My room did it this way until I became manager. This was a rule I changed right away. It makes the floor's job much easier to just go by the list. Also, as a floor I always noticed the newer players or at least the players that didn't understand the MM concept would end up getting the shaft because they couldn't foresee the game breaking like the regs could and they ended up on the waiting list or just leaving as a result. If I just move them in order, they understand why I'm doing it and no unsuspecting noob feels shafted. A lot of noobs are too afraid to raise their hand or don't even know what they are raising their hand for when the floor comes over and asks who wants to move to the main game.

Yeah that optional-move list just seems like a massive headache and a way for regs to take an even bigger advantage over non-regs

Just don’t have a MM then, imo.

A lot of it has to do with what you think the purpose of a must move is. If you feel the purpose is to protect the players who have been their longest from having their game go short or break then keeping a must move at all times makes sense.

I on the other hand like to think that is not the purpose. The purpose is to allow the card room to open a new game when they would otherwise want to maintain a list to be able to fill seats in the main game so that opening the new game doesn't damage the first game(s).

So if you agree with me about the purpose .... There are times when having a must move makes no sense. Say for example you have 1 game. You get a list of 20 names and then you open a new game..... You still have a decent list ... No need for the game to be a must move. Likewise if you open a must move .... After some period of time it may be fair to say opening of this game didn't damage the older game(s) and now we can proceed without keeping it a must move. How long that time period is may be debatable.

So if your trying to come up with rules for your must move system I think it's important to first identify what it is you are trying to accomplish.

1) Love balancing with a lean towards the Main
2) Single MM is better, just might take a hand or two extra to handle the table changes

3) Two happys are better ... but ...
4) Opens door for a couple of big stacks to feed on the shorts as they get seated at the MM (This ties in with coercing 'others' into moving.)

5) Not a fan of the reverse order model, but offered it out for discussion anyway
6) Too early in the month for dinesh and I to have similar opinions ..

7) Best time to teach is in the moment ... but in larger rooms where Floors don't have a lot of time you want to keep things simple for sure.
8) Regs don't always want to play other regs ... keeping them seperated has both positive and negative points. GL

One room I worked in had a system I never saw anywhere else. They called it a may move. But it wasn't just that players had the option to move that made it different.

It was that nobody was getting moved just because the main game lost players in fact the main game could get shorter than the may move game.

But whenever there was a new player .... The main game would get it's seats filled first. First they would go to the may move table and go down the list offering the chance to move. If no one wants to move then the new player goes to the main game regardless of which game is shorter.

So if the main game has one open seat and the may move has 4 open seats .... Once the new player comes the main game is getting filled either by someone moving or the new player.

This doesn't protect the main game as well as a must move but offers some protection without forcing anyone to move.

Think those numbers changed recently.

Heh, well I will be there in 10 days, so I guess I'll find out. What did they change to?

I have played at that dog track a couple of times a year for the past five years. (My in-laws live in Pace.) I like all the dealers there, fwiw. And based on my occasional visits, turnover doesn't seem high.

I just got home last night, from my first dealing job, which was an out of town tournament. This was an inaugural event run by an organization that has never done anything like this before, so every day there were either too many or too few dealers. Overall my workload was very light, with 66 downs in five days. I did have 22 downs on the busiest day.

While my mechanics aren't as smooth or as fast as I would like them to be, I can live with that, and I know that is not as important as not making mistakes. But...I made too many mental mistakes. Kind of disappointed in myself in that regard. Most of my downs were pretty uneventful but one was bad and one was a train wreck.

I know what I need to work on. I leave the 18th for my second job and I will definitely be better.

Congratulations on getting your foot in the door. It only gets easier.

1. I learned more about dealing on my first day than I did in 2 months at dealing school.

2. I dealt 2-3 days a week at the beginning of my career. I felt like I had it pretty much figured out and felt comfortable after about 5 or 6 months. In other words, I know I'm a better dealer now than I was after 5 or 6 months, but as far as pitching cards, keeping the action moving, calculating rake and side pots and the rest of the "every day" stuff, I was about as good a dealer 6 months into my career as I am now.

Number of players. Saw a memo, I’ll peak at it when I get there later today.

Woman rushes into the pokerroom and up to the front podium.
"Can you put the Yankees game on?!?"

The Yankees game is on literally 20 TVs throughout the room. You cannot look in a direction and not see the yankees game. She is informed of this fact and allowed the chance to view the game from any spot in the room.

"Oh good, my husband is calling balls and strikes tonight and I couldn't get the game at home!"

I don’t get it.

Her husband was the home plate umpire in the Yankees game. At least that's how I take what she said.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Sometimes I'll pull up a random page from this thread. It's always fun.

I found this post, from about 5 years ago. I'm bumping it for no other reason than, "I crack myself up." I don't remember saying this, nor do I remember posting it--"but dat's funny, right dare, I don't care WHO y'are!"

Today I saw players on a full game discuss giving a player to a table that was short so the short table could keep a game going "so that everyone could get to play". And they did exactly that.

I fell out of my ****ing chair.

Did they vote the best player off? I would love to move to a softer shorthanded game!

I once volunteered to move to a 3-handed game so that a new player could sit at my 7-handed table. He wasn't going to play otherwise.

I did it because the full table kind of sucked and I figured the only reason the game could still be going 3-handed in the middle of the night was if there was a fish there throwing money away. I was right.

Wake up man! you're dreaming...

I'm surprised nobody objected. Most players start acting like a gazelle that knows a lion is nearby when the table falls from 9 to 8. When it gets to 7 or lower they are in full panic mode.

It's the sort of thing you might here from tourists who don't play poker more than once a year.

I have seen many times that a mix game will "donate" a player or two to another table to get the must move game started.

We got 4 handed last week, only 1 person was uncomfortable with it. Floor broke us anyway.

So everyone I've shared this story with, has really enjoyed it.

https://www.cardplayer.com/poker-new...ker-tournament

Cliff Notes: poker dealer gets 16 hands out before anyone notices the shuffle machine is set to "Sort".

I guess there would be a whole lot of folding -- no pairs, very few broadway hands -- and potentially not very many flops. Seems plausible that the players wouldn't notice until the third flop or so, which might have taken 16 hands.