Cash game/Balancing/reg.-rec. needs

This would be OK if there was no waiting list (so either more than one table or fewer than 10 players playing in the game). Otherwise it is completely unfair.

Not sure what the rule is. Do you have to stay 2 more hours once you are ahead? Or do you have to play 2+ hours when you have a winning session? Also for the record the room can't know when you start having a winning session and in some cases whether or not you have a winning session. If someone loses hundreds or thousands of dollars and puts bills on the table and then goes up how does the room know when their chip total is above what they overall bought in for?

So a guy who has a winning session in the first 15 minutes doesn't have to stay for 2 hours if a VIP shows up? LOL

For me this all wouldn't matter because when I travel I play tournaments and then long cash sessions if I don't go deep.

There are people who sit and play short stacked and if they double up like to leave. So these people wouldn't play in the room.

I probably wouldn't play cash games in this room given the rules but my guess is that if it is in Eastern Europe the rake is ridiculous so I wouldn't play in the room anyway.

It's probably best to ask a moderator to close this thread, since i'm clearly not getting the feedback i was hoping for (with very few exceptions) bc you guys either criticize me for stuff that's going on there or simply don't believe the room exists at all.

so, for all the doubters:
Yes, you got me, it's actually an illegal alien operation, i was tasked to lure you in (by not telling you where it is ;-)) right after they take your money your body is taken over as well (like in "Invasion of the body snatchers" for real scifi fans)

So you were hoping everyone agreed to a rule that makes them play for two more hours from the time they wish to leave because they're "showing a profit in the game"?

No one likes the idea, so got your feedback but I'm sorry it wasn't what you were looking for.

Sir, that was/is not my point (as you can clearly see when you scroll through here).

This is a very tricky situation, they are doing this for a while now, and all the locals like it. But now they’ve decided to attract a broader clientele, become more professional in their approach… but it’s a balancing act (as my title suggests), since they don’t wanna alienate their customers.

Nobody seems to understand this, or outright think I’m fantasizing about the whole thing.

The locals will get over it.

First, these comments are USA and regulated POV. If that is what you are striving to be more like, take them for what they are worth. If that isn't what you really want, feel free to completely ignore.

1. Blocking seats...bad idea. You should either do for everyone or no one. But really just a bad idea.

2. Forcing 2 more hours...first in US, regulated room this is likely illegal. You can't force someone to bet money they don't want to bet. As you note you can't enforce it rationally anyway. I mean, when does clock start? If I when the first hand I play, then I go on a terror, can I leave after 2 hours? Does clock start the last hand that I win? What if the table gets extremely short? This idea is worse that #1

3. If you have people consistently leaving for excessive time, the game is already not that good OR their leaving likely makes it better. So is this a solution looking for a problem? The 15 min clock seems excessively short. Again, does it really fix anything? I leave for 10 min, come back play one hand, take a walk again, etc. As the the 3 man walkiing comment, I am not even sure what you mean. Here 3rd man walking has 10 or 15 min, then he is picked up. Again, in the US taking money from a stack and betting it for the player not there is likely not even legal. (Those who chime it...they do it in tournaments, remember those are simply chips with no actual cash value. IOW, not forcing a actual cash bet.) Again, not as bad as the others, but still a bad implementation.

4. I understand wanting to get a real whale in asap. I like the idea (have seen more than one place) where the HOUSE can choose to add a seat, 6 max becomes 7, 9 handed become 10, even 10 handed becomes 11. This used to not be that uncommon and not just for whales. Combining tables, no list and a player shows, etc. The idea of an auction is interesting but I am not sure it works as well as you think. If I saw a bunch of sharks bidding significant $ to play me would really turn me off. Maybe turn it around, the whale (or anyone for that matter) can buy a seat at whatever price the player's choose.

As to the room size, I really don't care the number of tables. How many games are actually running and when. I know rooms with 20+ tables but seldom running 10+ games. Or the 10+ games only happens during promos like HH and as soon as the promo ends, *poof* tables break faster than floor can keep up. Those would not be large rooms IMO.

Finally, as to the response you are getting. Much of it has been clear, your ideas are not good and won't be found in any US regulated room. So with that in mind, stating disbelief is quite expected simply because it doesn't happen "here". And it doesn't happen in much of Europe in a regulated rule.

