Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Venues & Communities Discussion of live, legal poker venues, and discussion among players in live poker "neighborhoods."

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-07-2010, 05:16 PM   #2151
Grim Horse
grinder
 
Grim Horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The other side of the monitor.
Posts: 517
Re: PARX Poker Thread

I definitely support (and have been advocating ) third man walking.
Grim Horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 05:33 PM   #2152
JohnCash
banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: In the soft count room
Posts: 412
Re: PARX Poker Thread

I can't imagine a place with really long wait lists not strictly enforcing a 3rd man walking rule.
JohnCash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 05:35 PM   #2153
2to1Underdog
centurion
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Phila
Posts: 115
Re: PARX Poker Thread

Was at parx last night for the fourth time and first losing session. Could not getting nothing started and was getting run down all night long. But I will be back , I ain't scared. Does anyone know when parx will be serving alcohol 24 hours a day, I've never been there around 2am before but there was a mass exodus around that time and every table seemed like it was just regs.

Around 4 am we got a new player sat at our table and one of the regulars greets him by saying " welcome to the shark tank " I just loled and picked up
2to1Underdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 05:42 PM   #2154
Nighthawk419
journeyman
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 304
Re: PARX Poker Thread

You regs crack me up in these threads. You are all so concerned about your health and comfort that you forget that whats ultimately best for you is to GET MORE FISH.

What do fish want?

no waiting lists - 10 vs. 9 has a huge impact on waiting lists, if you go to 9, youll have much longer wait lists, which means someone casually wanting to walk in and play might see a list 20 deep and say "F that im not waiting" and leave. meanwhile if tables stay 10 handed, that 20 person list is only 2-3 people and Fish has no problem hanging around for 10 mins.

to be able to smoke - get all whiny with being able to smoke at the bar and youll get less fish because smokers tend to get pissy when they cant easily get a light. ive been there multiple times all over the room and havent smelled a thing unless the guy next to me just finished smoking.

Its just ridiculous that everyone debates and bitches about such little issues not even realizing that they are driving away the casual players and thereby decreasing their win-rate. I dunno about you, but I'd rather win $15/hr and be a little cramped rather than win $10 an hour and be able to spread my legs lol. Do on a diet!
Nighthawk419 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 05:42 PM   #2155
IluvParxPoker
newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Philly
Posts: 32
Re: PARX Poker Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2to1Underdog View Post
Was at parx last night for the fourth time and first losing session. Could not getting nothing started and was getting run down all night long. But I will be back , I ain't scared. Does anyone know when parx will be serving alcohol 24 hours a day, I've never been there around 2am before but there was a mass exodus around that time and every table seemed like it was just regs.

Around 4 am we got a new player sat at our table and one of the regulars greets him by saying " welcome to the shark tank " I just loled and picked up
I could be wrong, but i dont thing this will be happening.... ever! It is pa state law to stop serving alcohol at 2am.
IluvParxPoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 06:20 PM   #2156
IFSATG
adept
 
IFSATG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Searchn4Lite NtheDarknessOfInsanity
Posts: 714
Re: PARX Poker Thread

Correct. It is also that way in the Indian Reservations in CT.

However, there is a glimmer of hope for extended hours...

This bill is on again/off again in the PA legislature. It would permit sale of alcohol until 5AM.

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...r=2206&pn=3147
IFSATG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 06:41 PM   #2157
IluvParxPoker
newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Philly
Posts: 32
Re: PARX Poker Thread

sorry to derail the thread, but if that bill was passed would it just be for PA casinos? Or would it include all bars?
IluvParxPoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 06:47 PM   #2158
ashinynickel
veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,608
Re: PARX Poker Thread

Floor last night after hearing me say that they might put in a bad beat jackpot:

"No plans for it soon. Earliest is next summer. Dropping $6 a hand takes too much money off the table and players go broke faster."

Awesome that they are thinking like that.
ashinynickel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 06:50 PM   #2159
IFSATG
adept
 
IFSATG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Searchn4Lite NtheDarknessOfInsanity
Posts: 714
Re: PARX Poker Thread

This would be a reversal of what Ari told me a while back.

