That is such a ****ty bull**** answer. A sign of crappy management. If the players want to play the game and can put it together, run it.

Casino AZ has a lot of cruddiness in my opinion. Like the rule that they won't reduce rake 6 handed if there is another pile of chips on the table, even if the player's been gone 20 minutes. In this situation I generally will ask for the reduction anyway and then when they refuse, will sit out my next blind "until we get some more players". This often is successful in stalling the game since many live players don't want to play with 5 or less, especially for full rake. I've actually had this successfully get us a rake reduction despite the 6 spot rule.

Incidently, I have had fort McDowell state the same rule but the Gila River casinos seem to go with the players dealt into the hand, rather than the players theoretically seated at the table.

How many low limit mix players have ever been in the room at the same time at CAZ?
That is probably where you answer lies in why the game doesn't get spread.

Define the "mix" of games you want to play.

It's a double edged sword because we can't identify ourselves as mixed players without a game to play.

I have gone and asked them if I got enough players would they spread it and they have told me no.

I found out a little bit more.

The issue is that there is not a defined approval FOR "mix" to be played at a "raked" level at TSR.
In order for a low limit ( raked/jackpot ) "mix" game to run , a clear proposal has to be written, ( including limits, games allowed, jackpot eligibility(UNlikely), with explanations supporting and defining the whys and whats) submitted to and approved by state gaming.

The reality is, there just hasn't been sufficient interest to warrant undergoing that process.

Then why can't it be a timed game with no jackpot?

At wild horse they had a list started for 4-8 mix and 8-16 mix a couple weeks ago. The games never started, but does this mean they actually had a defined mix they were going to play that was approved by gaming?

Or maybe they were going to make them timed games, as Pope suggested.

This definitely seems to be the most logical way to approach it, since then you could have a different mix and throw in games that don't fit under any of the jackpots.

The Harrah's mixed game is a rake game, I'm fairly sure, but I guess they must have that specific 3 game mix approved. I'd be interested to know if it's a jackpot game.

I don't know what follows as fact, my guess/opinion would be that since the time collection is set at $7 per half for the current time games/limits, the same rate would need to be used for any low limit time( mix) game.( IF low limit was allowed under the current time collection agreement, which is doubtful, see "A." below)

So the first obstacle:
Low limit mix players aren't likely to pay $7 a half to play( for very long at least).

More likely
A. low limit mix games are not defined/listed in the limits
already approved = approval process

B. IF they wanted a reduced time rate: again = approval process

Hell, almost any game would be better off with a $7 per person time rake than the rake they are currently paying. Maybe not the Omaha and Stud games...

At $6 a hand, that means that if 10 hands are dealt a session (not all getting max rake) that a time payment would be better than a rake.

I'm pretty sure most of the players in that game could do the math and figure out that they're still coming out ahead on that price.

Im not saying that logically they wouldn't be ahead. Its like pulling teeth sometimes to get $7 collection out of the 40/80 players, i cant imagine the resistance from 4/8 or 8/16 "mix" players

What about a 15/30 or 20/40 (time rake) mix game? Would they spread either of those, or have they in the past?

In the recent past (last half of last year) we've had a few 20/40 mixed games at CAZ. It was just for fun and only occurred a small handful of times.

Wild Horse had 15/30 mix the first week it opened. I believe that was a time game.