The 9 a.m. turbo rarely gets less than 100 players?

.

Why are we pushing for a 1/2 $5 to go PLO game with bigger buyins? This is a 2/5 game. And I guarantee you that's what management is going to think. If you can't get past that question in a way that will sway management to print up some new plaques for the tables, then you got no shot.

Also If you want to get a steady game with new players you have to have it at 1/2 in what people see on the plaques. If I sit down at a table and am told the game is something different then what I was expecting, I'm probably not going to play long and I will feel somewhat cheated.

People will try it at a level they think they know and become comfortable and come back. Also a lot of 2/5 players I know turn their nose up at 1/2 blind games thinking its beneath them. So if you want those players to try, you got to have 2/5 blind games and start them short and hope some players try them.

So IMHO if you want PLO to grow you have to stick to the players conceptions of what the blinds at a certain level of game mean. 1/2 means one thing and 2/5 means something else. Even though PLO players know that the game plays big, you can't artificially make it play bigger, cause you'll lose your new 1/2 level players who are now slaughtered in a game 2 levels higher then they think they are playing.

As to the speed issues with white chips, I personally think most games I've played have become red chip after the flop anyways, so why deny the timid new player the opportunity to limp in for a couple of bucks preflop. And I am of the opinion that players slow the game down more then any dealer having to count a few white chips does.

I agree, imo they should increase the max buy in for 1/2 plo. Thats a must.

Its more like the 9am
Rarely gets 50 people, and the 1pm turbo averages between 60-100 depending on what's going on

instead of getting points or a meal voucher for my birthday this week Foxwoods gave me a Bingo entry (must be used on a tuesday)...how thoughtful

Did it come with a free bingo dauber?

the woods always looking to expaand the vices of its customers
some marketing guru was paid big bucks for that idea

i see they have a PLO gaming going right now... i kinda wanna drive down for it tonight , if not i hope its still going tommorow. I see someone said they want the max increased for PLO, what is it now?

$300 at 1/2

Can someone explain to me all the complaints with PLO being run with a 100bb max buy in? The game has always been played like that online hasn't it?

pretty much w/ some variation, I think they should just up the min buy in to like 100-150 then the game would be fine, I mean if people actually rebuy the game will get deep anyway.

I think part of the problem is there area few short sacking nits that have a neg. impact on the game.

Though a 1/2PLO game does most def. play bigger than 1/2 NLH I dont think the 300max buy in is what is holding this game back @ FW

To be fair though it seems 1/2 PLO is going much more frequently than in the past, though I am not sure if it just the same regs playing or not. I sort of gave up on playing 1/2 PLO there like over a year ago so I am not sure on the current state of that game TBH.

Changing the min/max buy in will not make the nits less nitty, imo.

it wont effect their play but in terms of bringing in rec. players its kind of discouraging for someone to walk by and see 4-5 players setting w/ the minimum.

I noticed they removed those tables upstairs by the poker room opening that had automated roulette/baccarat/sicbo. Any idea why they were removed? You didn't earn any points on them, but people were still stupid enough to play.

Just to clarify, its 150bb. I'm beginning to think the PLO crowd will never be a satisfied bunch.

The lease was up and the company that owned them wanted to go up considerably in price. The casino wouldn't have made any money on them

IMO, most of the people who post here would simply like to see a bigger PLO game, hence would like to see bigger buyin's (among other changes). I think most of the complaints are directed at the $60 minimum, and shortstackers, more than at the $300 max.
I would personally like to see the min raised to $100.
IMO, there are a lot of other changes which could be made to the structure of the 1/2 PLO game to make it run more smoothly.
For example, I think that rounding the postflop pot up to nearest $5, and allowing postflop bets in $5 increments only, would improve the game quite a bit (from personal experience elsewhere), by speeding it up, without making the game enormously bigger.
However, I think that some of the other changes ($5 bringin, $500 max buyin) would turn it in effect into a 2/5 PLO, and might lose more new players than they attract. (Personally I would be thrilled by regular 2/5 PLO, but whenever a list is started for that, it seldom gets more than 2 or 3 names.)

But I really think that the real problem is not the current structure (though that could be improved), but simply that there just isn't quite enough demand for PLO (yet) to have the game go every day. Most of the new poker players in the last 10 years have come into the game exclusively through holdem, and are scared of Omaha and also of potlimit betting. When the internet was available, people could learn the basics of the game in .01/.02 games, but no more.
I really don't have a good solution to this, unless FW would like to try to promote the game somehow (which might be a good idea for them).
Otherwise, I think the best we can do is to start lists, show up when the game is called, play short-handed to get the game going, be flexible about PLO vs PLO8 (or learn whichever one you haven't played), be friendly (and uncritical) to new players, and be tolerant of other players' views.