There will be no BBJ at Parx [period]
IFSATG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 07:05 PM   #2160
ashinynickel
veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,608
Re: PARX Poker Thread

I mean he basically said it wasn't happening. If it was it would be this summer at the earliest. I'd be down if they dropped the rake...
ashinynickel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 07:26 PM   #2161
Richyrich9987
adept
 
Richyrich9987's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,159
Re: PARX Poker Thread

what is 3mw rule?
Richyrich9987 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 07:33 PM   #2162
Phaedrus29
centurion
 
Phaedrus29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 163
Re: PARX Poker Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nighthawk419 View Post
What do fish want?

no waiting lists - 10 vs. 9 has a huge impact on waiting lists, if you go to 9, youll have much longer wait lists, which means someone casually wanting to walk in and play might see a list 20 deep and say "F that im not waiting" and leave. meanwhile if tables stay 10 handed, that 20 person list is only 2-3 people and Fish has no problem hanging around for 10 mins.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the idea of going to 9-handed tables would only be implemented once the expansion happens. Wait times shouldn't be much of a problem then. And I'm not so sure that having 10-handed tables reduces the wait time. I say this because, with 9-handed tables, we will have a better chance of keeping must-move games alive. With the must-moves in place, wait times should be reduced.
Phaedrus29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 07:36 PM   #2163
IFSATG
adept
 
IFSATG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Searchn4Lite NtheDarknessOfInsanity
Posts: 714
Re: PARX Poker Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by IluvParxPoker View Post
sorry to derail the thread, but if that bill was passed would it just be for PA casinos? Or would it include all bars?
Different versions of the bill have it both ways. One way - casinos only. Another way - many bars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ashinynickel View Post
I mean he basically said it wasn't happening. If it was it would be this summer at the earliest. I'd be down if they dropped the rake...
OK - I could buy that. At least the extra $1 would go toward a lottery ticket, not just down the hole.

Edit: Nah - F-that. I so hate the very principle of the BBJ.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richyrich9987 View Post
what is 3mw rule?
Third Man Walking

Last edited by IFSATG; 12-07-2010 at 07:38 PM. Reason: Never, ever, ever have a BBJ at Parx..... EVER!!!!!!!!!
IFSATG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 09:12 PM   #2164
Ari
Poker Room Rep
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Parx
Posts: 190
Re: PARX Poker Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by ashinynickel View Post
You sure about the $2 chip being nixed at 2/5? I've still been seeing it.

How do you guys feel about the rule that you can only call clock if you are in the hand with cards?
We changed the rule so anyone dealt in can call the clock.
Ari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 09:14 PM   #2165
Ari
Poker Room Rep
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Parx
Posts: 190
Re: PARX Poker Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by IFSATG View Post
This would be a reversal of what Ari told me a while back.

There will be no BBJ at Parx [period]
We have no plans for a BBJ.
Ari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 09:43 PM   #2166
spresso81
centurion
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 116
Re: PARX Poker Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ari View Post
We have no plans for a BBJ.
Also "We changed the rule so anyone dealt in can call the clock."

Great work again Ari. Every change you have made is showing why Parx is going to be the place to play poker.
spresso81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2010, 11:21 PM   #2167
sling7
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 52
Re: PARX Poker Thread

400 players 10 handed = 40 games. 400 players 9 handed = 44 games.
$5 rake each hand and an average of 35 hands per hour = $175 per game. With the four extra games the house would rake $700 more per hour. If they could do this 7 days a week, 10 hours each day, 365 days a year the house would rake $2,555,000 more in a year (700x10x365). This is more money directly out of the players pockets. I can't see why anyone would want to play 9 handed in a raked game, except that they are too cramped. These numbers are hypothetical, but it's easy to see why the casino would prefer 9 handed games.
sling7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2010, 03:20 AM   #2168
2to1Underdog
centurion
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Phila
Posts: 115
Re: PARX Poker Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by sling7 View Post
400 players 10 handed = 40 games. 400 players 9 handed = 44 games.
$5 rake each hand and an average of 35 hands per hour = $175 per game. With the four extra games the house would rake $700 more per hour. If they could do this 7 days a week, 10 hours each day, 365 days a year the house would rake $2,555,000 more in a year (700x10x365). This is more money directly out of the players pockets. I can't see why anyone would want to play 9 handed in a raked game, except that they are too cramped. These numbers are hypothetical, but it's easy to see why the casino would prefer 9 handed games.
If this is right ? Im going to change my vote to keep it 10 handed.
2to1Underdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2010, 10:23 AM   #2169
IFSATG
adept
 
