Bobby's Breakroom - for gaming employee chatter + YTF appreciation. See restrictions in Post #1

I'm asking if he would tell the player immediately to speed up the game instead of waiting for him to ask.

Thanks for the thoughts, guys. Your input is, obviously, the direction I thought I needed to go.

Anyone looking for a change? I hear Milwaukee is nice on June 23rd .. sunrise over the lake part of the world ..

The casino there .. Potawatomi .. has posted 'all' jobs for the reopening of their poker room (14 tables). This is very welcome and much delayed since the CV shutdown.

This room was 20 tables and hosted two WSOPc and four MSPT events on top of their own fairly aggressive weekend tournament scene. Not sure what their short and long term goals are but this area is poker crazy.

While Rivers near O'Hare AP in Chicago pretty much rules the 'Bravo' roost I'd expect this room to take off quite well .. and you can always keep your eye on Bally's in downtown Chicago as to when they will open their room (eventually). GL

PS .. If you go to the Potawatomi Casino venue forume there's a link there

I've made a 180 regarding giving answers to player questions when it comes to clarifying the action.

Player A bets 100. Player B raises to 250. Player C goes all-in for 320. Player A asks "If I call, can Player B re-raise?" Years ago I would refuse to answer. I've had this conversation with several dealers and floors whose opinion I respect and now I just answer the question.

Player A bets 285. Player B raises to 950. Player A asks, how much more is it to call? I wouldn't answer in the past. Now I just give the number in the interest of customer service and keeping the game moving.

What's your opinion on this? Player A bets, Player B raises, action back to player A, Player A asks for the bets to be brought in. Dealer does so, and breaks down the amount of B's raise in a clear way. Afterwards, dealer will only tell player A the total rather than the amount more, citing the amount more is clearly broken down & visible.

Telling a player the amount is not helping them play better. It is saying what he owes to continue.
In what other world do we think it's OK to obfuscate what is owed or how much something costs?

It has always been a ridiculous argument to me that saying a bet, when requested, is somehow violating OPTAH.

There is also a clear difference between saying, "fifteen" and "just fifteen", so how it is said by the dealer is important before we derail down that track.
Having said that, the info on how much without extra words or commentary is fine.

Our room, and all rooms in my area that I have been to / am aware of, allow the answer to the question of how much more. The only issue that has come up is when a dealer miscounts, but the correct amount is still owed.

My opinion is that this is insanely petty and makes no sense.

I know my answer is going to be a wishy-washy non-answer, but it really depends.

What are the stakes? What is the mood of the table? What is the dynamic between all of the players? Etc.

If it is a low limit game on a Friday night with everyone drinking and laughing and otherwise helping the asking player anyway? Then of course it is a no brainer, keeping the game moving and not affecting the mood is far more important than the miniscule chance my words affect his decision. Especially if there is a decent chance another player will help him out otherwise.

If it is the final table of a huge tournament where everyone is silent. I am notnsaying a word unless asked.

Obviously those are extremes, but they are an example of the factors involved.

That said, the various factors can have different weights at different times. I have dealt in a very high limit cash game, but everyone was having fun and playing silly side games and there was one player who couldn't keep up with the action (he was obviously the whale/fish at the game). It was in everyone's interest at the game for me to help him do the math and keep the game moving without him asking.

Like I said, it depends on lots of factors. And they can mean different things at different tables.

That said, the default should always be to announce the raise and only do the math if asked. You should have a reason to deviate from this standard.

I should also say that there have been times in my dealing life where I have deviated from the standard and openly volunteered the amount of the raise and regretted it later.

Put another way, I was wrong to do so.

It is a very fine grey line that requires judgment.

I think this is great discussion because it highlights the difference between bad dealers, good dealers, and great dealers.

Bad dealers announce the amount of the raise almost all of the time not even realizing they shouldn't be doing it.

Good dealers always announce the amount the action is raised to without ever announcing the raise amount unless asked.

Great dealers recognize that this is one of those areas where they can bend procedure rules in the name of keeping the game moving. It depends.

There are lots of very good dealers who follow procedure to a T. I have no argument with them. However, the next level is understanding why the procedure is written the way it is and when it can be bent without violating the spirit of the procedures for the betterment of the game.

Tournament .. open a table of ALL alternates .. not all of them have arrived as of yet ..

1) How many Players have to sit before starting to deal?

2) Do you start to blind all the stacks off or allow (an amount of) time for the others to arrive? GL

3) Call floor, follow their instructions?

Of the first two, I guess it's situation-dependent. There does need to be a reasonable amount of time for players to gather. However, I'm not sure what the definition of 'reasonable' is. Depending on room size, maybe five minutes-ish?

At some point, it's players' responsibility to pay attention.

Once we start, I'm blinding players' stacks in, if I've been so instructed.

A Floor was actually opening the table in this particular case .. so we take that option away There's more to this that I'm leaving out, but I just wanted to know how other rooms handle their stacks.

My assumption is that most rooms blind off stacks that are paid for before the tournament starts .. and perhaps even an alternates stack is in play as soon as they are called. But this particular case of opening a table of all alternates created some dust.