So if you want to be more like regulated rooms, these highly informal practices have to go. You can't have it both ways. You can continue to run like a non-regulated underground game where almost anything goes but many folks, including non-regs/non-pros like most whales are will tend to stay away. Or you can act more like a regulated room where there are rules in place to give everyone a more fair experience.

No one is saying either are bad but you can't come to a quite US centric, regulated room type forum, ask for advice but insist well we do it now so it needs to continue but maybe with tweaks. These practices you bring up largely just won't happen in US regulated market. So don't be surprised by the reaction you get.

No, that’s not what I’m striving for (US centric, regulated etc), as I thought I explained, but I wanted to thank you for your thoughtful response anyways.

As I understand you want to attract gamblers from other countries that will have had their gambling experiences in a much more regulated environment. You might not want to create a regulated environment but if you want these customers your choices are create an environment similar to what they are used to seeing or have them believe the differences are in their favor. Your suggestions; especially I must play a certain amount of time if I am winning, would convince most players I know not to play in your games.

For the 15th time or so:
These are not my suggestions, what I described is the status quo.
I’m looking for ideas/solutions to adept these coming closer to more regulation without pissing off the regs too much.

And with regards to the concrete example you mentioned (min time requirement after winning):
They all agree to this when sitting down, accept the inconvenience bc the payoff can potentially be huge (with the right guys in the game).

And you have no idea how many people would otherwise play if the rules were different. Pissing off current regs if you gain more players net is good not bad. I think you will find the current situation works well for those that have no other choice but does not work when the players know better.

Interesting thread and reactions. OP is basically a list of complaints people have about the higher stakes games at Europe's largest card room.

Some people argue those procedures/best practices (I wouldn't call them general rules) are the only reason why they can run those games in a public setting.

No idea if OP consults for them or just wants to hear what others think but I don't get the overall hostility towards him. If those questions don't have a place in here the forum should be renamed to something like "Casino & Cardroom Poker (for rooms regulated by a US Gaming Commission)".

The whales aren't local. In fact the vast majority of them isn't even from the country the room is located in.

ty for your comments sir.

some of the stuff i mentioned happens in there too, but i'm not talking about that one, but the other one ;-) (where it's even more brazen/wild)

that's what i thought too, but apparently i was wrong. (seeing the overwhelming tone and content of responses)

well, with "local" i didn't mean from the same town, but the surrounding cultural area (but yes, some come from farer away)

Blocking a seat seems fine to me. I'd maybe let the floor decide who are whales unless it's a game runner then he could decide.

Two hour rule seems pointless unless the game will break if those people leave. If it's a whale they can do whatever. Normally this sort of things self enforces in an invite game environment.

Chronic walkers should be punished (unless whales) and players who play should be rewarded. You can still encourage the whales to not walk around all the time though.

Making room for a super whale somehow seems good whatever method you decide on. Last person seems ok but they should get something at least. If it's been long enough then maybe do a random draw.

interesting ... seems like you'd almost leave it as it is.

Hmmm. Yeah but a bit more formalized on the actual rules.

I thought things like this were against the rules in casinos. What’s the next step, marking cards?

That’s probably a good approach … I’ll try that out.
My feeling (from conversations I had so far) is, that they were tasked from upper mgt. to do these changes, but are hesitant to really implement anything concrete, due to concerns of alienating the regs

1. Blocking seats for whales, no, should be same rules for anyone.

2. Playing for minimum time if in profit, ha ha ha absolutely ridiculous notion. Seriously go **** yourself if you want to run a room like this.

3. Timed breaks for 15 minutes max, OK fine but you may have to consider how to handle meal breaks. In generall all good. Third man walking pays blinds sounds bad. What if two guys go out to smoke and then I need to take a crap? Seems pretty unfair.

4. Super VIP status gets to simply bump people out of a game, again this is insane and completely unprofessional nonsense if I understand it correctly. Paying someone to leave sounds bad as well, because either its a derisory amount or if it is worth it, Moochy can make friends with VIP Guy and make sure he gets a pay day when his buddy bumps him.

Nobody has to play. Lots of players are happy to get into the high stakes games.

I’ll happily engage with serious comments from here on out, but won’t reply to
- arrogance
- insults
- or plain stupidity anymore.

