ShareHeads-up poker has been a topic of debate for quite some time now. Poker where two players compete directly against only each other is considered by many to be the purest form of the game, however, there are several challenges that come with it. One of the most significant is the skill gap between professional players and recreational players and the rate at which the unskilled can lose their bankrolls.
Recently, a Twitter thread posted by Phil Galfond brought up some interesting points about the issue. As a heads-up player who has spent time on the operator's side of things, he sympathises with both sides of the debate and gives a detailed breakdown into why heads-up tables are not available on most sites.
Why Remove Heads-Up Tables?
The reasoning behind removing heads-up tables is simple: weaker players, on average, lose faster s and only to one opponent. This means less time per dollar lost for recreational players and less rake generated by their losses for the operator. It's a clear lose-lose situation.However, some players still want heads-up tables, and operators know that they need to cater to their customers' preferences. If casinos had their way, we’d all exclusively play high margin games like slots. Yet, they still offer table games and sportsbooks, as some customers only enjoy table games, while others play both slots and blackjack. Getting and keeping customers in the door is key, as casino customers spend plenty of money outside of gambling.
In the case of poker, the difference in margins is greater, and adding casino games improves the player experience. In poker, with heads-up tables, it may harm it. So, what's the solution? PokerStars offers HU Zoom, where opponents rotate every hand, which solves half the problem. Stars profits more per heads-up recreational player losses by forcing pros to play with each other. It's a good option, and Phil Galfond views it as the best solution so far.
However, it doesn’t solve the problem of faster losses for recreational players, but maybe that wasn't a huge issue to begin with. Tight recreational players do worse in heads-up, but wild recreational players often don't. Variance is higher in HU, which means more winning days. While losses are faster when measured by time, they are not necessarily faster when measured by the number of hands played.
As a player, Phil Galfond still has big dreams for what online heads-up poker could be. If Run it Once Poker grows in the US, he may yet get to try, but for now heads-up Zoom is a good option and better than nothing at all. That said, it's still missing the game-flow dynamics that many players love.
GGPoker recently launched ELO-like ratings for SNGs, which could potentially match opponents based on their rating. However, this could incentivise multi-accounting, which is a problem in the online poker industry already at the highest stakes.
The decision to remove heads-up tables is primarily driven by the desire to generate more revenue for operators. However, players still want heads-up tables, and operators should cater to those who still love this form of poker. Heads-up Zoom is a good option for now, but the major platforms can do better if they wish.
