The floor at a casino is selectively managing who gets to play in which games. Specifically, they want players to play at the skill level which they think is appropriate for that player (i.e. higher stakes for better players). Lesser skilled players can still play in the higher stake games, but competent players are highly encouraged/pressured to play higher. Also, certain players are discouraged from juicy games.

Should poker rooms be able to 'manage' who gets to play what?

In my view, players should be free to choose the stakes and games they want to play in for as long or as little as they want. It is a public casino (not home game) for a reason.

It would be great to hear live pros opinions on this and how they would deal with it.

Casino is going to do what it can to maximize profits. if making the games fairer keeps newer players in the game longer and increases their player pool, which means they can keep more tables running, that is what they will do.

From a customer/player perspective, we are risking our own money. I get it that the casino is maximizing profits, but they are asking players to risk more money and some are less comfortable with it than others. So as a player, how do you approach it? And for argument sake, let's take playing at another casino off the table.

I think that's messed up. Then again nobody cares what I think.

How does the casino even know a player's skill level?

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Are you saying that if you want to play 2/5, he refuses to seat you and forces you to play 5/10 or nothing?

They mostly judge based on who is winning / losing over some reasonable (but still short) amount of time. Overhear conversations among players on who is good, doing well. Dealers talk. Eyeball people stacks and guessimate results.

Its a terrible idea/policy, management should not allow or encourage it, gaming comission could get involved

Trying to categorize players into skill levels when 90%+ should be losing after rake is more than foolish

Sounds like a good way to direct wealthier players to higher stakes. You can't tell how good someone is over a few weeks by eyeballing their stacks but you can figure out who consistently buys in for the max and has unlimited rebuys. Those guys are either wealthy, pros, or degens, all of whom the casino would want in bigger games I guess.

Still seems messed up though.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Seconding this question. How exactly are they pressuring people?

This is fine:
"B.M., 2/5."
"You're fifth. There's a seat open at 5/10 if you want. You're a good player, you can handle yourself there."

This is not:
"B.M., 2/5."
"We don't really like you playing 2/5. Play 5/10 instead."

That is, encouraging you to play higher is much more acceptable than discouraging you from playing lower.

Something like the 2nd. Making you feel less welcomed if otherwise.

I'd either leave or they could give me the extra $1K play the bigger game deep.

This. No one knows my cumulative results but me. No one knows my income but me (and the IRS). No one knows my net worth but me. No one knows my bankroll but me. No one knows my psychological bankroll—how comfortable I am risking and sometimes losing certain amounts of money—but me. No one knows my varied reasons for playing poker but me.

If someone tried to push me to play higher than I wanted to play, I suppose I would try to laugh it off with a comment like "I wish I could afford to play that game" or "I'm still just learning" or "but I can barely hold my own in [whatever lower-stakes game I want to play]."

Seems pretty -EV if it's done on skill alone.

Better players playing at higher stakes will not = more rake.

If better players are being put into bigger games that are just harder then they are just going to go elsewhere. They want to hunt the fish, and if they aren't allowed at that casino then they will go elsewhere.

Maybe it's a strategy to fill more tables overall. If the low stakes are shark free the fish enjoy themselves more.

I don't know. Sounds like a stupid policy but they must have some economic justification.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Seems pretty 'Stars-esque' so not beyond the realms of possibility...

what is "something like"?

You need to be more specific. Poker rooms do try to get the cards in the air for their bigger games.

If they're talking you into playing it because they know you're capable and they wanna get the game going, it is a lot different then them not allowing you to sit at a lower stakes game. It's a big difference.

What percentage of 0% acceptable is much more acceptable?

The floor is not there to tell players what to play, but to accommodate players getting to play what they wish to play.

The opinion of the floor/brush on where a player should play should be left in the toilet along with all the other **** they think that they have no business expressing to their customers.

Yeah I would be calling the gaming commision.

So, if they are not refusing to seat you in the game of your choice, what's the problem?

I would honestly find a new room if one is available. If one is not, and they are not actually forcing you into games, I would tell them to bug-off, I play the game I want to play.

You will need to give an exact example or 3 would be even better before I will even comment on whether what they are doing is ok or not.

When you say "they are selectively managing who gets to play at certain games" to me that means they are refusing to let players play where they want. I highly doubt that is the case, so please be more specific with examples.

fwiw if the games are the same limit, they have every right to sit him where they want.

How do they respond if you say you aren't rolled for the higher game, or you only feel comfortable at a lower stake?

Say your SO doesn't like you playing poker, but they agree to let you play only if you play at X stake and no higher?

As soon as a read the question I felt the vagueness was designed to hide something. It is reminding me of a player complaining because a staff member may have suggested to a player who had no understanding of the game that they might be better off trying the smaller game. I have seen that several times where it was quite warranted (the player simply did not have a clue of what was going on) and almost everytime I heard someone at the table complain about it. (I'm not talking about players not playing well I mean they didn't understand the basics of playing poker) and the criticism usually sounded a lot like this question.

What's wrong with just saying "If I wanted to play 5/10 I would have signed up for 5/10" and asking again for 2/5? Who cares if the floor does or doesn't make you "feel welcome", they aren't sitting at your table.