Ask floor.

Ding Ding!

And then there's all the 2/5 droolers who all have been playing 1/2 lately just for shots at the BBJ. There's droolers everywhere, I say include all games up to 20/40 Holdem and up to 5/10NL in the BBJ. Doesn't Borgata do this hence the reason their BBJ is always so high?
When its high enough the room gets filled with fish and it more than makes up for it

THIS X 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

The 2/5 tables are now 90% all nits/regs. Open up the BBJ to the 2/5 game and watch the action flow. I don't know who held this "vote", but it needs to be held again.

The same jackasses who don't vote for the BBJ in 2/5 are the same clowns who win a $5,000 pot and tip $2 to the dealer. You can throw all the long term stats at me you want, there is still the element of GAMBOOOOOL involved. Last few times I went down, 2/5 players left to go BBJ mine at 1/2 game left and right; Completely asinine.

Just include 2/5 and 5/10 in the BBJ and stop letting players have a say who I would personally kick my OWN ass if I lost a pot to. We all know who they are.

Its 60% to main 35% to backup and 5% to Foxwoods.

Then if it is hit they take the back up and split that 60 to a new main and 40 stays for a new back up.

5-10NL drying up because rec players like RobGarf are staying home.
Text me next time you go! I'll be sure to make it. Lol.

But on a serious note. I don't think the 2/5+ games are drying up per say. The games are always going it's just the players are getting better. At least for the NL games. There's a lot of strat material out there for NLHE and the "glory" days are coming to an end for NLHE I think.

I think PLO is the next NLHE. Listen to Bart Hanson's latest podcast with guest Limon. He describes how since the game is new, all the players are still trying to figure it out. There's not much strat material out there either for the average rec so it's a great time crush the game. Too bad it hasn't gained too much popularity at FW.

Ive logged plenty of hours at 2/5. Im yet to see anywhere close to a $5K pot. And go ahead...tip the dealers more than $2 and watch them make $60/hr....which is way more than most playets sitting at 2/5. What does the size of the pot have to do with anything anyways? Does the dealer work harder if i win more? When you lose big pots, youre gonna wish you had some of your absurd tips back. Its all relative. People have no idea how much money they're losing by tipping huge amounts. Its adds up...very quickly. Im sure every dealer is plenty happy making $1 a hand...so they can make about $30/hr including their base (which most people in this country dont even make right now). Telling me im a jackass cause i tip $2 on making $500 is an ignorant comment. Does the dealer give me any nack when i lose $500? They make plenty of money as is.....you're the jackass taking a BB or more off the table and giving it to someone who makes more than you do, thinking that youre being a "nice" guy. Not to mention the mulitplying factor.

There's a tipping containment thread. If you wish to have this conversation please do so there.

Totally agree, in fact I may say PLO is the game of the future!

I think part of the reason PLO has not gained that much popularity at Foxwoods has to do with it being played full-ring. The way PLO is played is not suited well for a ten handed game in my opinion. These 10 handed games often create situations in which a lot of the players are open limping pre flop and trying to nut-pedal post flop. This creates a very non-gamboly game.

Part of the reason why a lot of recreational players do like PLO is it is more of a gambling game than hold-em. However, they might not enjoy these full-ring games because it plays to nitty for them. If they someone allowed PLO to be spread 8 or 7 handed or something this would greatly loosen up the action with wider ranges raising pre, more 3 betting, and bigger pots. I think this type of action could attract some new players as well as keep some occasional players hooked.

Im not sure if Foxwoods would ever consider changing seat numbers at tables, but I do know the players are petitioning right now to make 5-10 NL 9 handed max.

^ how often does plo actually get 10 players on the table at the woods thoigh?

^ without fail every time i show up the PLO table gets full

Pretty much exactly this. They need to run PLO shorthanded, I think the game plays much better 6max. They have run the PLO game on one of those 8handed stud tables before, but I doubt they would cut the game shorter than that. Running the game on these tables, would still be an improvement, imo

I look forward to slow rolling you soon, my ball busting friend and what you wrote is exactly what I meant by the term "drying up." I'm on vacation so I'll be there a few days this week (but will be playing 1-2 unless the 5-10 isn't filled with solid players per usual).

What kind of action goes on during the weekdays. I am debating on taking a 2 hr drive up to foxwoods for a day. Probably grinding $1-$2

limon runs his game 8 handed fwiw. fat fish like it better cuz they have more room for shytty casino food so thats a bonus as well...

It is true that some 2/5 and 5/10 players migrate to 1/2 when the BBJ gets up over $300k or so. It's actually not too "asinine", because at that level, the $1 rake actually becomes slightly +EV for the entire table.
But most of the time, the jackpot is much smaller, and the 2/5 and 5/10 players do not migrate to it. More importantly, IMO, when the jackpot does get very big (>$400k ?), it does start to attract some additional players into the room. Most of the time though, the jackpot is much smaller, and I don't see it attracting a lot of new players into the room. And the new players attracted by the BBJ, IMO, will overwhelmingly go to the lowest NL game available, ie, 1/2. So, on balance, I would prefer not to have the BBJ at all, and would certainly opt not to have it at the games I play.
You are entitled to your opinion, and while I disagree with you, I would not suggest that it necessarily defines you as either a "clown" or a "jackass". But I would suggest that name-calling does not enhance your credibility. (And I'd be happy to see you come gambooool at my table, anytime.)

