Gamblers' Ages

In another thread there's a comment by kewlj regarding the age of casino gamblers. In part kewlj wrote:

...my question is, of that older customer base that I see frequently, is that sustainable for the casinos?

This is a good question.

With the exception of a few casinos that target younger patrons, most casinos do target older patrons. And the reason is simple: older people have the money.

One good indication of a casino's target is the music that is played in the casino.

Now, regarding kewlj's question. There will always be a crowd of people in their 60s and 70s to patronize the casinos. The next generation of 60-70 patrons are now kewlj's age. Deal with that kewlj the next time you refer to old people.

The latest survey I saw says 58% of gamblers are at least 50 years old.

Age 21-3418%
Age 35-49 21%
Age 50-64 33%
Age 65 and over 25%

Not a bad subject and one I’m sure casino execs are spending millions on. For the most part the “Skill” slots failed. I personally see opportunities in the community games where friends can all be involved financially. One wins, they all win. And games that somehow provide opportunities for guys and gals to interact. Or in today’s world, guys and guys or gals and gals.

But yea, the average age of casino players isn’t getting any younger.

There seems to be a relationship between the influx of new casinos in the past 20 or so years and the aging out of the baby boomers.

We now have the greatest number of older folks, ever, and the numbers will only decline once the boomers take their final dirtnap.

Of course with the hordes of folks from the south of the border flocking to America and bringing with them their habit to breed like rabbits, I suspect their numbers will go up while the rest of ours go down.

The average age of gamblers is rapidly going up, and this is eventually going to be a problem for casinos.

Younger people just aren't embracing gambling the way they used to.

It's not just a factor of who has the money to gamble -- that's always been the case.

In recent years, young people just aren't taking to gambling. That's the reason for the introduction of those skill-based machines, though I'm not really seeing them making any appreciable dent in those demographics.

Poker has the same problem. It was traditionally filled with middle aged and older people. Then it blew up on TV, and became "cool" for young people to play, and the average age went way down.

However, as the poker boom died out, and as it became much harder to play online in the US, the younger people didn't get nearly as involved with it. Many of the "young" people circa 2005 are still playing, but they're not so young anymore.

Guess what the most rapidly growing event at the WSOP is?

The Seniors Event -- which is open to ages 50+.

Look around a poker room nowadays, and you'll see relatively few players under 30.

Another industry having age issues? Baseball. That fan base is also aging very rapidly.

I really wonder what the gambling and baseball industries will look like in 50 years. Too bad I probably won't be around to see it.

Dan, why do you feel the Poker Boom went bust? I have a few thoughts but as a pro you obviously have first hand opinions and observations. It obviously grew too fast but it almost died just as fast. Thanks.

There are other businesses dying with age. Coin collecting and stamp collecting and collectibles of all kinds are not having any impact on those under 50.

Lifestyles change. Tastes change.

Does anyone else remember when HORSE RACING was the #1 spectator sport in the USA? It was that way until the early 1970s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

Dan, why do you feel the Poker Boom went bust? I have a few thoughts but as a pro you obviously have first hand opinions and observations. It obviously grew too fast but it almost died just as fast. Thanks.

---

Various things happened at once:

1) Economy crashed in 2008 due to housing bust, so fish didn't have enough money to keep playing (and losing)

2) People got sick of watching it on TV. Novelty was wearing off.

3) Got increasingly harder to deposit money online.

4) The huge influx of players during the boom produced a certain percentage who rose up to become good/great. So once the fish decreased, there was a big group of good players at the top of the "food chain" who weren't there before, with not enough fish to eat.

5) Like any fad, the public started to lose fascination with it.


Being a somewhat known poker pro in the mid-2000s boom years was a weird experience. Tons of strangers (especially around Vegas) recognized me and knew who I was. When I met girls in chat rooms, I would lie about my name and not tell them the truth about what I did for a living, fearing that otherwise I would be a gold digger magnet. Old friends and acquaintances popped up out of the woodwork and wanted to talk to me again, as if it was cool for them just to say they knew me.

This all died out by 2010. But it was so strange going to the supermarket and some random checker would ask me, "Hey Todd, how's poker going these days?"

Poker died because the easy money Chris Moneymaker fad died as people realized it wasn't easy money.

The same thing happened with Bitcoin, and baseball cards in the 1980s and "junior oil stocks" in the 1970s and do you remember when URLs were a hot commodity and people were flipping website names for thousands of dollars?

Thanks Dan, and Alan for your thoughts. What I saw as someone who played neighborhood games and small local (sucker) tournaments was close to your thoughts. I’ll add the fish got slaughtered too quickly both online and in Vegas poker rooms. Not sure there was a way to avoid that but my observations from the Flamingo poker room in the late 00’s was 5-10 local “pros” cleaning out the tourists quickly and then eating themselves.

Seeing Gus Hanson playing a $45-$15 (crazy house hold) at the old O’Sheas was probably a warning sign. And they had to add extra tables due to the amount of people wanting to play with him.

Probably was inevitable but one always wonders if greed killed it too quickly.

Back in the Day there were fewer stimulating activities readily available to people; gambling was toward the top.

Now there are many other things to give us that needed "fix," such as video games.

The casinos need to come up with a new game, hell maybe even a whole new approach / paradigm shift in the gambling experience if they hope to snare the newer generations.

Whoever comes up with and patents such a thing will become wealthy in short order.

Last I heard, Chris Moneymaker was the resident pro at Morongo near Palm Springs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

Thanks Dan, and Alan for your thoughts. What I saw as someone who played neighborhood games and small local (sucker) tournaments was close to your thoughts. I’ll add the fish got slaughtered too quickly both online and in Vegas poker rooms. Not sure there was a way to avoid that but my observations from the Flamingo poker room in the late 00’s was 5-10 local “pros” cleaning out the tourists quickly and then eating themselves.

Seeing Gus Hanson playing a $45-$15 (crazy house hold) at the old O’Sheas was probably a warning sign. And they had to add extra tables due to the amount of people wanting to play with him.

Probably was inevitable but one always wonders if greed killed it too quickly.

---

Gus is a huge cash game loser.

It's amazing he got people backing him for as long as he did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

Thanks Dan, and Alan for your thoughts. What I saw as someone who played neighborhood games and small local (sucker) tournaments was close to your thoughts. I’ll add the fish got slaughtered too quickly both online and in Vegas poker rooms. Not sure there was a way to avoid that but my observations from the Flamingo poker room in the late 00’s was 5-10 local “pros” cleaning out the tourists quickly and then eating themselves.

Seeing Gus Hanson playing a $45-$15 (crazy house hold) at the old O’Sheas was probably a warning sign. And they had to add extra tables due to the amount of people wanting to play with him.

Probably was inevitable but one always wonders if greed killed it too quickly.

---

Gus is a huge cash game loser.

It's amazing he got people backing him for as long as he did.

---

Yeah, he got luckier than an out house mouse in those televised tournaments sucking out on every one. I think he might hold the record for most money lost in the online cash games but not sure. I think it was about the time of the Wynn opening that he disappeared out of Las Vegas because he owed so much money.

A stiff rake has a lot to do with cash games going down. People run out of money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

Dan, why do you feel the Poker Boom went bust? I have a few thoughts but as a pro you obviously have first hand opinions and observations. It obviously grew too fast but it almost died just as fast. Thanks.

---

UIGEA and Party Poker (which was where the majority of college kids played in 2003-2005) pulling out of the US market was a huge blow, and then Black Friday shutting down the biggest remaining legit site PokerStars pretty much killed it.