Casino Blog

eCogra Survey for Internet Poker

According to this survey the typical Internet poker player was likely to (% Internet
poker players):

• Be male (73.8%)
• Be aged 26-35 (26.9%)
• Play 2 to 3 times per week (26.8%)
• Have played for 2 to 3 years (23.6%) • Play for between 1 to 2 hours per session (33.3%) • Play one (24.1%) or two (24%) tables at a time
• Consider the monthly bonus (30.8%) to be the most important factor in deciding where
to play
• Play both cash games and tournaments (34%)
• Play at big-blind (minimum stake) levels of $0.50 to $2.00 (61.2%)
• Play with 6-10% of their bankroll at a table at anyone time (23%)
• Use the chat facility but not very often (37.8%)
• Claim that they are “average” in terms of skill level
• Feel that there is slightly more skill involved in poker than luck (31.9%)

Men were significantly more likely than women to play Internet poker (almost 3:1 in favour of men), and were significantly more likely to be younger players. Men were also more motivated to gamble online for financial reasons when playing poker, and for excitement, and women reported higher levels of motivation for social reasons or avoidance measures (e.g. boredom and taking their minds off other things). This is largely consistent with gender differences and motivations for casino play as discussed above. Men are also more likely to play more frequently, for longer periods of time, with more of their money at the table, at higher stakes tables and play more than one table at a time than women.

A series of factors were identified which had a significant influence on the money that Internet poker players reported winning and losing each month.
• Those who reported doing financially better were those who were:
o less likely to chase losses
o were more likely to play at more sites
o likely to listen to music when playing
o play more tables at the same time
o play with a smaller percentage of their bankroll
o play to win money
o play more frequently.

• Those who perceived themselves as more skilful or felt that poker is more about skill were also more
likely to do well.

It is important to note that playing at more Internet poker tables simultaneously (multi-tabling) only had a positive impact up to a point, as results indicated a curvilinear relationship in which profitability goes down when playing more than four tables at a time. In poker circles there has been a debate about whether it is more financially effective to play one table at a time while paying attention to other players and occurrences at the table even when not involved in the hand, or whether it’s better playing basic strategy on many tables at the same time. Results from the study clearly support the latter, in that players playing between two and four tables at a time did financially better overall (the best being four). Playing any more than four tables at a time led to a lower reported financial outcome (see Figure 1). This may be due to the fact that playing more tables maximises the player’s chances of winning more money up until the point at which the number of games occurring at one time causes a form of “cognitive overload” which may lead to mistakes, poor judgement and/or missing opportunities. It may also be the case that those playing one table at a time do not actually pay close attention to the other players or if they do perhaps they overestimate the value of past behaviour of other players. What is clear is that more research is needed to elucidate the nature of multi-tabling behaviour and its relationship to gathering information and financial success.

A similar curvilinear relationship exists between bankroll management and profitability. Playing with a smaller percentage of your bankroll (i.e. money set aside for gambling at one time) tended to have a positive impact on financial outcome up to the point where players were playing with less than 2%. Players playing with less than 2% tended to be less financially successful than those playing with between 2% and 20% of their bankroll. The optimum range to maximise profitability was playing with between 2% to 10% of the bankroll at any one table. There is common understanding that playing with too much of your bankroll at any one time leaves you open to risking too much of your bankroll in one hand, and then ultimately to chance. Financial success in poker is considered to be a long term affair with the acknowledgement that even the best players are vulnerable to statistical variance e.g. “suck outs” or “bad beats”. However, playing with less than 2% of your bankroll, as supported by the findings of this study, may mean forgoing potential profitability given that it is possible to play with a higher percentage of one’s bankroll, whilst still protecting oneself from statistical variance or “bad luck”. It may also be the case that those who are able to play with less than 2% of their bankroll may be less concerned about the outcome of the gamble, given that the implications for winning or losing would be less significant given the size of their bankroll. This might suggest that such poker players
would play more hands and exhibit less discipline and control (i.e. play loose).

Trying to develop a model that predicted financial performance when playing Internet poker was more successful than for Internet casino players. One of the more original findings from this research was that those playing at more Internet poker sites reported a better financial outcome. This might be explained by players playing on a variety of different sites, who take advantage of more bonuses. However, bonuses are often proportional so this benefit may be limited to the sign-up. Probably more important to success in playing more sites is that competitors do not learn their style and are able to gather less information. The finding that players played better when listening to music is an interesting one. Past research (Parmenter and Parke, 2006) has identified a link between gambling behaviour and music. It was found that when gambling on Internet roulette while listening to dance music, gamblers were more likely to place more bets and take more risks. The implications for this study would be that players listening to music may have been playing more loosely and more aggressively, with possibly more bluffing. However, the exact relationship between profitability in poker and listening to music needs to be determined by future research in an empirical ecologically valid setting.

Results showed that being financially motivated to gamble, but not motivated to gamble in order to relieve boredom, yielded the best financial outcomes for Internet poker players. This makes intuitive sense given that those who play to win money may be more disciplined, more motivated to improve their game (e.g. practice more often; read literature; visit forums, share information with other players) while those motivated to avoid boredom may be tempted to play more hands, take more risks and perhaps not place developing their game
as a priority.

Those perceiving themselves to be more skilful, and poker to be more a game of skill were also more likely to report winning. To date the extent of the level of skill involved in poker is still up for debate, with this argument being a key tool in the US legal debate in trying to defend poker as a game of skill rather than a form of gambling. However from a psychological point of view, a common bias when estimating levels of control and skill is what is referred to as “attributional bias” (Bernstein, Stephan & Davis, 1979) whereby in unsuccessful outcomes people attribute the outcome externally (e.g. chance, bad luck or bad timing) whereas if they were winning they would feel that it was to do with internal factors, (e.g. skill, discipline and hard work). As a result, it is difficult to determine the exact relationship between skill estimations and profitability, and this should be addressed through future research.

More frequent play was also positively associated with financial performance. The reasons for this may be twofold: those playing better, more profitable poker will be more motivated to play more frequently; and those making profits in the long term will increase those profits as they increase levels of play. This should not be taken to mean that players will automatically win more money if they play more poker and therefore, this finding should be treated with caution. It should not be surprising that more Internet poker players claim to win money each month than Internet casino players, given that casino players play against a house edge and Internet poker players play against each other (albeit whilst paying for use of software through a rake or ante). This may also be due to the fact that Internet poker players can play at lower stakes (and therefore lose less money). Therefore they have the opportunity to play against other, possibly less skilled players or “fish”, rather than against a bookmaker.

Around 12% of players pretended to be a different gender when playing online. Those who always swapped genders when playing poker reported having less profitable play than any other type of player. This finding is consistent with Parke, Wood, Griffiths, and Rigbye (2006) who found that gender swapping during poker play was the number one predictor of gambling problems when playing Internet poker. In this study the authors concluded that these players may have been less successful as a consequence of over estimating the advantage of playing poker as a different sex. More research is needed to determine whether this is something that players do with the intention of controlling the outcome of the game, or whether they do it in order to ”escape” everyday life and use an online profile to dissociate or ‘zone out’ from their real life persona.

save this post as PDF

(No Ratings Yet)

Loading ...

This entry was posted on Thursday, April 10th, 2008 at 16:15 and is filed under Casino News (tags: none). You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

None

Comments are closed.

eCogra Survey for Internet Poker

Related Posts: