3rd man walking means that once 3 people are away from the table, a 4th can't leave unless s/he is picking up from the game completely. (sometimes people use it to mean once 2 leave, the 3rd can't leave.) Sometimes the 3rd man also has a short time frame they are allowed to be away (10 or 15 min, or until their next blind), or else their chips get picked up. This prevents the table from going down to 5 or 6 handed while multiple people are just away for dinner, bathroom, etc., and their chips are still locking up a chair preventing you from getting back up to a more full table.

[Aside to IFSATG: I have no problem with this rule, and I wish they had it in place even 10 handed.]

The 15-30 had a must-move created on Thursday night (or was it Saturday?) last week. It was must move for at least a couple hours (its full duration), until it broke. It was down to 3 or 4 handed at one point, but then it picked back up to be full or nearly full again, before eventually dwindling and breaking.

i've only seen it used with the 3rd man has a time limit, usually 10 minutes. it'd be tough to stop someone from leaving if they had to go to the bathroom while 2 people take a dinner break

This is specious. Instead say you have 4 good players and 5 bad players at a table. If the next person on the list is another bad player, would you rather the table be 9 handed or 10? What if the next person on the list is a good player, instead?

You can't save the extra seat just for bad players. Over the long term, your table (and, more specifically, that extra 10th seat) will have bad players in the same proportion as the player pool for the game does, regardless of the number of seats at each table.

I prefer 9 as well.

+1. this should be obvious to poker players. its all about the odds. odds are the same.

If we go to 9 handed, we would use the 3rd man walking rule. All this feedback is great, thank you.

Ari,

Just wanted to acknowledge that your efforts and responsiveness to us is incredible and much appreciated. It is truly awesome to see you and your team taking our concerns and suggestions into consideration and then implementing the appropriate changes. Well done

Not entirely, but your point is good.

The real point is- fewer seats available, fewer casual players can get in (because the regs will be camped out).

However, Parx's tables may not be big enough for a comfortable, long-term 10-seat game.

Ari,

Just out of curiosity, what would your 3rd-man rule @ Parx look like? Ideally, I'd love to see something like the following:

-- Regardless of how many people are at the table, any player will be picked up if he has acquired one "absent" button and the next dealer push comes. That gives a player a maximum of just under an hour to "walk." Other rooms I've played in wait until there's two absent buttons, which is too long. 30 mins would be the best, but there's no way to enforce that unless Bravo Genesis can reliably time how long a player has been away.

-- If there are two people already on a "walk," the third person to leave the table has ten minutes to return to the table or he is picked up. All that really allows for is a bathroom/cigarette break, which is a good thing.

And thanks for being so responsive to 2+2ers' suggestions in this thread.

KYW1060 is a very popular news radio channel in the tristate area. Lots of people listen to it for weather and traffic reports, "2, 3, 4 times a day" << that's their slogan

1/2 plo anyone. Playing 5 handed atm.

Thanks Ari, I would also urge you to implement the policy as Rapini outlines below!

This is precisely how it should work. If the Bravo system can track time, then 30 minutes (or 45 mins,MAXIMUM) in lobby mode = picked up (please be prompt and consistent with this). If absent buttons are used, the new dealer arriving will call for a pickup as soon as they sit down, for any player who has a button.

The 2 absent button rule is too much time, especially when there is a long waiting list of players. Allowing 30-45 minutes is sufficient time to grab a snack or, take a break - without leaving the game with a prolonged empty seat.

If you need more than 30-45 minutes, you should pick up and go on the dinner list. I presume that Parx will have (or already has) a dinner list policy.

The only problem with the Bravo watch is that you don't "lobby" time game players.

9 handed tables create longer wait lists and one less player the casino can potentially take rake / time charge from. Many players including myself prefer the comfort of 9 handed tables, but they are worse for the casino's bottom line and generally (not always) worse for the game.

Oooopss - yep. Forgot about that. So much for using technology.

Absent buttons it is!

If you are worried about people taking long breaks, you should publicize the dinner list better. I know it exists at Parx, and I make use of it all the time, but it doesn't seem like many people do.

The best reason to play a "worse" game at a higher stake is because you think you will make more money doing so, which is surely an important thing to anyone who is playing the game for a living. You play to maximize your win rate within the bounds of the risk your bankroll can tolerate, not to ensure that your every session is a winner.

Even if one concedes that a lower stake game is "better", one must make twice as much per hour playing in it to break even. Dropping from 15-30 to 4-8 requires making almost four times as much per hour. It's up to each player to determine how well they think they can play in each game, but almost no one who thinks they can make 1BB/hr at 30-60 is going to be interested in playing the 4-8, no matter how juicy it is.

