people never play ring games. They are happy to play tournaments only. However, I never claimed that I would make Pokerschool Online a tournament only school.

I do not have all the answers yet but I WILL find them. One of the things that sprung to mind this morning as I read through this thread was this:

At the current level of membership I cannot afford to put out more sponsorship points. The budget allocated to sponsorship points is already spoken for in the current leagues. As we move into January and new year I WILL introduce ring games. I also WILL incentivize people to play in them. I am currently happy with the way the sponsorship points work. "If it aint broke don't fix it"

I am also happy with the Big One as a long term promotion. I am not looking to change that anytime in the near future. You have to realize that behind the scenes there is a lot of programming that goes into making all this work with the minimum of intervention from the staff at pokerschool. Just this past week we had to install an updated operating system to our web server and many things broke with our automated systems. If I am happy with the systems in place I am very reluctant to change them.

So, here is what sprung to mind for 2003:

The Big One III begins and follows the same format as The Big One II.

Ring games are introduced where school members have to use their existing bank roll. Maybe I slightly change the criteria for a new member and refilling and maybe the amount that gets refilled is changed. I am not sure yet.

However, here is the main point. Winning sponsorship points becomes dependent on a a certain criteria being met with ones bankroll in relation to ring games.

I am not sure if this would be either practical or reasonable in terms of programming , but it might be interesting.

I could see me making all the leagues have the same sponsorship points available as now and then setting the above mentioned ring game bankroll criteria. Don't know what that is yet but basically, if a sponsorship points winner did NOT meet the ring game requirement then his sponsorship points would be forfeited. If he did meet the criteria then the points would be awarded.

Aha, I hear some of the critics saying. Mark will be better off because he will not have to payout the points most months.

WRONG!! I could roll over every month to the next month all the points that were unwon in any league.

Aha, they say again. What if the points are not won at the end of the year? Well that is an easy one.

At the end of the year, any sponsorship points that have not been won could go into That years Big One.

An alternative would be for me to try to guess how many points were likely NOT to be won based on the ring game qualification and then offer those as bonus sponsorship points for winners that do have the ring game qualification.

Again, I am thinking out loud and looking for feedback. When responding just remember the following:

1. I WILL be introducing ring games.

2. I will incentivize ring game play from the current sponsorship points budget.

3. I have not decided what the ring game qualification will be.

4. I am not looking to gain any kind of financial edge.

5. My main goal is to produce poker players eventually that can walk into any poker room anywhere in the world and no matter what game they sit down at they can compete.



Getting PokerStars is easy: download and install the PokerStars game software, create your free player account, and validate your email address. Clicking on the download poker button will lead to the installation of compatible poker software on your PC of 51.7 MB, which will enable you to register and play poker on the PokerStars platform. To uninstall PokerStars use the Windows uninstaller: click Start > Control Panel and then select Add or Remove programs > Select PokerStars and click Uninstall or Remove.

Copyright (c) PokerSchoolOnline.com. All rights reserved, Rational Group, Douglas Bay Complex, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 1DZ. You can email us on support@pokerschoolonline.com