But taking it all in, it almost (unintentionally) feels like I conducted a poll, with the result being that the intended changes are more or less not necessary bc like 99% of US/international based players are not interested in probably getting great value but having to show some flexibility on their oh so holy regulations in exchange ;-))

Or; phrasing it more honestly, you asked for advice on how to get more players and dislike the fact that you were told the rules that work for the current regs are crap and would need to be modified to attract players. And despite your claim forcing someone to play when they do not wish to play just because they are winning is NOT great value.

Ok. I am not trying to be a smart ass or anything, I just want to point out an inconsistency. Here you claim it is in Eastern Europe where there is little to no regulation. The casino can do what it wants. Yet in the other posts you compared the game to the Aria/Bellagio/Wynn. That is inconsistent.

The Aria/Bellagio/Wynn are highly regulated. Sure, in Vegas the casinos rule and the gaming board goes along with them for the most part, but they do at least give a little bit of care to the player. The Nevada Gaming Commission would never allow a rule that made it that a winning player could not leave.

That is just absurd and makes your comparison silly.

As for saving a seat for a whale, that really depends. Technically Nevada casinos need to follow certain procedures for empty seats, but there are lots of loopholes and ways to bend the rules.

Basically it is like most things in life. It depends.

In an always going lower limit game that always is running, the casino is going to follow procedure to the word. They do not care. It a higher limit game that only occasionally runs, it depends. They will generally try to accommodate the players in the game by doing all they can to save the seat for the whale because they know that the game is at the mercy of the players. If the majority of the players stop playing in the game (because of things like whales being casually tossed aside) then the game doesn't run.

So it is a balance of following the rules to the letter and also reasonably accommodating what the regulars want because without the regs there is no game.

Then you are completely missing the point. There have been numerous suggestions on how the game needs to be run to be closer to regulation, but you keep getting mad at them.

There is an American phrase:

You can lead a horse to water, but you camnot make him drink.

I would appreciate it if you would answer the 2 hour question.

Is it 2 hours more playing time from the point at which a player starts winning or is it a minimum of 2 hours playing time if a player has a winning stack?

Also, how does the room know if a player is winning or not?

The thing is that there are rules in the US that can be problematic as well.

In games where you sit down and don't have to post, there were players who would sit down (in the CO) and play until they were a Big Blind (BB) and then leave without playing a BB. So in your room if they were winning they wouldn't be allowed to do that (which would be a good thing).

Ultimately the problem for me is that I play tournaments mostly and then cash games when I bust out. If I have a tournament the next day my playing time can be limited but in your case there would be times I wouldn't be allowed to leave. Similarly, when I get to Foxwoods early for a tournament I play in a cash game for like 20 minutes to an hour. I wouldn't be able to do that in your place because if I was ahead I wouldn't be allowed to move to the tournament until 2 hours had passed...

I get why the room wants whales to be able to come in and sit down right away. Otherwise they might go play something else (baccarat, blackjack, craps, etc.) and the attraction to the poker room would diminish. In the end if the table has an empty seat and will only fill it with a whale then all of the skill players will be very happy. Also there are likely to be more players who play regularly. It is also a good thing for pros who play better than others shorthanded. I was playing in a 5/10 NL game this past weekend and there were several whales at the table. I played a lot later than I normally would have (and yes I played 2 hours after I started winning).

Hey Rick,
Sure, let me try to explain:
First, all the higher games basically have like a private floor/host who permanently observes the game and helps out with everything.
They know if you are ahead or not (they get you your chips from deposit or cage), and decide when the 2 hour rule starts.
It’s not like when you raise pre and collect some blinds, but when you win a pot (again, not exact science, there’s no number, but decided by the host).
Also, let’s say you win a 3K pot in a 25/50 game, and then just nit up, go for cigarette and bathroom breaks all the time, and don’t play anymore, the other players will talk to the host and you’ll probably get off your 2 hour time earlier.
It’s not handled in a very accurate way (according to procedures or what not), but more with a eastern/southern European nonchalance if that makes sense… or in other words, depending on your relationship to that hosts and/or your tendency to tip you will be able to bend those “rules” to a certain degree.

Again, everybody is aware of this and also agrees with it upfront, bc the games are often very good and make up for any other inconvenience.