What's the min-max for 20/40 stud?

if foxwoods is taking out a 3% administration fee for the jackpot (note that i understand that the 35% held back per gotf is for funding the seed of future jackpots) then they are in fact being reasonable since there are expenses associated with jackpots. the acknowledged administration fee in los angeles area cardrooms is more in the 20% range. it was also obvious to most players that at least one club shorted jackpots substantially back in the late eighties and early nineties.

Min 400 no max

i love PLO but Foxwoods has to OFFICIALLY fix the structure of the small 1/2 game (which plays much bigger than 1/2 nl holdem if the game is anywhere near equally good)

being omaha the game is always going to have less hands per hour than holdem but the foxwoods game is way too slow with the counting of small denomination chips to determine pot size. this is horrible for *most* players, the dealers, and the house which will never be inclined to push it unless speeds up and possibly grows (as an aside starting a table to see it break soon is something that the house and staff hates). the reality of the poker room is that dealers will complain about this game, many in management used to be dealers, and to an extent their complaints (when it correlates with revenue/drop/rake) will be listened to.

many who post here who play in these games have good ideas to help. in short we can round bets to the nearest $5 at least post flop. if there is a straddle (i personally have no problem with it being kept voluntary for the smallest game) then it should be officially $5 instead of $4. call it the 'pot limit' straddle.

regarding "most players" unfortunately there is one super-nit regular (the player posts here and i've heard him referred to as a 'super-nit' by several players so it is more of an identifier than name calling) who objects to any reasonable changes every time he sits down which also unfortunately is quite often. recently when players offered reasonable suggestions similar to those listed above to speed up the game he actually said (more or less) that he wants to slow down the game since he cares about the points on the rewards card and one hand per hour would get him the points. maybe this was said to tilt us but clearly this wasn't good for the game as are most of his other actions (do we really need to have a 'log the player out' policeman every time someone leaves the table?).

POKER ROOM POLICY AND GAME STRUCTURES SHOULD RARELY BE BASED ON THE WISHES OR PREFERENCES OF NITS.

in southern california i was initially against the jackpot being put into the middle limit games (10-20 to 20-40) for reasons similar to the ones you listed but i soon saw that it did attract far more players from the lower levels which of course made the games better.

one problem in LA was that the jackpot was aces full beat (at one time any aces full but later aces full of tens) with kickers mattering (e.g., board of AAAJ9 a player holding KK gets the jackpot as long as the player with the ace has a jack, queen or king kicker). when no limit came around it created some ugly situations since going for the jackpot could cost you your stack as opposed to a couple bets.

OTOH hand the foxwoods jackpot is way too hard to hit. IMHO any quads beat should make a jackpot (i realize this shouldn't be changed until the current large jackpot is hit). why not encourage the play of very small pairs? in fact i would also allow kickers to play in a quads over quads scenario; for example a board of 88999 would produce a jackpot with players holding 88 and 9J. then almost any hand can produce a jackpot and the droolers will have even more reasons to play hands.

Agreed. The blinds should stay at $1-$2, but the straddle should be $5, and I'd take it further and say anyone entering the pot has to enter the pot for $5, rather than $2 (if there was no straddle).

I also think post-flop all bets have to be in increments of $5 (except for all-in situations).

I also feel that $2-$5 NLH should be the same way. You shouldn't be allowed to raise to $13 or $27 pre-flop - it should be $15 or $30. And post flop the same, you have to bet in $5 increments (except for all-in).

I think these changes would speed up the games and not really annoy anybody. It's win win (which basically means Foxwoods will never do it )

Agreed!

Agreed again!

We are sympatico on a lot of things it seems.

the five dollar open limp (with 1/2 blinds) is the structure used in places where PLO is growing a bit AFAIK (also recommended by PLO host/author Jeff Hwang last time i looked a couple years back). downside might be the game would play much bigger and discourage people from the 1/2 NLH player pool or those with small bankrolls from playing once they realize how much bigger the game actually plays. for such a game the buy-in should be something like $200-$500. a $60 buy-in for PLO encourages short stacking nits. they might help start games but aren't worth it in the long run IMHO.


actually it could work for all-ins too. let's say someone has $137 and goes all in. only $135 plays and he must re-load (assuming he lost) before he plays another hand. also you would need at least $5 in front of you to be dealt in.


agree with this with the point i wrote above included as another possible option. i would estimate this would add about one hand an hour - that's huge from a revenue standpoint. keep in mind when the casino can make a bit more per hour by increasing speed the rake won't go up as fast (e.g., shuffle machines have probably held the rake down).


with any change someone is usually annoyed; the key for management is to recognize the difference between something that is legitimately annoying and those who annoyed by everything in general.

although i've only been playing as a semi-regular for five months generally i believe foxwoods is a well run room (most of my playing and working experience is in the huge card clubs in los angeles county). in los angeles i did see players suggest changes to management that were in fact incorporated. the key is to find the right person or persons in management and have the ideas of the players ironed out somewhat so they approach as a united front. the point that the casino and dealers would make more money is almost always a winning idea and should be included in any proposal.