I get to the Seminole hard rock Hollywood this morning and as usual put my name on a 5-5 PLO list as the only other game running at that point is 2-2 PLO going at this point. About 30 minutes after I arrive, they finally decide to call the 5-5 PLO list after doing a roll call and about 9 people confirming they are there.

Game gets called, cards are on table, and the big 🐳 that is curently in the 2-2 game decides he doesn’t wanna come to new game. This is where it gets screwy.

The floor man goes over and allows the table to vote if they want to convert their ongoing 2-2 game to a 5-5 plo game (same game the new list was just called down on) which they all agree on because the 🐳 is there.

Due to this happening, the new game doesn’t open, and everyone who was on that list, but wasn’t on the ongoing 2-2 game gets screwed out of a seat, and a new open game. Floor seems to think there was nothing wrong with what was done here as “these players have been here longer playing”

Who is in the wrong here?

So you went from being on the 5/5PLO list to being on the 5/5PLO list? How did you get screwed? The players at the 2/2 game have every right to switch the game to a 5/5 game if everyone at the table agrees, so they did nothing wrong. It is now up to the floor if they want a waiting list for the game or if they want to start a 2nd game. I hope they apologized for calling the list but not actually getting the game going, but beyond that they did nothing wrong.

The game was called and confirmed that the players on the list were going to play. So at that point it’s no longer a “list” it’s an active live game, thus why I got “screwed”

How many of the players in the 2-2 game where on the listed confirmed for the 5-5 game?

If the "whale" doesn't go to the 5-5 and they all decide to stay where they are and play 2-2 ..... is the 5-5 going to go anyway?

Its not an active live game until the cards are in the air.

I'm going to disagree with this.

I'm assuming that game had several people who weren't on the 5/5 list and now they are getting to play 5/5 before OP and a handful of others who were on the 5/5 list. That's not fair.

5 of the 9 were on the 2-2 game.

The whale seems fine playing 5/5 with the people playing 2/2, just not with the people on the 5/5 list.

Right here is kind of important too. It's not the whale didn't come so the floor closed the game. It's the whale didn't come so the players chose not to play. They are 100% allowed to change their game.

If the rest of the people called said they wanted to play, you would have a game. Short handed maybe, but you would still have a game.

You're complaining things didn't go your way basically. This would be like complaining that you didn't get seated at the table you wanted even though there's a table transfer list.

I don't know his reasons often times when I see this sort of thing it's not about who is in the game (I suspect many in the game we're going to go to the 5-5) it's about I don't feel like racking up and moving so I'll just stay here.

They changed their game which is actually running unlike your game
Nothing wrong with that

Trying to get new games going, especially at medium stakes, is a pain. Some start screaming for us to open one as soon as 4 people are on the list, others want us to open the game but won't sit unless they see it's already full or there are sufficient fish there, and in cases like this opening it will shut down another game.

Faced with two bad choices, keeping the existing players happy usually wins out. You're going to have to wait a little longer.

So, is the situation is something like this:

9 players in the 2/2 game. Five of them are on the 5/5 list, four of them are not. There are four other names on the 5/5 list.

Case I) There are enough names on a 2/2 list to keep that game going.
Case ii) There aren't enough names on a 2/2 list.


If it is the second case, then the floor would appear to have no problem with booting the 2/2 players (else why call the 5/5 if it is going to kill the 2/2). Why not just ask them them to rack up? What happened looks like he was trying to protect the longest sitting players. Would existing players normally be given the opportunity to move to the new game, even if they weren't on the list? It is a bit incongruous. Before calling the 5/5 game, the floor should have asked the existing players if they would like to change. Anyone who says no gets a rack.

If it is the first case (which makes the most sense to me, but I'm only a player), then move the 2/2 game to another table. Whale stays happy and the players on the lists are happy.

I highly doubt that constitutes an active game.

Players in a 2/2 game voted to change the stakes of their game, I don't see anything wrong with that.

