Assuming you are referring to enforcing table max when changing tables it is not insane.

I split my time between 2 very well run rooms, MGM national harbor and MD live. MGM requires you take your entire stack to the new table.

Live enforces table max for VOLUNTARY table changes. Involuntary table changes - when a table breaks or moving from a must move to a main game, you bring your whole stack regardless of table Max.

This protects recreational players and helps protect the long-term viability of the local poker economy. It does this by making it harder for strong players to bum hunt weaker players that get lucky and find themselves much deeper then they are accustomed to playing. There are many times when playing at Live that I find myself with three or four times the max buy-in and I look over at another table with really bad players that are super deep. I would love to be able to take my whole stack over to that table where the rec players mistakes are going to be much bigger because of how deep we are.

Enforcing table Max during table changes does open up the possibility of people going south via that table change.

Regardless of which side of the debate your opinion falls on, there are well thought out, reasonable arguments that support both ways doing things.



Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

Bumhunters table change regardless of stack size. Nits going south via table change because of stack size. Completely different.

I bet its cause people were using that rule to go north.

I couldn't disagree with this more strongly.

The poker economy doesn't need protecting. It's way more dependent on the strength of the local economy than it is on this rule. I play semi-often in Niagara Falls, Ontario. All you need to do to see how much of a difference the economy makes is to cross the border to Seneca in Niagara Falls, NY. The Ontario room on weekends is 20+ games deep, runs 1-2 5/10 games regularly, and they occasionally have a 25/50 game running. The Niagara Falls NY game is mainly 1/2 with usually one 2/5 game running. The difference could not be more stark. This is a testament to the strength of the Toronto area economy, and the general suckiness of the Buffalo area economy.

On the other side, I don't know too many poker players making 7 figures. Bums do not need to be protected from the sharks. They need to give the sharks their money for the week, go back to their electrician/stockbroker/lawyer job, then come back next weekend and give the sharks more money. That's what fish do. It's not the job of the casino to try and level the playing field.

The problem is once they or their wives figure out that they're dropping 5k a month playing poker, they're not gonna continue dropping 5k a month player poker. Although I do agree that not being able to take your whole stack is stupid, I highly doubt fish don't have a monthly budget when it comes to losing at poker and I also highly doubt that the fish that aren't close to break even can afford to be regulars.

Well that's the thing with fish -- unless they're wealthy and in control of their relationship, they don't come regularly. Many fish come for a few months, drop a bunch of money, then you don't see them again for a few months. Which is understandable. I'm just saying -- a full time grinder who makes even $100k live is rare. If they don't have a day job or are retired with the house paid off, they're not at all rich. If the casino suddenly decides to step in & kill their hourly, then....

It's a smart move on the casino's part to kill their hourly. Full time grinders are a huge detriment to the long term health of any room.

This policy is a huge detriment to one's ability to be profitable at poker.

I don't care if the room is healthy if it's irrelevant.

It’s the worst policy in the room by far.

I hope they get more dealers and more players in. The past 2 nights I’ve had to sit at 1/2 for a few hours before getting to move to 2/5.

I'm not advocating one way is better than another. My selfish, personal wish is to play as deep as possible with players I feel are weaker.

Can you at least see that the casino has zero motivation to provide an environment for you to be a profitable poker player? Especially since the more profitable you are, the more others need to be losing.

It is more in the casino's best interest that none of the poker players in its player pool are big winners or big losers.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

This is why gov't sponsored monopolies are bad. The employees have a union, and the company has a sugar daddy.

Completely missing (or ignoring) the point.

I give up.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

Oof. First busy night I’ve gone. 1 table of each game. No dealers for more tables. Probably going to be a 3 hour wait as the lists are 40 deep.

I don't understand why there's such a shortage of dealers. Had always been a problem for Brantford so I don't see it going away here. Meanwhile Niagara does not have this issue. I wonder if there's something going on we're not seeing.

Niaraga does have this issue, it's just not totally apparent as they do a better job of trying. Additionally, Niagara has a large stable of old time reliable dealers who've been there for 5+ years. There's also a dealer that started working there cause his gf works there, there's another one who started working cause his mom works there. In other words they have a solid base to build from. So you don't see a lot of the issues, especially at 25 and up. At 13 tho… there are newer dealers who really truly suck. They're always hiring.

I think the issue is it's hard finding millennials who are good at basic math without a calculator. A few months back I had a teller at CIBC unable to do basic subtraction without a calculator. She couldn't find one, then looked lost. I had to tell her the change.

9:17 they are now opening a second 2/5.

this is just an issue at a poorly managed casino. If a nit wants to preserve their winnings they can always quit and come back in an hour. Maybe they quit, go have dinner and put money in the casino’s coffers indirectly. I’ll bet the markups at those shitty casino buffets are way better than playing 10% up to 6.

10% up to 6 is pretty good for Canadian rake. But that 200 cap though...is there a jackpot drop at $10?

Speaking of completely missing (or ignoring) the point.

Full time grinders are the ones that keep tables open. They come, tables open, seats are available. Plus a FT player puts more rake into the tray than the occasional single weekend player. Furthermore, that FT player tells more people about how the place is. Is it worth eating there? Is the game worth playing?

Rama is what happens when no FT players are there. Niagara happens when there are lots.

I hadnt been to Rama in years. I was shocked to hear this weekend that they had closed to original room and put it on the floor.

Ya table with 9 or 10 full time grinders waiting around to cooler each other. There is a sustainable economy.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

I dont think that exists lol

What's best for the room are regulars who are not grinders. Because they will be break even or slight winners at best and most of them will be losers. If even a 1/3 game is you, 6 grinders and two fish, I'd be thinking of a new hobby.

This.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

I feel like this thread is getting a bit derailed.

The single biggest thing holding this room back right now is lack of dealers. If they want to grow the room they need to be aggressively addressing this. I'm not going to be going regularly to a room that will either have one 1/2 game and one 2/5 game and if im really lucky they will run one extra of one of them.

Right now if you wanna play on a sat or Sunday you have to call in to get on a waitlist before noon and if you dont get on the opening table youre gonna be waiting hours.