“Just a thought:
No one would argue with your math. The question that I would have is, “Is the argument even relevant?” Perhaps it would be relevant if you were trying to figure out the potential longevity of the game in question, but past that, im not sure it really addresses whether the game is beatable or not.
The question i would want to ask would be, “Do you, personally, play 25 hands/hour?” Wouldn’t it be more relevant to estimate how much you, specifically, would have to overcome to figure out whether the game was +EV for you specifically?”
It would be very hard to argue with the math since I used my Iphone calculator to come up with the numbers:)
Certainly my post goes directly to the longevity of the game. That is the primary reason you see games come and go. It requires quite a player field to support a game where the house is taking over 365,000 a year out of the pool!
Now as to the relevance of the games profitability certainly the games longevity indirectly reflects the profitability in the long run of playing in the game. As to what is mentioned however certainly you could use a more sophisticated technique to determine your yearly cost. Say the game is 10 handed and you play 10 hours a day your 1/10 of the rake is 36,500. Assuming your a solid aggressive player your cost to play is going to be less the loose players in the game. So even assuming 20% less its going to cost you almost 30,000 a year to play.
Now we have not added in the other costs. Tipping the dealer 1.00 a hand you win, tipping the cocktail waitress 1.00 every time you order, tipping the floor etc. This could easily take you back to the 10% of the 365,000.
The best approach would be to put in 5 years playing and see what the spreadsheets show:) However my approach will give you a general idea of where you stand. I really do not know any Omaha 8 players that can make 36,000 a year playing 8-16 Omaha 8 and you need to make that just to be around even:)
Also I have received quite a few emails regarding my post where I indicate that there is no money available to be won in the long run in the 8-16 Omaha 8 games.
I have to strongly disagree with you regarding the 8-16 with a 12-24 omaha 8 games at the Venetian. I have played in these games when I get into town and have to say the caliber of play is dismal to say the least. Very few of the players have a clue how to play in a ring game of Omaha 8. Its by far the softest game I have ever seen.”
Well……that is a strong statement to say the least:) And I tend to agree with you regarding the caliber of play. Although there are a handful of younger players in the game that play a pretty strong game of Omaha 8.
What I like to do is try to see how much is available after the rake for the winning players in the game. Essentially you take the money donated by the bad players less the rake and that is the amount to be split up by the winning players.
So the first thing to do is figure out what the house is taking out of the game. The rake is 4.00 per hand and lets assume about 25 hands per hour in a full game. That 100.00 an hour that the house is taking out of the game. Now lets make a conservative assumption that the game goes 10 hours a day all year round. Thats 1,000 a day rake or 365,000 a year out of the game.
Now these assumptions are conservative since the game goes usually much longer then 10 hrs a day and often times they get more then 1 table spread.
So in a game the losing players have to contribute at least 365,000 a year so that the winning players can at least break even….!
Now using even the most basic analytical evaluation of the game in my opinion this set of facts precludes almost anyone from producing a profit in the long run in the 8-16 Omaha 8 game. In addition moving up to 15-30 with a 20-40 Kill with the same rake is borderline at best for a top player.
I welcome anyone to comment on this as its a discussion I feel is worth pursuing.