I just had an interesting conversation with Brian (the poker room manager) this past weekend regarding must move tables. Their current policy is that if there is a main game(s) and a must move game, the players at the must move game are given the option to move to the main game. If no one wants to move and there is a waiting list, the first person(s) on the waiting listmust go to the main game (i.e. everyone at the "must move" game can stay there). If there is no one on the waiting list and the main game still has empty seats, players from the must move game get moved to the main game in order of who has been there the shortest. His logic was that he did not want to "force" players to change tables if they did not want to, especially players that had been playing at the must move for a long time.
- When I asked him "isn't he similarly forcing players from the waiting list to play in the main game anyways", he said no, those players can choose to not take a seat if they don't want to.
- When I asked him "can't players then just keep rolling their name on the waiting list if they want to play at the must move", he said yes.
- When I pointed out what happens if there are only a few names on the list (or even just one person) and no one wants to play at the main game/everyone keeps rolling their name (which did happen this weekend)... he paused, said that has never happened before, and that he would just put the next person to show up on the must move game.
- When I asked what if this was late in the night and it's very likely someone might not show up for a long time... he paused, and said the main game would play short handed. So I clearly asked him- "You would rather break a main game than force players to move from the must move game", and he said "yes". Why even have a must move then? He gave the generic "to keep games alive the longest" answer.
Note: They do eventually move players from the must move game to the main game if there's no list. I think he was thrown off by the fact that I found this loophole of having players from the "must move" game move to the main game before players on the waiting list (like pretty much every other casino in the country). It is called a "must move" game for a reason, Brian...
I also pointed out to him that a main game that's been running for a while would have a deeper average stack than a must move game, that a player that has been sitting down at a must move game for longer would, on average, have a deeper average stack than a new player (considering the game has a $500 max buy-in), and that new players would be more likely (on average) to stick around for longer at a shallower must move game. I explained this is why almost every casino in the country runs "must move" games like this- to keep games alive the longest. He paused, then said "well, you can't ever know that the player at the must move game the longest will have a larger stack".
At this point, I gave up as he clearly has no knowledge or understanding of the concept, told him I understand that I'm just a player in his eyes, so to please look to other experienced poker room managers and supervisors for their opinions (and that they'd all likely say the same thing).
He then thanked me for my feedback, admitting that many others have complained about it since it started, but admitted this policy is not ever going to change because of all the work he put in to implement it.
P.S. I chose to keep my name rolling on the list as the main game was horrible and the must move game was amazing (and if I take a seat at the main game, I obv can't ever table change to the must move, but I could vice versa)- best decision ever (and didn't have to wait very long).
I don't mind that system aside from the fact that people at the main game are locked in while everyone else can choose their game. That's not fair. The players who have been there the longest shouldn't have less freedom than new players.
I don't mind that system aside from the fact that people at the main game are locked in while everyone else can choose their game. That's not fair. The players who have been there the longest shouldn't have less freedom than new players.
Might as well not even have a must move game if that's the case (which I completely disagree with)... someone from the main game chooses to move to the "must move" game and now whoever's last in line is forced to take that empty seat??
I just spoke to the Poker Room and there are no more Harley Davidson quarterly tournaments.
This fing place can kiss both cheeks! wtf smh gfy
This stinks. I've played there twice both times for a quarterly. I hope "Jack" gets some good tournament series scheduled or there's no reason to return.
This stinks. I've played there twice both times for a quarterly. I hope "Jack" gets some good tournament series scheduled or there's no reason to return.
I'm a total newb here so I apologize ahead of time but the last time I was in the HS CLE the dealers all mentioned that management was working on having some solid regular tournaments.
I'm not regular, nor tournament player anyway, but FYI - hopefully they do indeed deliver.
I played there when in town for a friends wedding not long ago. I must say it is one of the oddest run rooms I have ever been in. I really feel for you all...
I tell you, there is one female dealer there, just a complete bitch. I know part of the problem is she wants this D and can't get it, but she is so negative. No wonder her baby daddy dumped her.
I just had an interesting conversation with Brian (the poker room manager) this past weekend regarding must move tables. Their current policy is that if there is a main game(s) and a must move game, the players at the must move game are given the option to move to the main game. If no one wants to move and there is a waiting list, the first person(s) on the waiting listmust go to the main game (i.e. everyone at the "must move" game can stay there). If there is no one on the waiting list and the main game still has empty seats, players from the must move game get moved to the main game in order of who has been there the shortest. His logic was that he did not want to "force" players to change tables if they did not want to, especially players that had been playing at the must move for a long time.
Wow... Just. Wow. This room continues to be the nut low.
I guess I've been lucky. Haven't ran into anything too ridiculously unique while playing here. Will be back in town next week and plan on visiting the 1/2 games again. Will need to read up on the latest must move ridiculous it seems though.
I can appreciate Brian's attempt to make the room better. He is trying new things. He is discussing ways to improve with players all the time. Let's see how player friendly this room becomes. One problem is the state requiring a long lead time to make changes.
Here is a response from the poker room manager to my post.
"Hello Mike. I certainly appreciate your feedback. The idea of the early registration is to encourage players to register early. Also the top 5 finishers from each tournament will qualify for a $25,000 Freeroll on May 26. I'm a huge advocate of tournaments. We offer daily tournaments at 12:15pm and 7:15pm, which has doubled our tournament play in less than six months. We continually try to come up with new bells and whistles to offer all of our tournament players.
We're going to give this a try April 4-May 26 and see what happens. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn't. But I won't give up trying new things. The rules for this were submitted and approved by the OCCC. Although we currently follow TDA, our new tournament rules are about completed and should be effective next week. They will certainly be more tournament player friendly."
Played there for first time a week ago Tuesday when I came up for Cavs-Pistons game 2. In town with buddy who doesn't play poker, so played the pits with him also for a good stretch. Obviously that got parking validated. If just playing poker, will they validate parking without using your comps?
Yeah, it's something different. Very slick. The color (predominately red with black) of the felt makes it difficult to see the current red chips but otherwise - honestly, it's not bad. In my opinion. What they need to do is change the table rail color from the horrible camel to black and the tables will look real good.
Really hope they stick with the standard cards instead of the jumbo ones... another poor decision.
I don't care for the jumbo decks either. But, I don't think it should be lumped in with poor decisions. I'm really indifferent about it. If we want changes made we can't nitpick to every detail we don't like.
Why does it matter (jumbo vs regular sized deck)? Is it more about protecting your cards and the thought that it's possible someone further away could see your cards from behind you? Or is there something else to this? Other than the larger text being easier on the eyes in general (and I am young and have good eyesight), I am going to be protecting those cards the best I can at all times anyway.
If there's one thing poker players are good at, it's complaining. Obviously people with poor eyesight will prefer jumbo and obviously people who play games with more than two hole cards will prefer standard. There's no pleasing everyone.
Jack Entertainment has stated they will be partnering with a property(ies) in Vegas where we can use our points/comp towards hotels. Anyone have any info on this? I haven't been able to find anything yet Cleveland is supposed to open in two days...
