9 handed is best. 8 handed is a trap. and the fact that online sites re goign to 8 is absolute filth

How exactly is 8-handed a trap? I swear poker players will just say anything

I prefer 8 handed. The table is already crowded enough still with 8 people. Only crappy part is when people start to leave the table when two people sit out for bathroom/food break or whatever.

Should have 8 max or 8 ad 9 max, but they won't do either.

Should have 6 max***

It is too late now, but I should have made the poll more specific since 90% of the players on 2+2 consider themselves pros or serious players.

A) I am a rec. and prefer 9 handed.
B) I am a rec. and prefer 8 handed.
C) I am a serious player and prefer 9 handed.
D) I am a serious player and prefer 8 handed.

There are a couple people who say that 8-handed maximizes the hourly take for the house. I have no idea if that’s true or not, but if it is, there’s a strong argument why at least some rooms might not want to go back.

Might very well be one of the things that poker rooms would have liked to change in the past but didn’t because of potential customer backlash. Now it would be a perfect time to just not go back to 9-handed if that’s what they prefer anyway.
But then you get a lot of answers from people who are A) or B) but think they are C) or D).

Personally I have no dog in this fight. But with the average person in the US getting fatter by the day, it might soon become a problem to fit 9 players around the table. Maybe they have to go back to the ugly 10-handed tables and use those for 9-handed?

I was wrong. 7 handed maximizes. but 8 is better than 9 for the house.

mostly grunching...

Theoretically wouldn't we expect things to mostly equal out ie. fewer opponents to beat means you're playing wider, raising and reraising wider so you're building more large pots and thus more pots will exceed the rake limit, etc?

Saying, more hands per hour means more rake, is like saying, more hands per hour means higher hourly win rate. Both statements may be too simplistic.

I would play 5 or 6 handed if I could, it is so much fun and you end up sparring with your opponents at a deeper level; adjusting and readjusting. More hands per hour means more poker.

Lmao@ rake trap
If you can't make more money 8nhanded vs 9 or 10 handed you suck at poker

I wonder if old timers who beat their opponents by using discipline and patience are upset about 8 handed play because it erodes their edge. Imagine the tantrums if they had to move to a fee based on time rather than a rake.

Yes, if that's the thing stopping you may as well give it up.

other than the situation where an 8 tabled with 2 seats who walked away is "short", where as a 10/9 with two away is not "short" can someone give reasons why 8 (or even 7) handed is worse than 9 or 10?

8/7 you get to play more hands profitably. You are there to play poker. Isn't more poker better?



p.s. if it is really a big issue short handed problem can easily be solved with some variation of 2nd man walking rule on 8-handed table.

Apparently not to a lot of players.

I don’t understand why but I don’t see another reason why you always hear complaints “but there’s still two seats open!” when trying to start a game; yells of “open seat at table 12” the second somebody racks up; and players instantly sitting out once there are more than two walkers.

The craziest thing is that it’s not even only nur peddling nits. I’ve seen several players whose loose preflop style would probably get punished less in a game with wider ranges.

I'm completely baffled as well. I could see the argument that the table is maybe more likely to break 8-handed vs. 10-handed, but there are probably solutions.

Anyone who thinks they have a decent edge on the field should much prefer 8-handed though.

Only thing I can think of is that they are mostly breakeven or losing players just there for the fun and camaraderie and want to play as few hands as possible and pay little rake. That's why the 20-handed NLHE table idea might have some legs

The total fixation on just the rake paid per hour # (without any consideration for # of hands played per hour or potential winrates) is frankly mind-boggling.

Here is the math showing just how devasting the increase in rake becomes when going from 9 handed to 8 handed:



The first table shows the average cost per hand to play due to the blinds for 10,9,8 handed games. The cost goes up by 12.5% per hand when going from 9 handed down to 8. Anytime you randomly add more forced money to the pot then the skill factor is reduced.

The 2nd table shows how much total rake is removed from the game based on average rake per hand and number of hands dealt per hour. With 10 handed games, I used 30 hands per hour deal rate. With 9 handed games, I used 33 hands per hour, and with 8 handed I used 36 hands per hour. No doubt 8 handed will play the fastest. The total extra rake made by the house is 9.09% higher 8 handed vs 9 handed. No wonder the house wants 8 handed so as to squeeze more money from the players.

