I was surprised to see our 8-max mixed game being spread on our largest poker table. And sure enough, no one could readthe board cards unless they belonged to their immediate neighbor...

... but the players remarked that this table was much nicer than the stud table which usually hosted this game.

Care to guess why?

The other night a player showed up and was told he would be the first one on the 1/2 waiting list. He then went on a rant about how it was stupid that our tables were 9 handed. If the tables were 10 handed nobody would have to wait. Every other room in the country was 10 handed.

I thought about explaining that we'd still have the problem when exactly 41 or 51 players want a seat as we do now with 46 players, but he didn't seem open to logic. I went back to the podium for the 90 seconds it took for a seat to open up.

Every room that I can think of in South Florida is 9 handed. Possibly Gulfstream Park is 10 handed? I'm not sure. I haven't been to Vegas in a while so I can't recall how many seats are at their tables. I'm a huge supporter of 9-handed with a 3rd man walking rule.

I've been meaning to start a list of things the players here insist is done differently in every poker room. If I let them talk long enough it usually comes out that they've only played in 2-3 other rooms, one of them being an underground or home game.

One that keeps coming up is that at showdown if all but one player mucks without showing, the winning player does not have to show their cards. I've been told several times that every other room requires them to show or lets someone without cards ask for them to be shown. Apparently the other 6 rooms I've dealt cash in and the 35ish I've played all missed this memo.

I love 9 handed when playing and dealing. The only problem I have is that we (as with most 9-handed rooms I've visited) have 10 cup holders. This leads to endless confusion.

Here in LA all the tables are 9 handed

While I prefer 9 handed I hate the constant grief of dealing with players who think an 11 handed game is short handed.

At a 9 handed table with one open seat and a player gone to the bathroom these guys are huffing and puffing and craning their necks to see if their are seats at other tables...

Ugh. I hate the 9 vs 10-handed thing. In our room we typically go 9 at NL, but will go 10 when the next player waiting is a certain tier level or higher, or when we're really busy and don't have a dealer to open another table. What sucks is going from 9 to 10 to 9 to 10 constantly. Then there are our "seat 5" players, who can't see and demand seat 5. They even race each other to get here 1st to sign up. One of these guys, when I make his game 10-handed, pushing him to seat 6, always immediately makes sure I know that he gets to go back to 5 when the table goes back to 9. When he calls up, his name isn't "John S", it's "John S Seat 5."

One day I made it 10-handed for a tiered player, a really nice older lady. A few minutes later another player left, going back to 9. Literally 2 seconds later after I pull a chair out, I turn around and see a top-tier player. The top tier players go to the top of the list automatically, and then of course can make a game 10.

Feel free to tell your manager that constantly shifting from 9 to 10 handed and back is colossally stupid.

As bad as the 9 to 10 to 9 thing is, it's not the worst policy mentioned in that post--I wouldn't play in a room where the "top tier players go to the top of the list automatically".

"I was next?"

"Sorry, sir, but three VIP's came in since then, now you're fourth."

"What is this? Southwest Airlines? What am I, steerage?"

I'm all for giving VIP treatment to a VIP player--but never at the expense of the other players! That's dumb on its face, from a business standpoint! How can you imagine that this is good business?

Because in most places, the business is bigger than the poker room and that person could literally be responsible for a whole number percentage of the casino’s monthly revenue.

Should it be extended to a wide range of tiered players? No. But is it appropriate for the top tier? I think yes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's understandable in a restaurant. In a poker room it's antithetical to the nature of the business. The poker room is supposed to be a nuetral third party running a game between the players. If you start out by management declaring some players more important then other players why should you trust them to run a fair game?

Changing 9 to 10 players when the management feels like it is pretty bad because the players never understand the criteria being used so they feel it should be changed Everytime there is a wait.

I worked in a 9 handed locals room where the grave yard shift manager would make it 10 handed. As a result all day long whenever someone was on the wait list wed hear constant complaints about why were we now not making it tends handed...

Just pick one and stick with it.

my room spreads limit games 9-handed, NL games 10-handed.

