Great, please send these results to all card rooms in America.

We can create 12-20 handed tables at Nitwoods and send all the nits there.

for sure this. people who read 2+2 are a small subset of poker players. I'd put it in single digits.

Also. Im often surprised by people who appear to be regs who show me blank face when I mention something from 2+2.

And who pays the bills for the casino and the 2+2 population? The non 2+2 population! Without them, "we" are done for. Thinking a level ahead is not limited to poker hands only. Use it to open up your business sense. Imagine what each market participant wants and seek common ground.

Make the bad players feel at ease and put more asses on the seats. Yesterday, Wednesday evening, my local casino looked more deserted than on Monday 6 am before the lockdowns. Hallways, slot areas, table games areas, shops, everything looked dismal. People need to get real jobs back, and get back into the habit of going out.

Last but not least, the Golden Rule: He who has the gold (fish), makes the rules. The Galfond's and the Negranu's don't pay your hourly. The fish does. Which now makes me think. We must ask the BAD players about how they want the games to be set up. Thus, the poll is not very helpful.

Not totally sure who you refer to as "we" but the percentage of 2+2 users who play poker professionally is probably in the very low single digits. If even that.

That said, nits don't pay any bills for the casino. There's probably a close to zero number of people who come to the casino to fold for a couple hours and then spend $200 at a restaurant on the premises or even play any casino games outside of stuff like penny-slots.

Make poker fun again: Add mandatory bomb-pot tables(every hand) and 6-max tables(higher stakes).

Btw, I'm not sure 6 max would play more hands per hour because folks should be playing wider(more hands-more decisions- more thinking), etc.

As long as you are tagging people with such words, whatever you say makes no sense!!

This is about preference between normal poker and short handed, and I prefer 9/10 handed normal game over short handed. (period) (PERIOD) (CAN YOU READ?)

Lol, I specifically said “nits” and not anything about preference of number of players. That you feel attacked by that says more about you than about me.

Players who play extremely tight preflop are called nits. The vast majority of players who play very little hands don't spend much money elsewhere on the property. Those players don’t pay any bills for the casino. Pretty straightforward stuff you would think?

So why do you keep changing the conversation into talking about those people who play tight, and refer by that to all people who prefer normal 9/10 handed game?

Your logic:
Nits like 9/10 handed (fact).
Someone likes 9/10 handed (fact), so he/she is a nit (your conclusion!!) !! makes any sense to you???

I merely responded to another user, as should be obvious by me quoting part of his post.

Not sure why that topic gets you so emotional that you feel the need to use all caps and a plethora of !/?.

This doesn't address my points. You can rebut them or you can admit that they are valid. Writing "nits don't pay any bill for the casino" is an opinion, presented as a fact and it doesn't even address the points I made earlier.

Must be too emotional to be able to handle more than 1 hand an hour, hence the love for 10-20 handed play.

Alrighty, I'll use my "business sense" as you call it: I co-own a business in the hospitality industry and have a pretty decent understanding of how less than 20% of customers can account for more than 50% of revenue and how critical it is especially for a business with limited capacity to disregard the non-spenders if that keeps the spenders happy.

In regards to poker rooms, I was actually the one who said that a large percentage of small rooms might struggle to stay in business if they lost their "I'd rather die than play shorthanded!" crowd. A lot of other rooms are buzzing right now though, with waiting lists that you usually don't see outside of special events. If those rooms were able to replace super tight players with others who actually come to play cards but don't want to wait in line for ages, everybody would be happier. Well, except for those tight players I guess.

@madlex: Now we are talking! This is how I like a discussion to go.

In businesses with no customer to customer correlation, you can easily ditch the non-paying (if existing) or low revenue/high demand customers and save your efforts to the high paying ones. In businesses with very high customer to customer correlation, like multiplayer games, whether online game or a casino game, the business model depends on a critical mass of customers and may even have to pay some of them to provide "seed" for the paying ones to show up.

We both agree on the "large percentage of small rooms might struggle to stay in business if they lost their "I'd rather die than play shorthanded!" crowd" but I suspect we miscommunicated. In the US, outside Vegas, Texas, CA, and Florida, (correct me if I am missing some other regions) , there is no possibility for consolidation of poker rooms and I'd rather have a game to play than not. If Foxwoods and Mohegan close their poker rooms, I will have nowhere to play with the frequency I wand. Even now, I am unhappy that they don't run the rooms 24 hours like they did before the lockdown.

Right now, Friday 3pm, Foxwoods (9 handed) leads Mohegan (7 handed) with 28 to 11 tables. Mohegan used to be packed.

P.S. I am not that afraid of 8 handed. I am getting pumped for my first trip to Vegas in early July

Don't worry about me, I can handle a table full of poker-winners life-losers like you with level 1 thinking and without getting too emotional, be it 9 handed or 8 handed.

Same number of NL games though. Foxwoods just runs a bunch of stud, plo, and limit games that don’t run at Mohegan.

This thread is full of nits who are just now grappling with the realization that they might be nits.

Foxwoods also doing triple status points promo today. No promos at Mohegan

playing poker with a bunch of people who care about making 3x 90 cents an hour
sounds like a hoot. games must be off the hook

If 8-handed becomes the new norm, it will eventually evolve into having no reduced rake short-handed.

Being forced to play 50 hours a week in those games surely must be one of the rings of hell.

Hi kid:

This point is more important than you may realize. If it was somehow possible to go to 20 handed games, the games should become very tight because the probability of extremely good hands being out would be quite high. Thus the "balance of luck and skill" would be thrown off as the games become very low action. So, this wouldn't work.

Best wishes,
Mason

Between this post and your undying love for Mariano, I think you're my favorite poster ❤️

Gee thanks, didn't realize that. [/s]

That's the main point of the thread. The balance of luck and skill is already thrown off with the move from 6-handed to 8-handed to 10-handed, and then to 20-handed. It's just a matter of degrees. The better players will more likely prefer 6 or 8-handed to 10-handed where skill will play a more important part and likely offset the fact that they're paying more rake per hand.

What Mason Malmuth said was that going to 20 handed (40 cards in the player's hands) was a bad idea. He did not support the argument that 8 was better than 10 or that 6 was better than 8. And "better" being debatable because different parties has different goals as it can be seen from the argument about where teh "golden middle" is.

What Mason Malmuth said was that going to 20 handed (40 cards in the player's hands) was a bad idea. He did not support the argument that 8 was better than 10 or that 6 was better than 8. And "better" being debatable because different parties has different goals as it can be seen from the argument about where teh "golden middle" is.