The extra money from the player is even worse than 9.09%. Table 3 shows the table configurations based on 18 players in the room, 36 players, 54 players, and 72 players. With 18 players, instead of two tables of 9, there will be 3 short tables of 6 when 8 handed tables are used. This will result in a stunning 63.64% increase in rake for the house!!! With 36 players in the room, instead of 4 tables of 9, there will be 4 tables of 7 and one of 8, and the increase in house rake is 36.36%. With 54 players in the room, the increase is 27.27% and with 72 players in the room, the increase is 22.73%. (note these increases are the same for any average rake amount. $5 is used in the example)

Of course, none of this analysis factors in you will be winning more hands when you play 8 handed vs. 9, and thus likely tipping more which further decreases your winnings. But since everyone here seems to think they can beat ANY rake, then be prepared to play a lot more hours to try and win the same amount you used to make back in the day when tables were 9 or 10 handed. 8 handed poker is the 2nd wave of cancer to hit cash games since the advent of poker jackpots.

8 handed you have to play marginally more hands, which makes it less profitable for the nits, which makes the games better for everyone!

Casinos make more money 8-handed.


I agree that 8-handed is not ideal. If it was always 8-handed that would be one thing, but what % of the time do you think the table would actually be full? I'd estimate <65% of the time once you factor in people taking bathroom breaks, getting food, smoke breaks, or someone just leaving and having to wait for the seat to get filled. 7-handed low stakes is probably tougher to beat than most people think. Even if you're paying time though, most recreational players don't want to play 7-handed.

I prefer 8 handed but only because of having more space. Its just no fun for me to be squished together against other players, and thats especially true when it goes 10 handed.

So my problem could be solved by simply having bigger tables, but I dont see the casinos going for that.

So heres hoping 8 handed sticks.

If shorter is more profitable for the Casino, and for pros / regs, then you should wonder where will this extra profit come from. Pros / winning players love it, Casino Loves it !! Guess who is not going to love it!

This is exactly like the following: The Craps bit boss tells you, that since this gambler player loves betting on the hard 10, as long as you convince him to bet 100$ on the hard 10, the bit boss will let you bit 100$ on the place 10 for 100.02% return, so you bet 100, you get 204!!

So you make 2% and happy, casino makes 11.1% - 2% and is also happy, and the gambler hits some hard 10's and enjoys the game, and since this is what he wants, he is happy as well.

Next day, the bit boss tells you, they will change the deal, but you still have to convince the gambler: casino will pay the gambler 6-1 on the hard 10 (instead of 7-1), and will increase your place bet return into 100.03% But you still need to convince the gambler to bet the hard 10 at 6-1 odds!! So good luck with that.

Even the dump rec will realize this situation much faster than you think and adapt: go play some casino game rather than limp / fold, limp / call / fold 5-handed poker, or maybe never sit at all at short tables. Let alone average recs who are usually smarter than most regs / pros.

You will make 1 more BB / hour !! but the casino will take exactly 4 more BB at the same time (based on the 36 players scenario below and 50% winning players)!!

Another point, it is confirmed that NLHE was played 11 handed in the past in many casinos, and there are witnesses who said it was played 12-handed. I am not saying that this is good, but going from 12/11 to 10, then to 9, and now to 8, will tell you where will this end!

Wait until the casino decides that these tables are too large for 7/8 players and they could use the extra space by using smaller tables, which will look like the BJ table to utilize the space!!!

The cost to the casino is the same for a 10-handed and a 2-handed table. The cost is born by the players so we should expect the cost/player to be way higher at the 2-handed table. So, to mitigate the short handed cost, and to appeal to more players, we should be asking our casino's to offer 1/3 10max tables and 5/10 6max tables. Ofc the casino's would have to understand that they can't have a higher rake at the 5/10 6max table(not sure they would "understand" that).

We need more casino's to be competing for our patronage or we'll get gouged one way or another.

If you prefer 9 or 10 handed you suck and are a nit

That is all

I prefer 9/10 handed and I can assure you that I am neither of these!!

Calling someone who prefers regular poker over short handed a 'nit' is the most stupid argument in this forum!

I asked many times, and nobody answered, if less players is better for you and the casino, why don't you ask the floor to open a heads-up table and sit there wait for your villain?

Those bigger tables exist. MGM Grand might still have those wider tables they used for 10-handed cash games (and apparently 11-handed tournaments way back?).

Unfortunately they’re designed poorly IMO because it’s extremely difficult to see the other side of table if you’re in the 2/3 or 9/8 seats. If you have bad eyes, 40% of the seats actually make it difficult to see the board.

Compared to the early WSOP days the average American male is something like 30 pounds heavier today. That makes a huge difference space wise.