You know, pretty much the opposite of the way I was brought up.

I get that, but in this case there are only about 3 or 4 players who play poker who are at that level. So yeah there's grumbling but it doesn't happen enough for it to be a big deal.

This is exactly why the casino should want them on the waiting list and not in the game.

This


Also this.

Whenever somebody tries to tell me that we should cater to regulars, one of two things is always true;

1) That player plays less than 10 hours a week on average
2) I will respond with “You should play at [room that closed a year ago]. I heard they do that sorta stuff”

I once dealt a LHE game in Missouri which sat 10 players but only 9 were dealt in. Usually someone would be off smoking or whatever, but if all 10 were there UTG would be dealt out. I imagine it was done to combat the issue of 9 handed tables getting short, but maybe they were only approved for 9 handed play? Not sure. Nobody playing seemed to think it was odd.

On the topic of stupid rules, about 10 years ago Colorado had $5 max betting in their casinos. $5 blackjack. $5-5 limit poker. And so on. But they did have some pretty decent tournaments.

Some genius at the state government office figured out that a NL tournament should begin with a certain number of limit hands with the formula being that for every $100 in the initial buy in, a hand of limit poker would be played. So a $300 tournament would feature 3 hands of limit before transferring to no limit. Players would stand around the edge of the room, taking their time to talk to each other, order a drink, or whatever, as 2 or 3 players would sit at the table and play out the designated number of limit hands. And as soon as the game went no limit, the tables would immediately fill up.

Haha, that is choice. I cannot begin to understand the "logic" of that one.

1) I know of no rooms (anymore) that require an unchallenged hand at showdown to be shown ... although within the rules (since we are at showdown) the request to show by a player dealt in but didn't make it to the River would be considered pretty bad ... well beyond my 'once a month' label ... if there was no betting on the River.
2) Allowing a player who missed the SB 'only' to post it on the Button in the next hand ... as long as they also straddle (if allowed).

3) Various enforcement of the 50% rule.
4) Various table changing 'policies' when it comes to a player's stack or ability to move to newly opened tables.
5) A few stragglers of the 'forward motion' concept of folding/mucking.
6) Various straddle options, including 'the rock' or Mississippi .. especially when the bet has to be out there.

7) RIT options, if any
8) Missed BB or dinner options ... when do you pick a player up?
9) Showing cards/table talk
10) Waiting period to come back in at table stakes if you pick up and cash out

There's more I'm sure ... GL

1- My room (Parx) requires an unchallenged hand at showdown to be tabled in order to win the pot. It is because the PA (and NJ) gambling law is written poorly and seems to require it. Most other NJ and PA rooms used to require it as well, though many have stopped in the past year or two. I've posted about this numerous times.

2- I'm not sure if you're saying that allowing the SB to post on the button is dumb, or only requiring a straddle to do it, which doesn't even make sense.

6- What about rocks do you find stupid? They work fine. I do hate mississippi straddles, they kill action and give the button way too much an advantage.

I think he was just listing those things that players insist is always done a different way from the way his room does it.....

You know the routine .... "But in every other room the rule is ....."

d'oh! Makes sense. Apologies.

I was already prepared to ask all of my early dealers how much OT they can do today when my 11am dealer called out. Today is going to be fun.

11) Min raise after a straddle ($2-$5 with a $10 straddle) is the minimum initial raise $15 or $20?
12) Straddle amounts. I know one room that will allow a player to straddle for up to half of his total stack at a 1-2 table.

One of my favorite "But thats not how they do it in every other room" stories.

Before the poker boom I was playing in an Indian Casino back east. There is a big commotion at another table ($3-$6 limit Holdem) one of the regular players is ranting and raving about how she has played poker in rooms all across the country and she has never heard of such a ridiculous rule and the staff here has no idea about the rules of poker ...

So what happened?

Well apparently she got to showdown against another player and there was a flush on the board. But here opponent held a card of the suit that was high enough to play so he had the higher flush .... but according to her in every other cardroom in the country if there is a flush on the board ... its a split pot ..... And she was arguing loud enough for everyone to hear....