Jeremy: I can't understand the house rule in the lower nl games, stating that no one at the table can call the clock on someone, unless they are involved in the hand. This rule does not apply to the 5-10 nl and higher, because those games pay "time" rather than rake.

I recall a dealer or floorperson once mumbling something about players "abusing" the practice of calling for the clock, but this makes very little sense. What logic would dictate that lower-limit nl players would be more likely to be a problem with this than higher-limit nl players?

In a room with, oh, a few questionable procedures, this one make the least sense. How many times must a 1-2 or 2-5 table sit there in silence for minutes on end, while the player deciding what to do goes through the whole gamut of his so-called thought process, usually to serve no purpose whatsoever, other than to show the table he actually has a semblence of thought process?

I can't figure out what this rule is supposed to accomplish, but I can tell you at least a few things that it does accomplish: (1) It slows up the game unnecessarily, often to a near-halt. (2) It aggravates the hell out of people who came to play poker, instead of sitting around being dazzled by a usually-poor analysis. (3) IT COST THE HOUSE RAKE (4) IT COSTS THE DEALERS MONEY (I would think these last two would get your attention, but I put them in caps just to make sure). Furthermore, it makes the room look a bit silly. No other room I've played in has some tables allowed to ask for the clock, while other tables cannot.

I doubt that whatever positives this particular rule is supposed to achieve, outweigh the negatives listed above, and I can guarantee you that you'd be making the majority of lower-limit players a little happier by rethinking this one. Hopefully you will, and it just might wind up in the trash bin, where it belongs. You're welcome.

As for the lower limit games, when you are sitting out of a hand waiting for the next hand to start, 30 seconds seems like 5 minutes to most players and the clock was being called way to often, when you did not have to be in the hand to call clock.

Now that the player has to be in the hand to call the clock has helped the game much more often that has hurt it. Doing this has caused many less crying players and arguments. No one likes the clock called on them and when it was being called that player automatically took the full minute in spite and then would fold 99% of the time. Also when one player called the clock on the other player then that player would have it out for the other player and usually lead to an argument. So in essence this way in the long run is faster.

If you do feel a player is taking to long all the time you can bring it to the attention of the dealer and have them call the floor and if the floor feels necessary they will put the clock on the player. This is if you feel a player is consistently slowing the game down, not just for one hand (unless it is a long time, over a couple minutes). I know if I am in a hand with someone, I don’t want anyone out of the hand affecting the decision of the other player in the hand, and calling time on them affects the thought process.

As for high limit, the players realize there is more money at stake and could possibly take more time to make a decision. But they are paying time so they have the right to call time if they would like. It really doesn't happen to often.
You're welcome!.....

can we get some updates on what types of games and how many tables are running? I remember when the shoe first opened you gave us what seemed like daily updates...

I would like to go and play some low limit (5/10 or lower) horse, but I never know what day or when the game will be running...

There has been a 5/10 horse game on Saturdays around late afternoon. Good game.

[QUOTE=Raise It;7514796] .
I've played both low limit and high limit, and to tell the truth, 30 seconds seems like 30 seconds in both, and 5 minutes seems like 5 minutes in both, and I seldom have trouble distinguishing between the two.

Ask the dealers if they think so. I have yet to see a single dealer (who has bills to pay like the rest of us) seem all that pleased that the game has been "helped" so much.

This happens just as often in high limit as low, so I'm missing your the point you're trying to make.

.
"More money at stake?" If you don't consider this purely relative, you might want to ask the lower limit players if their money is less important to them than the money of the higher limit players.

I'd like to add this: Does it matter one iota what the players want, rather than what management wants? Ever? Even when it would cost literally nothing to let them have their way? Take a poll of the lower-limit players and you'll find an overwhelming dislike of this rule. If I managed the room (yes, I'm thinking of applying, so don't toss the want ads just yet), that's all it would take: "My players want this changed, it costs us absolutely nothing to do so, let's keep 'em happy."

There's a name for casinos that run the room with the attitude that management knows everything and players are basically idiots with no worthwhile thoughts of their own: It's called "Hollywood Casino," (Aurora) and ya know...they're not doing too well anymore. You're welcome.

Just want to throw this out there. I'm personally in favor of the no-clock rule if you're not in the hand for low-limit players, and here's why. I could be wrong about this but it seems to me that low-limit players are more likely to either not understand how to behave at a casino poker table or to understand but behave poorly anyway. I'm not saying you're in this group, coconuts -- I'm sure you know how to act. In aggregate, low-limit players are simply less experienced than high-limit players and don't understand, for example, that if they aren't involved in the hand they should be silent so that they don't influence the hand.

Makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.

TOURNAMENT SCHEDULE!!!!!

IM COMING HOME FOR CHRISTMAS BREAK AND WOULD HOPE ITS UP BY THEN

(CROSSES FINGERS)

I play a lot of low limit NL for fairly long sessions (6 or more hours at a time). I have never heard a single player complain about the rule that you can only call the clock if you are in the hand. I have also never come across a player who habitually took an inordinate amount of time to make a decision. Usually, in a six or seven hour session, there are perhaps two hands where someone takes a long time to make a decision and it is usually justified.

I like the rule.

I've played the 5-10 NL game maybe 40 hrs at the shoe and have yet to see the clock called. People get pretty mad in 5-10 when u call the clock.

Thanks for the reply. I was to hard on tournament they have there place.
From my observation cash game player go play tournament and leave for the day. I also see tournament player just come in the tournament and not play the cash game. I could be wrong just my observatio. Also I'm not saying that the poker room should only have cash game, tournament should also run.