They need more blankets and less blankets!

good post. the small plo game needs tweaks for speed, fun, and making it less nit friendly (which isn't even good for the nits because eventually the game looses action and withers),

my suggestions are approximately as follows:

- increase the buyin to 100-300 from 60-300
- make the straddle $5 but keep it voluntary.
- make all post flop bets in increments of $5 rounding off pot to nearest level (if pot is $47 then a pot bet is $45, if pot is $48 then a pot bet is $50). this would also work for all-ins to (if someone goes "all-in for $138 only $135 plays and he must rebuy (assuming he is felted) before playing the other $3.

plo high game went good for a while today (thursday) even though the huge holdem jackpot (about 430K) is sucking the life out of this game and some of the other games (such as 2/5 NL holdem where there is no jackpot).

whoop,

plo at this point tends to draw the more sophisticated players, some of whom post here. the current structure is flawed and the game isn't living to it's potential. this is why it is generating discussion in this thread.

the game done right has the potential to grow somewhat (i don't think it's the game of the future - sorry gotf) and attract new players while not cannibalizing the existing player base all that much. adding one of two tables of action is huge for any club.

although i don't like playing in a game that is a 2+2 fest (at least when i need money which these days is always) plo can be a great game with tougher players due to it's nature (lots of short term luck which means lots of tilt, many winning styles and no real 'book' on how to play).

the right ideas presented by the right representative(s) to the right manager(s) might change things for the better.

your ideas are part of a good solution.

I think the biggest problem is that FW seems unwilling to try out anything new. Why not try out a game/structure that the players like and see how people react to it? If there is significant interest and it is within gaming commission rules
Why not try out what ever game possible?

As is plainly evident, I'm not a big fan of posting, but just when I thought I'd seen it all (at least at Foxwoods), a hand came up tonight that I figured was worth sharing.

So I'm festering in the 5-10 Omaha8 game, which is dying a painful death, but that's another thread for another time. The dealer neglects to move the button from the eight to the nine seat (as an aside, it's the second time in that same orbit he has done this, which is very unusual because he's an experienced dealer). Thus, the nine and ten seat post their (two dollar small and five dollar big) blinds again.

Unfortunately, nobody figures this out until long after the cards are dealt. Moreover, the one seat (who should have been the big blind) calls, the two seat folds, and the three seat raises. Only then does someone notice, at which point it hits the fan.

The floor is summoned over, the usual raucous occurs, but the floor takes control and we get our ruling. Because there has been significant action, the hand will play out. However, the nine seat, who just paid his small blind the previous hand, is informed he still needs to post it again. When he objects, an old guy who I think comes plays at Turning Stone (based on conversation throughout the night), the player is informed that he can pay it or stop playing for the rest of the night. Faced with these options, he reluctantly posts it (similarly, the ten seat is required to pay his big blind again, but he never protested at any point).

That's not even the interesting part. The rest of it is this. When the button comes back around to the eight seat - get ready - the nine and ten do not have to post their blinds! They still have to call the five bucks, or more if it's raised, when the action gets to them, if they want to play their cards, but the hand is literally dealt with no blinds posted! Just a bunch of players with cards and no money in the pot!

While I don't consider myself an expert in rules (knowledgeable, sure, but not an authority), I never thought it was possible to play without at least a big blind. The best part was, before the button got around to the eight again, a new dealer pushed in, so the outgoing dealer informed him of this as he was standing up. Needless to say, the new dealer's reaction was disbelief, but he just went with it.

And that's how you play a hand without a blind to be seen anywhere...

Sounds to me like the woods just needs to get dealers who actually can keep track of the bets and knows how to count "pot" to keep the game moving. Either that or get a seperate RFID table/chips specifically for the PLO game that can keep track of the "pot". Maybe bring in an electronic table specifically for the PLO game, that way people can just press a pot button lol. That's probably the best idea.

I don't see what the big deal is with people buying in for 30bb's. I mean they could easily be all in pre and you wouldn't need to worry bout them on the other streets. PLO is a totally different beast from hold em and you can lose your stack 100x easier. I can see why people would rather buy in short, especially if they don't have a good grasp on the game.