The big obstacle at FW was union issues, not operational.
Once that was solved, they were able to do this in a month or two.
Dozens of poker rooms in the US do this, and have done so for years.
It's a big plus for dealers, players, and the house.
It's not inventing the wheel.

If I remember correctly, the Foxwoods dealers voted to not keep their own tips, many times well before the union came to Foxwoods.

I'm in eager anticipation of this room opening. Seems like they were quick to get table games rolling. But this area looks like a deserted dance floor. Can't wait to gamble it up leisure like.

Just for the record this coming from the lady who is in control of the the gitca agreement which is the gaming industry tip compliance agreement (I think that's what it stands for) made is very clear the irs would rather have poker dealers be in this agreement and pay a set fee regardless of what they make then have to worry about trying to figure out what they make

Also made it very very clear every casino is more then welcome to enter in gitca agreements and when a casino doesn't let them keep thier own tokes that's on the casino and not from the irs.....no clue why a casino wouldn't want there workers taking cash home with them instead of putting it on a one or 2 week check

I think this is incorrect. (Poker dealers voting against keeping tips.)
I think that the original deal with the state had dealers pooling, and then when the union came in, it held up the poker dealers keeping their own until the union was recognized and the first contract was negotiated (which took about 5years). But anyway, I think they're pretty happy about it now.

If I remember correctly, there was something about the "room" at Twin Rivers having only 16 tables or some fixed number that struck me as low. If indeed it's only 16, can that succeed? Looking at the Rock, if they had only 16 the lists on weekends would be huge, and in turn would likely annoy the player pool. And what about tourneys - would they even run?

I'm no expert on poker rooms, but can anyone point to a successful room under similar circumstances (i.e. so few tables and other viable poker options within driving distance for nearly the entire player pool)? And when I say "successful," I mean in the eyes of both players and management/casino?

The lowest limit they should spread for no limit should be 2-5 and 4-8 for limit to combat the problems that will arise if they do intend to spread 1-2.

Sent from my LG-H811 using 2+2 Forums

That really depends on how the casino itself defines "success" for a poker room. Hollywood casino in Bangor has 4 tables in their poker room and my understanding from the people there is that nobody is talking about closing it.

OTOH, if you talk to a slots manager, he/she will probably tell you there's no such thing as a "successful" poker room and no casino should have one.

That's why I stressed the 16 number - it seems too, for lack of a better word, in betweenish - not small enough to be seen as a mere checked box, yet not big enough to be a room that attracts a steady stream of the right players. My thinking is this could be analogized to law firms, where the vast majority of the ones which succeed are either very small or very large, with mid-sized ones suffering from many of the same problems that plague both large and small firms, yet enjoying few of the benefits.

What would constitute a right player?

For the casino, it's a player with cash in his/her pocket that would be willing to spend a few dollars onsite. Low limit and low stakes no limit games with a rake is a loser for all.

I can't imagine any poker room in the world would be upset about the fact that they always have a large wait list. It means all their tables are making money. If those long lists drive away some of their customers, the lists get shorter, which annoys the customers less, until it reaches the Baby Bear "just right" point.

If Demand > Supply for a long enough time, they can always add more tables.

An as for MTTs, a smaller-sized poker room isn't likely going to be focusing on those. Maybe every once in a while. And if they don't have room, there must be space available somewhere to set up tournament tables.

Alright already! When are they going to open so that we can check it out.

November.

If someone teaches me how to upload an image, I'll show you my backup proof.

http://m.wikihow.com/Upload-Images-to-Imgur

http://i.imgur.com/ULg1B6H.jpg

Note:

Kevin Brown is director of table games at Twin River

Two things I'd like to see in the new room: card-shuffling machines and the Bravo system. That would make it a first-class operation, I believe.

If only that was all it took. See, e.g., Mohegan Sun.

Thanks.

What is that a pic of?

Memo from director to employees.

Played blackjack downstairs this past weekend with a dealer named Steve. He said dealer trainings are running. They're training TG dealers for poker. He also said the games should be running by the end of the month.

I'm predicting we'll see a couple low fixed limit games, a few 1/2 + 2/5 games and a few stud 1/5 games. The Twin River clientele are grandparents and burger flippers. They can't possibly take into account potential poker guests when their normal customer is the -EV gambler.

Most poker rooms will run most games if there is demand. In some states, these games have to be approved in advance.

When Plainridge Park opens a poker room that will be closer for most MA resident.

Plainridge can't have table games. Poker is considered a table game. Poker and table games are for the full casinos in MA, Plainridge is a slot parlor, period. (Video blackjack is considered a slot)

That for that info! States have stupid casino rules.

Yeah, MA put out the offer with 2 types of licenses. Slot Parlor and Casino.

And it's not just the State that would cry foul, either. No way Wynn (for example) would stand still for a Slot Parlor bidder trying to back into competing with his casino when the Slot organization never would have won a casino license to begin with