Coconuts says: "The sun rises in the East".
RoccoTerrier responds: "I've been up nearly every morning at sunrise, and have never noticed that the sun rise in the east. I'm not so sure it does."

Rocco; tell us: Why are you paying no attention at the table whatsoever, and what is it exactly that you "like about the rule." We're all holding our breath in anticipation of your response.

Are you ever going to make a post where you don't come off as a painfully annoying and unlikeable douche-nugget?

I pay attention at the table and I described what I have observed, or, more accurately, what I have not observed. I am sorry that you have apparently played at tables where people take a lot of time to make decisions. Oddly, I do not believe you have experienced the slowness that you are complaining about any of the times that you have played at the same table as me....or, you are simply less patient than I am.

I like the rule for the reasons articulated by Jeremy.

As a (formerly) frequent 1/2 player at Horseshoe, I can +1 this.

Also, I am a proponent of a fast clock in low limit games. I find that if I believe a player is taking an inordinate time, I look at my watch and give the player an additional minute before I would call the clock before the new rule. Of the dozen or so times I've tried this, the player acted before the minute was up every single time. The bottom line is, it just seems to be taking a long time when someone is making a big decision. Coconuts, as usual, is wrong.

You first statement is mostly ture if the tournament is later in the day. All of our tournaments to start will be in the afternoon (which is when we have the available tables). There are many players that play just tournaments and have been waiting for them. This will hopefully make the cash games that much better afterwards.

Your poll has failed so far.... I know there are others though that are in favor of the "can call clock WHENEVER they want" and if those players have attitudes, most players can not stand to play with them. If those are the players you would like me to take suggestions from then good luck.

Coconuts because I never care what the players say as you say (or just you it seems) I can't make up my mind now weather to switch the rule or not, because some like it.... It's not that I don't listen, I listen to all suggestions, which is why I come here. If we did not care I would not be here, right? We just don't implement all suggestion. Many people have good suggestions but most have been tried before and from experience we know weather they work better in certain ways.

Could you imagine all the changes back-and-forth if just one person came up and said I don't like this, or don't like that.... That is one of the worst things about a poker room, when they do not have consistency. We take everything and factor it in and make a decision based on the information we have. With every decision that is made there will be always be ONE and sometimes many people that do not agree with what is done. You can not make everyone happy.

Most people if they would not agree (or not understand) something after I explain why it is done, will usually then understand at least why it was done (not that they have to agree with it though). I originally answered your question because I thought you were honestly asking why. If you were asking, then I figured there had to be a few other people that might not have known why also. I guess I fell into your trap once again....

You should be in luck. I will post it soon.

Sorry, but there was no trap intended. I was legitimately asking what positives the rule is supposed to achieve, and if they outweigh the negatives. Regardless of what others post here, I have personally seen games slowed down over and over again, by milking this particular rule, if not downright taking advantage of it.

I'm sure I don't have to remind you that the poker room is in operation to make money, and when someone is sitting there for inordinate amount of time because he can, it costs the house a little money. It costs the dealer a little money too, and it really aggravates the players who want to play another hand sometime today. I understand no-limit requires more thought than limit, but 2,,3 or 4 minutes sometimes, and often over a bet of less than $100? Give us all a break!

Of course you can't make EVERYBODY happy, but especially in this case, it wouldn't take much effort to find out what would make MOST happy. You roam the room regularly; ask a bunch of your regular player what they think about the rule. A simple "would you like to see it changed so that anyone could ask for a clock, or keep it as it is now" would do. If most would like it changed, why not. If most want to keep it the same, I'm done bitchin'. Well, at least on this topic, anyway. Thanks.

Now listen up A.P. Despite the fact that RoccoTerrier and I are often at odds, I'm sure his intentions are good, and I believe him to be a good and decent man. He has a right to his opinion without being called vulgar names by you, so knock it off!

[QUOTE=RoccoTerrier;7529090] You are probably right about us not being together at the same table during the incidences I'm bitchin' about, because you'd be complaining right along with me.

By the way, Rocco, some guy named A.P. Keaton is calling you terrible names. I've set him straight already, and no thanks are necessary. Good luck.

No harm....

To be honest this is what is done BEFORE we change anything. I don't want to change something then ask everyone. Many regular players input were considered before the decision was made.

Also I rarely get a player that says they do not like the rule. It is actually more that like it when they understand why it was implemented. I don't want anyone influencing anyone else decision by putting a clock on them.

Haven't you ever been at the table (before) when someone called clock and then the guy gets mad the clock was put on him and then just takes the whole minute out of spite. To me that is slowing the game down and hurting the dealers, the house, and everyone else at the table. I never get this anymore, with the rule where you have to be in the hand to call clock.

If you do feel though that a player is taking advantage and taking a long time to act on a hand, bring it to the dealers attention and they will call the floor over. If we feel necessary we will put the clock on the player. So if a player is excessively slowing the game down you still have an option.

This was tonights (Monday)

A total of 23 tables.

1 300-600 limit Omaha 8
1 25-50 PLO/NLHE (10 hands of each game)
1 40-80 HORSE
1 20-40 LIMIT
3 5-10 NL
2 3-6 LIMIT
4 2-5 NL
10 1-2 NL

Weekends all 34 tables are usually going and a few other games that are spread are 5-10 Omaha 8 or better, 6-12 limit, 10-20 limit, 5-10 HORSE and 2-5 PLO. Wednesdays are usually very busy too with 27-30 tables going.

I guess I should have said I'm a proponent of a fast clock in theory. In practice, it's rarely necessary.

Games which go every day:
5/10 no-limit
2/5 no-limit
1/2 no-limit
20/40 limit
3/6 limit

Games which go every day, 24/7 around the clock:
2/5 no-limit
1/2 no-limit