IFSATG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Searchn4Lite NtheDarknessOfInsanity
Posts: 714
Re: PARX Poker Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by sling7 View Post
400 players 10 handed = 40 games. 400 players 9 handed = 44 games.
$5 rake each hand and an average of 35 hands per hour = $175 per game. With the four extra games the house would rake $700 more per hour. If they could do this 7 days a week, 10 hours each day, 365 days a year the house would rake $2,555,000 more in a year (700x10x365). This is more money directly out of the players pockets. I can't see why anyone would want to play 9 handed in a raked game, except that they are too cramped. These numbers are hypothetical, but it's easy to see why the casino would prefer 9 handed games.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2to1Underdog View Post
If this is right ? Im going to change my vote to keep it 10 handed.
Well, in theory, it "could" happen like this. We could also find Democrats & Republicans working together to make our country a better place... but, that's almost as much of a long-shot.

The "casino" is not forcing this down anyone's throat. The "casino" is asking the players which configuration they would prefer. The "casino" understands that happy players = more business = more profit.

There is no poker room on the planet that can keep 40+ tables going fully seated, for 10 hours/day, 7days/week, 365 days/year... and always draw maximum rake from averaging 35 hands/hour. The argument is waaaaay too slanted to the extreme. I have no inclination to redo the formula's with some "real world" numbers, however.

But, the point is well taken - even if the example is not accurately describing the real-world potential.

There have been innumerable discussions & debates over "who actually pays the rake" - I do not want to start that up here, in this thread. But, let's just assume for a moment, that it's just "money out of everyone's pocket".

The more significant contribution to a (good) player's P&L is, the dynamic of the game, that will be created by the number of players dealt in. That has been discussed in previous posts, here in this thread and also in the strategy forums.

The rake, as it comes directly out of your pocket, or expressed as "money off the table" - is trivial, compared to this, when comparing 9 v. 10 player tables.

You should base any decision about what you'd prefer, based on your overall assessment of: a) the type of game dynamic you would rather play, b) your ability to adapt to changing game conditions c) your understanding about the difference in value between a made-hand and a draw, based on real and implied odds and lastly (but not the least), your game selection ability - you're gonna need this one.

The rake differential is so far down the list, it's almost a rounding error, compared to these.

Last edited by IFSATG; 12-08-2010 at 10:28 AM.
IFSATG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2010, 12:58 PM   #2170
sling7
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 52
Re: PARX Poker Thread

[QUOTE=IFSATG;23377581]
There is no poker room on the planet that can keep 40+ tables going fully seated, for 10 hours/day, 7days/week, 365 days/year... and always draw maximum rake from averaging 35 hands/hour.
QUOTE]

The numbers are just an example, but even two extra games at less than maximun rake every day would make a million dollars a year in rake.
sling7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2010, 01:12 PM   #2171
Jeffawesome
veteran
 
Jeffawesome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,211
Re: PARX Poker Thread

nine handed is better for everyone
Jeffawesome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2010, 01:21 PM   #2172
sling7
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 52
Re: PARX Poker Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by IFSATG View Post
You should base any decision about what you'd prefer, based on your overall assessment of: a) the type of game dynamic you would rather play, b) your ability to adapt to changing game conditions c) your understanding about the difference in value between a made-hand and a draw, based on real and implied odds and lastly (but not the least), your game selection ability - you're gonna need this one.
The rake differential is so far down the list, it's almost a rounding error, compared to these.
The rake is high on my list when selecting games to play. It is the reason I will not play 2-4, 3-6, or 4-8 limit or 1-2 NL. 10 handed vs 9 handed is a 10% difference, that is not trivial. 9 handed will not change the dynamic of the game and it will be the same players, they will just be paying more rake. Although they might have more leg room.
sling7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2010, 01:27 PM   #2173
dinesh
Pooh-Bah
 
dinesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,872
Re: PARX Poker Thread

They will also win more pots. You need to consider this when you consider the higher percentage of time you pay the rake.

As for more tables meaning more rake collected, this is true (though as mentioned it is mitigated at a winning player level by winning more pots), and the effect of taking more money out of the poker community (much like a BBJ) is one that should be considered/investigated.