So this tells me that if those 5 don't play, then you have no game anyway. Correct?

If whale isn't going to play then they aren't going to play so this game isn't going unless they change the stakes at the current table. Sounds like the floor got the bigger game going the only possible way. May not be fair to let the other 4 jump the list like Rawlz says, but where do those 4 players go if the other 5 leave the game? I assume they had a list for that game as well to fill those seats? If that is the case then I will have to agree that you got screwed in a back door, sneaky, they didn't even know they were screwing you kind of way.

But then again I see nothing wrong with a table of players wanting to change the stakes of the game which is what happened here "technically".

It always felt wrong to me to let players jump the list like this .... But

OPs situation improved. He went from being on a list for a game that wasn't going to being on a list for a game that was going.

And he moved up the list by the number of players who were ahead of him but already in the 2-2 game

HOw many hands had you played? Zero? Nope, not yet an active live game.

Did everyone on the list go back on the list in the same position? Sounds like the same list to me. Maybe (just Maybe) I drop those who did not show to the bottom of the new list. But that can only potentially move you up.

You do not have a "right" to play at the established table. You do not have a "right" to play with the whale. The established table certainly retains the right to change the stakes if everyone in the game agree. And the whale certainly can chose to continue playing at the same table he is already at either at 2/2 or 5/5.

The floor did exactly what they were supposed to do already. And then had to deal with the change of situation based on the whale. Offering people racks/kicking them out is a bad idea.

If 1 of the people playing 2/2 doesn't want to change the game to make the fish happy, it stays a 2/2. Those are the rules. Not "you dont want to accommodate the fish? Here's a rack sir"

Seriously can the mods just change the title

"Floor made correct decision based on the rules. Whale did not change to form new table with me. I did not like it"

1) Did you sign up for both games? I want to play, I sign up for all the games and then tell them what lists to drop me from when I get my first seat.

2) The Floor may have made an error if the 2/2 list was shallow, like less than 10 names, when considering to open the 5/5. We don't have all those details yet.

3) 2/2 Players find out that whale may leave (and maybe their game is breaking) so they go into survival mode and convert the game to 5/5 to keep the whale at their table.

4) Floors are historically very hesitant to take 3-6 Players from 1-2 other tables and move them to a new game unless there's a substantial list there to support the shake up.

What we don't know ...
A) Whale doesn't care for what 'would be' the 4 different Players at the new game. He thinks he has a better shot at fun/winning/whatever at the existing table.
B) OP should buy the Floor (or whale) lunch more often and get on their good side.
C) Whale is smarter than he looks ... not wanted to expose himself to 2-4 better Players at the new table. GL

I disagree with the notion that there is some inherent right to change the stakes of the game. This is a policy decision by the poker room and it may be a reasonable policy to allow them to change the stakes of the game. But I would not suggest they have a right to do so.

Another possible policy would to not allow players at a game to change the stakes of a game when there is a list for the new game that contains people who are not in the existing game.

We can debate which policy is better ... each has pros and cons ....

I mean this casino allows private games how is this any different then turning their game private??? Of all the things that this casino does to exclude players this has to be the most minor. You play at a casino that caters to whales that’s why the whales play there and presumably the action attracts you so you can’t have it both ways.

Why’d the whale want to stay at his game and not go to the new one. I’m assuming his table was more friendly/nice then the one that got called so only person to blame is the *******(s) that got called for new game.

I can see being pissed if you gave up your seat in the 2/2 to go play the 5/5 which broke, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.

yeah I don't see the floor doing anything wrong if there was a high likelihood that the 2-2 would break if they started a 5-5, you all could have started a 5-5 short, then I would have a problem with the floor letting them switch from 2-2 to 5-5 with an existing 5-5 game going. This is different from if this was a must-move 2-2 and the VIP didn't want to go to the main and the game switched to 5-5 to subvert the main game, which IMHO would be unfair and wrong.