Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyGroomsTD
Back from my one month exile. I will answer many of the questions posed since then. The 20/40 mix game did run regularly.... Then it was decided that they wanted to spread 30/60. The game was full. Later that day, a 10/20 started. The players in the 10/20 game wanted to change to 20/40. Some players in the 30 game left and went to the formerly 10/20 game that had changed to 20/40. The players in the 30 game were very upset. I made the decision that we would spread 10, 20 and 40 to keep the games healthy and consistent.
That fair, and I appreciate the response. I'm aware of what happened on that occasion and my 2 cents worth is that a better approach would probably have been to not let the 10 game get kicked up to 20 while a 30 game was running. But that's splitting hairs. In general, I think the policy of trying to protect running games is a good one and double the stakes to run another game of same type concurrently is right.
That said, for edge games like mid/high stakes mix/LHE, that only go because players actively get them together, I disagree that having a blanket policy of 10, 20, 40 is best. I think it would be better to trust the people who are bringing the game to the room on stakes that they want to play. I guess I just don't see the harm in spreading a game that usually goes as 20 at 30 instead if that's what the people who are playing that day want and there's not another game actively running that it conflicts with. but maybe I don't have the correct perspective.
At the end of the day, I don't really have a personal interest in this particular situation. I just think it's unfortunate, and bad for everyone (the room and the players) when people who put a lot of effort into getting games running get burned out or otherwise jaded by decisions made by the room that they don't understand. It means hard to find games will run less often.