It's worth noting that it actually becomes less important once the tables are all filled, because when all available tables are occupied, the rake collected is the same regardless of whether they are 9 or 10 handed. At that point, the issue becomes one of wait lists.
dinesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2010, 02:32 PM   #2174
sling7
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 52
Re: PARX Poker Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinesh View Post
They will also win more pots. You need to consider this when you consider the higher percentage of time you pay the rake.

As for more tables meaning more rake collected, this is true (though as mentioned it is mitigated at a winning player level by winning more pots), and the effect of taking more money out of the poker community (much like a BBJ) is one that should be considered/investigated.

It's worth noting that it actually becomes less important once the tables are all filled, because when all available tables are occupied, the rake collected is the same regardless of whether they are 9 or 10 handed. At that point, the issue becomes one of wait lists.
It is true that you will win more pots 9 handed. If you play heads up you will win a lot more pots, you will also pay so much rake as to make it unprofitable, unless the rake is lower. More pots does not always mean more profit. Losing players win more pots than winning players because they play more hands, of course they also lose morre pots.

If the room expands to 60 table it will rarely be full and 9 handed games will mean more rake collected. In time games it will mean less rake collected, but they are a small percentage of the games.
sling7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2010, 02:32 PM   #2175
IFSATG
adept
 
IFSATG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Searchn4Lite NtheDarknessOfInsanity
Posts: 714
Re: PARX Poker Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by sling7 View Post


The numbers are just an example, but even two extra games at less than maximun rake every day would make a million dollars a year in rake.
Stop focusing on how much money the house makes, based on the rake of x-players/table and concentrate on how much money you make, playing in the dynamic of the game.

FWIW, the incremental rake not $1M, trust me. You are not taking into consideration the avg drop/time/table. Nor are you factoring in the avg # of tables running, over a full year. It's actually more complicated than that, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sling7 View Post
The rake is high on my list when selecting games to play. It is the reason I will not play 2-4, 3-6, or 4-8 limit or 1-2 NL. 10 handed vs 9 handed is a 10% difference, that is not trivial. 9 handed will not change the dynamic of the game and it will be the same players, they will just be paying more rake. Although they might have more leg room.
You might not play (or shouldn't play) those games because you can't beat the rake in general (2/4 and 3/6). At 4-8 and above, you can beat the game. I know many people who consistently beat 1/2NL for $10+/hr. But, NL is a different dynamic and does not suffer anywhere near as much as limit games, based on # of players - as you can manipulate the price in that game.

It's not a 10% difference, BTW. You have to factor the number of hands you are involved in, pots won and avg pot size. The effect of rake in a 9 v. 10 handed game is not contributing to the toughness around beating the game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinesh View Post
They will also win more pots. You need to consider this when you consider the higher percentage of time you pay the rake.
Exactly!

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinesh View Post
As for more tables meaning more rake collected, this is true (though as mentioned it is mitigated at a winning player level by winning more pots), and the effect of taking more money out of the poker community (much like a BBJ) is one that should be considered/investigated.
Yep - although, when you analyze how much of that ""community" money would end up in your stack, that's pretty low, in general. Not many of us play 7X24X365. It has an effect, just not as great as some rake-focused thinking would have you believe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinesh View Post
It's worth noting that it actually becomes less important once the tables are all filled, because when all available tables are occupied, the rake collected is the same regardless of whether they are 9 or 10 handed. At that point, the issue becomes one of wait lists.
Absolutely true!!!

Wait lists aside - the issue is the value of hands. You have to adapt to the # of players dealt in, since this affects which hands you can (should) play profitably... again - a limit concern much more than a NL concern.


We're getting way OT here... so I'll end with this:
My point continues to be, if Parx goes 9 handed (in limit games), I will not be able to extract maximum profit as much as I may like, due to the fact that the real possibility exists, that the game may be too short (at times) to play the hands that afford the the greatest profit potential. It has virtually nothing to do with the rake structure, including the small amount of money "out of the community" - based on my (or anyone's) annual playing habits.

I don't give a rats-ass what they do with NL, because: a) I don't play NL and b) 9 v. 10 handed is significantly less relevant at NL.

For limit players, I strongly urge you all to understand this concept. dinesh, I know you get it

Last edited by IFSATG; 12-08-2010 at 02:44 PM.
IFSATG is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive