did it ever dawn on u the same ones of us who hate straddles at MD live because we have to act FIRST in the blinds (but like the action in Reno and deadwood because here we dont have to act first when the button straddles but the UTG has to act first instead) are the same people who just want to play poker and would prefer there be no jackpot drop of any kind? u make it seem like these are 2 different people. also most of us nits who play very few hands cannot stand paying $2 for a promo drop (thats why we are nits). we certainly arent chasing high hands.

Id prefer a no jackpot game. But straddles creates action in games where sometimes there is very little action. I actually like when the button straddles my blinds b/c it prevents ME specifically from playing garbage. But that is a personal preference. If someone wants to blindly put their $ into a pot,regardless of position, im all for it

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

its only the rooms out EAST where the small blind acts first in straddles (tampa, MD, philadelphia, detroit, etc). in a lot of rooms out west (all of deadwood, all of Reno and a lot of vegas, nugget, encore, venetian, redrock, stratosphere, etc) the under the gun acts first instead. the reason rooms quit making the small blind act first even though the dealers find this more complicated to explain to the players the order is because they found out the button straddle was actually killing the action and nitting up the game due to the fold fold fold all around the table back to the button straddle. now the other way, the blinds are next to last as normal, and once it gets back to the blinds, they can put in a massive raise and often can steal the straddle and everyones limp. but they cant do this when they must act first.

I’ve only played a few times since the rule change, but ime the games were significantly tighter when a player was straddling the btn. The average pot size might have increased from doubling the stakes, but average vpip decreased dramatically. That shouldn't be surprising for anyone who actually plays poker. Most of the action should come from the LP players and blinds. A btn straddle removes some of the incentive for the blinds to play hands and adds incentive for a position that should be playing a ton of hands anyway.

The Chinese apps have done a great job adjusting game structures to increase both pot size and overall action. I’d much rather see MD Live innovate with a three blind game or btn ante to drive action and build larger games.

The new $6 time take at 2-2 5 card might be drying up the game. There’s only two tables running at 1 AM on a Friday night.

Isn’t that pretty cheap compared to a standard rake?

Only the casino knows that... it's likely cheaper per table than, say, a 4/8 holdem game where they're getting in 30-40 hands/hour, and pulling $4-$5 per hand. So $120-$200 per hour, 10 players = $12-$20 pp/hour.

But per hand, no way. You're probably lucky to get about 20 hands/hour on those tables.

PSA

Due to new carpet going in on the 2nd floor, Monday Aug 12, the 7:15 tournament will be cancelled. Apology for any inconvenience. But hey, new carpet

Thanks

Mike

New PSA cancel carpeting for this week

thanks

Mike

Thought the high hand promotions added a lot of excitement, though I could be biased since I binked one yesterday

Got an interesting Facebook "memory" pop up this week - a pic I took while attending the "pre-open" games at the poker room, where we actually had a great time playing 4-8 Omaha-8 and meeting what would become regular "poker acquaintances" at the new digs.

(Twitter equivalents:Post 1, Post 2)

Then also checked my latest session info... it's been over 35 days since I last played at MDL. This is in all likelihood the longest such streak in the last 6 years.

Is anything happening up there that makes it worthwhile to come back? Are there any spicy/fun games happening anymore, like those old rollicking O8 games that went until the breakfast hours on the weekends?

Mike, can you please provide a thought on this ruling?

Playing last night at MD Live, I was heads up on river and I bet and was called. I opened my hand, Dealer correctly called my hand, my opponent looked at my cards, and tossed his hand face down to the dealer.
A player to his left who saw his cards cried “no no no”.
The cards had touched the muck but were retrievable. The dealer allowed him his cards back, he revealed a hand that beat mine, and was awarded a nice pot (for a 4/8 game).
The supervisor was called over and agreed with dealer action. His primary point was that the poker room wants to see the winning hand at showdown get the pot.
I don’t argue the cards were retrievable even though they definitely touched the muck.
But there was also no question he made a clear and obvious motion folding his hand, pitching them face down to dealer, then changed his mind. Why is this action not binding? To me this is no different than making a clear motion indicating a check, and then changing your mind and deciding to bet. That would never be allowed. Should the winner of a hand be in part determined by how quickly a dealer mucks an obvious intent to fold?

