This weekend I was on the list for a 30/60 limit hold em game with no kill. I had been on the list for 3 hours, starting at 4th and moving up eventually to 2nd (only 1 game was running). At some point, the players in the game all choose to make it a 20/40 limit hold em game with a half kill. There was also at the time an interest list for 20/40 LHE half kill in the room, with no game running. The 30/60 LHE no kill list was then converted to an interest list since no active game was running.

I was not notified that the 30/60 was no longer running or that it was replaced with a lower stakes game. I was not on the 20/40 LHE half kill interest list. When I inquired on my status on the list, I was told the situation and that I would have to get on the end of the 20/40 LHE half kill list. IMO I should get to go to the top of the 20/40 list (or at least the 30/60 list be moved to the top of the 20/40 list in order). At a minimum, I should be placed on the 20/40 list where I would be had I gotten on the list at the time that I got on the 30/60 list (this room tracks what time people got on lists). What are people's thoughts on this? Do I have a legit gripe here?

Also to respond to the people who say I should've been on the 20/40 interest list from the start:
- What if I didn't know about that list?
- Why should I expect that the game would change stakes? That's not a normal thing for 10 handed medium stakes games.

You should not go above those already on the 20-40 interest list. I could see you getting on the bottom of the 20-40list at the time of the change.

I understand you are upset about that. But if you would be allowed to jump the 20/40 list, people on there would be upset, too. Can’t make everyone happy.

How to handle wait lists should be the card rooms prerogative and I don’t think you have a legit gripe unless they don’ t use a consistent approach.

I think the barest minimum should be that I automatically get added to the 20/40 list when the 30/60 changes. When I found out, the game had changed quite awhile ago without my knowledge, so there I was happily waiting for a 30/60 seat while the 30/60 no longer existed.

I see now perhaps why I shouldn't get to cut anyone on the 20/40 list, but I think I should get to go on the 20/40 list where I would've been had I joined when I first put my name in the 30/60. At least I know for the future to get on all related lists. It just didn't occur to me that the game would change stakes.

I think your best case scenario would have been to argue to be on the 20/40 list when the game changed. Not when you initially signed up.

Anyway now you know for the future to sign up for both.

optimal solution is a legacy list for that game only, and a secondary 20/40 general list. no one can join the legacy list, (new ppl join the general list) but the people who were on the 30/60 list go to the legacy list. the former 30/60 game fills with names from the legacy list, other tables fill names from the general list, and when the legacy list is exhausted it is eliminated.

Bad situation, but I think they handled it right. Sucks that you didn't know the game changed.

Think of it as the game you were on the list for broke, and a new table of 20/40 half kill started. If that were the situation, I don't think you would feel slighted.

If it converted to a 40/80 badugi game, would you still feel you should be at the top of the list?


Only thing I think they possibly got wrong was that if there was already an interest list for 20/40, they should not have been able to convert to that. The people at the top of the list should get the first seats at a 20/40. Otherwise it's too easy to skirt the list... start any game you want with no list and then just convert it to what you want to play.

Mostly agree with Fink above, except I think there were two issues:

1- the 30/60 shouldn't "break" before OP got called for it, since he's on the list. Heck, maybe he and another player are willing to play it heads up.

2- Once it does break, the folks playing should not be able to jump the list to play 20/40 over the people already on the wait list for it. There are times when a game can convert to a different stake, but switching to a game that has an interest list already (which includes people not currently in that game) isn't one of them.

I would say those players should think of it another way. If they want to convert, they leave the 30/60 game (en masse if they wish) and get on the 20/40 list. Maybe the 30/60 game continues with whoever is on the 30/560 wait list, maybe it doesn't. Then they see who makes it into the 20/40 game (if it ever gets called).

TLDR: you shouldn't convert a live game from a game with a list to a game that already has a list.

That was my thought too. If there was already an interest list for 20/40, those people should have gotten in the "new" game. They should be more upset than OP, although I empathize with OP. A good floor would have automatically added the 30/60 list to the bottom of the 20/40 considering the games are so closely related. As opposed to adding them to an Omaha or stud or NL list.