As for the Bellagio games, I am far from a regular in those games. But my experience there over the past year does not match what you describe. Both games were ~80% regs, and tables of both would start and break with roughly the same pattern having to do with time of day and almost nothing else. If a game imploded because of reg sharkiness, it was going to break anyway because it was 4am.

The Parx 15 game is rather reg-infested at the moment, and I agree it will (hopefully!) get better when there are more tables available. But in my experience the game runs short exactly twice per day: once when it first gets going, and once as it dies each night. Moving to play 9 handed (with a must move) won't do anything to change that, particularly if they implement 3mw.

Just my opinion.

Watching closer, you would notice that when there are 2+ games at B, the table transfer list is your indication of what the regs consider the softest of the games. So, it doesn't even out as you say, the empty seats at the soft game are filled by the reg's on the transfer list... new players go to the table they vacate.

Then the whole dynamic changes again, as that table gets tougher and the other tables either get soft or not. If they do, the transfer list changes.

Some weekend nights, I have table changed 3+ times, over 12 hours - to get away from the regs that have transferred to my soft table and also to get into softer games that have evolved. Maybe they are chasing me

Pay attention to the table chemistry and the transfer lists when your there. There is no reason not to be in the softest of games. If you can't find a game there that you can crush - give up poker!

The 15 game gets a MM table now & then. I suspect that this will continue and even expand to other games/limits, as the room continues to grow.

I think the only thing hurting this room right now is:

Not the smoking (I sat near the bar again and had no issue on Saturday night)

Not the table size (I am sorry but fish do not care about the table size and they are who I want to play)

Not the comps (Even though 5/10 NL players should get more comp than 1/2 NL players)

It is the wait times!!!

Once the expansion occurs I think the waits times will dimish somewhat but this may be countered by more people coming due to the table games and non-regulars who want to play but not for a two hour wait. Therefore, making games 9 handed could possibly keep wait times a fixture on weekends which will hurt the games in the long run.

Also, while action online in short games improves I am not convinced this holds true live. Even when people do not chop in a short game, raises drop in a short game and you have fewer multi-way pots.

I think short games are bad for the game. So keep the tables at 10!

Your logic is sound.

However, all said, you also have to consider the probability of loss. Even for a winning player, the probability of loss is greater in a tougher game. Contrast that with the higher probability of winning in a softer game and the 4X delta is really somewhere well south of 2X. Meaning that playing in a good 4-8 game gives up less than 50% of a tough 8-16 potential.

I've played between 4-8 and 30-60 in the span of one session at B. I just always look for the softest game in the room. The slope may be shallow, but it still goes up and risk remains low. It's not about BR. I'm not gonna try and grind out rent money in the 30 game, or the 15 game - if they are bad games. I'll play 4-8 or 8-16.

On thing that will happen in the Parx 15 game (or any limit game for that matter), if it goes to 9-handed is: the value of drawing hands will go down. Many of us agree that drawing hands are where you have the most potential for making the most money.

Way out of scope for this thread, but you will (correctly) have to consider the fact that you will often not be getting the right price for your drawing hands. . You're giving up potential profit.

Go back into the archives of RGP. There was a huge discussion around this, many years ago, relating to the CA 9-handed games. A couple of the people that are hero-worshipped here on 2p2 contributed to that discussion and analogy.

It was, ironically, one of the few things I ever agreed with them about

Heh, you've nailed why I, personally, would rather play 10 handed (though the fat man in me will enjoy the extra room of the 9). I prefer the slightly looser action preflop with lots of drawing and larger pots. I doubt a switch to 9-handed will have too much of an effect, but any change will likely be to my personal detriment.

I was hoping that the move to 9 handed might only go for the NL games, but it looks like the ship might be sailing for the whole room. Eh, adapt or drown, I guess.

Is there any mid-stakes LHE game in the country that isn't reg-infested?

Ari,

I'm curious about the dinner list too. Is it 1 hour? I really think it should be extended to at least 1.5 hours. In the Borg, for instance, I can go and get food fairly easily and right near the poker room. But at Parx, I'm inclined to drive down Street Road to one of the many restaurants there. (Or I'd think even going to the restaurants in the main building, at a leisurely pace, would take some time.) I want to feel comfortable going out to eat, and then returning to Parx, without the fear of having to wait on a long line. Just a thought.

I think there is some confusion here, you are picked up off the table after 45 minutes of not being there.

To go on a dinner list you pick up your chips and speak to the floor. When you return back from dinner you are placed at the top of the list for the next seat in order of departure. This is definitely the way to go if you are leaving the site. I have not heard a cap on the dinner list time, but can't imagine it would be less than two hours.