Everyone reading this knows the other player should not have said “ no no no”, that is not what this post is about. It is about binding action and possible wrong decision by the floor.

In most rooms nowadays, forward discarding of your cards is not binding at showdown. At showdown, if your hand is retrievable and identifiable, it can be retrieved and tabled, even if you intended to muck it first. Touching the muck doesn't matter as long as they are still identifiable.
Dealers should be instructed to quickly muck any hands which are discarded (making them unidentifiable), but you are at their mercy to do so.

This is in contrast to (1) during the hand and (2) facing a bet, where a hand discarded forward is irretrievably folded. Obviously, you also can't change a check to a bet, etc.

As you note, the "no no no" guy should be warned or penalized, but that is separate from whether the hand should be killed. It should not, at showdown.

This about covers it

Thanks

Mike

Yeah I don't know any fun rec players that like to pay time.

It seems that any clear action being binding is a better rule, but I can respect this room guideline if executed properly.
Not only did dealer fail to promptly muck the folded.cards, but he should have been alerted and spurred to do so by the action of the third party saying “no no no”. Instead he used this as reason to hesitate more, rewarding the player who made a major error and validating/endorsing the action of the third party.

Mike, I get we are all human and mistakes happen, but the poor performance of your dealer cost me in a clearly tangible way. That is far more frustrating than the action of the ignorant third party who jus didn’t know any better.

Ton of mix game tournies available during the WPT: ( 5 card PLO, OE, HORSE, and PLO8). Come and get it later in September!

Oh and there’s some Hold’Em events too I guess.

https://www.livecasinohotel.com/site...Schedule_0.pdf


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IMO, that's the crux of the matter. Do you want to really want to win on technicalities?

I think the Opp definitely wants to win on a technicality. IMO he didn't have the winning hand and almost scooped the pot on a mistake and now wants us to feel sorry for him. Dealer doesn't care one way or the other.

I agree that this has become norm (I've seen it a lot) but I do question the consistency of this rule vs. the fact that "verbal declarations are binding."

This is a clear, non-verbal declaration that is not binding. Player's brain said "fold", his hands carried out the action, then brain changes mind and verbalizes "gimme back!"

Another oddity: the player's action is not the final determiner of the outcome, but the combination of their action PLUS the dealer's action (pulling into muck.)

If he had verbalized instead of acting, folder is SOL.

Kinda strange when you think about it... my advice to players just starting with casino poker is always "just say what you want to do" so their actions can't hurt them. In this case, the action would be the safer thing to do - never say "fold."

It is at showdown. No one is facing action. You cannot fold. You cannot "verbalize" mucking (absent a room rule about concession, which is not a rule most rooms have). In fact, you cannot really verbalize anything at showdown - cards speak.

Even during the play of the hand, if your cards are discarded forward while not facing any action, your hand may still be ruled live and returned to you and you may be permitted to check (though I agree this is probably subject to a wide variance of outcomes in practice). In fact, folding when not facing action is considered a violation of etiquette.

I agree that there is a certain lack of elegance to the change in how different actions are treated at showdown. Maybe they stem from the long ago rules where ALL hands remaining at showdown had to be shown, there was no mucking allowed. Or maybe it's just because of our attempt to make the game safer for players when hands are misread or misdeclared. In any case, that is how the game is played now, so that is how the rules reflect it.

Great point, I hadn't thought of it that way, so a muck is technically not a fold.

And I've never heard anyone state "muck!"

Exactly. I say "straight" and then lose to a higher straight, then someone points out that I actually have a flush. Flush counts, not what was verbalized. At showdown, you can say just about anything and it doesn't matter.

If there is any action pending, then it is a different matter entirely.

Mike,
At last nights Tournament, the 10k bounty, we had a issue at the final table. Minutes after finally combining for the final table 15 mins before the break. One player decided that since we couldn’t decide on a chop he was leaving and just being blinded out with a healthy chip stack. Is this allowed? This leaves 9 others players playing it out for another few hours because one person decided to leave and we couldn’t chop even after it got to 5 players? Can you advise?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Man, that is quite a troll. A+