That should solely be at the discretion of the card room. If the person in charge decides to break a game, for example to use the table for a different game that generates more rake or make some high rollers happy, they should be allowed to do that. Unless it violates gaming regulations.
You have a table full of players and an employee dealing to them. Why shouldn’t you let the players decide if they want to play different stakes? Obviously only if it’s unanimous and again not in violation of gaming regulations. Heck, if all 9 players want to switch from 1/3 NL to 20/40 Stud Hi and that game generates at least the same amount of rake, let them switch as long as the dealer is trained for that game. No matter if there’s a 20/40 Stud waitlist or not.

Obviously they need to follow gaming regulations.

But even in the absence of that, when players feel like list management is corrupted, they go elsewhere. It is in a room's best interest not to give people the feeling they are being screwed.

If everyone at a table wants to switch, then you're guaranteed a full table either way. Just call the table in the right waitlist order.

Some rooms won't list games that are too close to other games already running for exactly this reason, it creates too many problems for players who want to switch between them.

The whole idea of waitlists is that first come first served and in a public room that everyone has a chance to play in any game (this has been the source of controversy in Vegas going on years now). Suppose 5 pros are on the list for the 20/40 game. 10 people, a mix of pros and recs, who for whatever reason want to play together and exclude those other 5 pros, come into the room and sit at 30/60. After 1 orbit, they all agree to change to 20/40. Now they've created a 20/40 game while excluding 5 people who were on the list for that game sooner. You could imagine a more extreme scenario where there's 5 on the list for 75/150 stud so 8 people come in and start a 1/2 NLHE table then convert to a totally unrelated 75/150 stud. This is exactly why you shouldn't be able to convert a table to a game that's already running.

And what dinesh said in his point 1 is exactly my thinking. The game couldn't have broken while there was still a list or else I'd have been called for it. The 20/40 list had many of the people in the 30/60 game on it, although also some who weren't in the game and some in the game weren't on the list. The 30/60 players should've had to break the game and start a new table, letting the 30/60 list players come have a chance to play and not allowing anyone to cut the 20/40 list. I understand though why for logistical reasons this isn't feasible, as it's unlikely both 20/40 half kill and 30/60 no kill games would run simultaneously, so while this rigmarole is more procedurally correct, it adds work to the floor, annoys the players, and doesn't change much. That doesn't justify it though.

That’s where people disagree and while we are obviously on the opposite sides of that conversation I respect and understand your (and others) opinion on that.

I think that if me and 9 other guys want to play together, the card room should let us sit at a table and have somebody deal us whatever game we want, as long as the poker room has an open table and is allowed to spread that game. As long as we don’t stop players from the wait list from joining if one of our players leaves the game, that’s not a violation of any ‘open to the public’ rules. Which are ridiculous anyway in my opinion, I am all for letting card rooms run private games, but that’s a totally different conversation.

grunch** -but i saw dinesh post hes prob exactly right.


game cant switch. first 30 gets called.

then 20 called from top of list. not let whos playing first play. first 9 names..

100% dont change game and clear list with interest list.

Yes, you got screwed IMO.

How can they convert a game with a waiting list?

I understand your “break” comment. But the table never broke. In my experience if a whole table desires to change the game and the change is allowed by the house, the table changes and they can effectively bypass any list for that game. The exception to this might be if there are already tables with the new game.

If the house doesn’t do it this way, the table will just change to a minor variation. Might add a mandatory straddle, make it a 3/4 kill, add a rock, a round with a kill and one without, etc. just some minor change, eve if a meaningless change. The other option would be the table really breaks and everyone who wants to goes on the existing slternate game list. And the OP is in the same exact situation.

Existing list did not get cleared. Same people on the list only now it is an interest list.

How do you handle table changes? Seems to overly complicate things.

I believe that is the most they can do. Ideally they should hav ecalled the entire 30/60 list to tell them what happen and offer to add them to the 20/40 list in the order they were on the 30/60 list.

Hypothetical: what if the game changed to 40/80 limit, a game for which there was no interest list. Should the 30/60 list be converted to an interest list? Or should the 30/60 list be converted to a 40/80 list? Or at least the 30/60 players called and given the option to get on the 30/60 list, especially if those players are in the room and it's even known which tables they're playing at. Apparently the floor in the original scenario would be content to leave these players unaware on the 30/60 list while people join the 40/80 list ahead of them.

The list should not convert. And the house should not put anyone on an6list without the player asking or saying ok. I agree it is poor for the house to not let you know about the chamge and giving you your options. But they should not jump you up an existing list or put you on another list without asking.

Announce that a 40/80 game has started, and anyone who wants to join the list can add themselves to it.