Small room (10 tables) .. no firm precedent on 'stacks in play' or 'reasonable' wait time. They will Bravo text AND call Player phone directly if time allows. Has skipped over an alternate who wasn't in the tournament area when they were called and just left them at the top of the alternate list as well. GL

Every room I have ever worked in had policies for these questions. Granted, some of these policies were loosely enforced and often bent, but there were policies.

For example, every room I worked in had a policy that tournament tables started when at least 4 (or 5 in another room) were present. That policy was often bent when it was clear that a couple other players were on their way (a good dealer would stretch out the prep time to allow the stragglers to make it in time).

That said, I am surprised that the room opened a new table with all alternates. Most rooms I have seen, if it is beyond the first level or two, any new table is opened by taking existing players from other tables and moving them (maybe sprinkling in a few alternates), and then making alternates sit I the already running games.

Same for blinding off registered players who are not present, rooms should have a policy. I have seen this policy vary widely though. I dealt in a room where absent players stacks were put into play only if there was an alternate list (or once registration closed). I have been in other rooms where absent players were given a 10 minute grace period and then their stack was put into play. At this room the policy was not always strictly enforced. Sometimes the floor was busy.

Every room is different, but each room should also have policies in place to handle these questions.

I had a hilarious situation today.

There is a player who I wouldn't call a regular, but he is a long time irregular player. He will show up and play 3 or 4 days a week for a month, then we won't see him for a month or two.

He is literally in contention for one of the 5 nicest humans I have ever met. He is always very gracious and friendly to everyone around him. He never gets mad at anyone, even if a dealer screws up and messes up his hand he is polite to them and half blames himself. He always is helpful to other players even to his detriment. Oppenents can suck out on him with the most ridiculous calls and he is always gracious and happy for them. Literally a really nice human. One of the best. He reminds he of Greg Raymer. That nice of a person. He is also a pretty decent poker player. Certainly a long time winner.

Physically, he is about 5'7" and at least 375, probably 400 pounds if not more. He is so obese that it is hard to estimate his weight. If he said he was 500 pounds I would believe it. This matters later.

It is a $1/$3 table and he is in seat 5 directly accross from me. Normally he plays $2/$5 or $5/$10, but for some reason he was at $1/$3. Maybe he was waiting for an open seat, maybe he didn't bring much money. I don't know.

So partially through my down there is a big hand. It is three bet pre-flop but still three or four players see the flop. Action continues postflop. Pot gets to be huge. Well over $1000. Probably $1300 or $1400. On the river there are only two players left. Seat 9 checks the river, seat 4 bets a decent amount, seat 9 shoves. Seat 4 only has to call maybe $200 (onto a huge $1300 or $1400 pot). He goes into the tank. It is obvious he has a good hand and therefore it should be an easy call just because the size of the pot, but it also looks like he is probably beat. He thinks a really long time. Well over two minutes.

Everyone sits quietly at the table while he thinks. Everyone knows it is a big spot. Especially for the stakes.

The protagonist (who is not in the hand) decides he is going to leave to table. The table is crowded, not just because he is a big boy, but there are all sorts of drink tables, the player in seat 2 has his girlfriend behind him, etc. It is a tight table.

Seat 5 pushes his chair straight back and starts to stand up. While standing up he lets out a really long and loud fart. At least 10 seconds. It reminded me of the story about Andre the Giant farting when filming Princess Bride.

https://www.snopes.com/articles/349106/a...

Everyone at the table was quiet for about 15 or 20 seconds. Everyone is trying to confirm they heard what they think they heard.

The poor guy wanted to shrink and hide and pretend it was not him, but he was dead to rights. Everyone heard it, it was obvious. So he did the best he could and started apologizing to everyone at the table.

So of course everyone at the table breaks out in laughter. Loud public farts are never not funny. He is such a nice person that everyone tries not to laugh, or at least hide their laughter, but no one is successful. The whole table is giggling like 15 year old boys. Even I am, I try and be professional, but it is impossible.

The guy apologizes again, the laughter sort of slows down, but never really stops, people are trying to be polite, but everyone is sort of snickering. There is a little older Asian lady in seat 7, she says "That was a good one!"

That opened the floodgates. Everyone broke down and openly starts laughing loudly. Half the table is crying from laughing so hard. It was made worse because no one WANTED to be laughing. No one could help it.

This goes on for a while, I couldn't tell you how long because I was laughing so hard. My eyes were watering. Probably a other minute or so. Everytime someone tried to gain control of themselves it just made them lose it that much more.

Eventually the guy in seat 4 who is still sort of laughing pushes his cards forward and openly says he is folding. He says he has no idea if he is good or bad, but he cannot think because he is laughing too much.

While openly laughing, I slowly collect the cards, and push the pot to seat 9.

For the whole rest of the down, everyone would calm down and play would be normal, but suddenly one person would start giggling and the whole table would break out.

I don't think I dealt more that 12 hands or so that down, but it was easily one of the best downs I ever dealt.

Farts.

Always funny.

I also had a crappy tournament down. There is a trend lately of tournament players going almost all in, but leaving themselves a chip behind because of "reasons".

So the blinds are $200/$400. There is some raising and betting. Action gets to the river heads up. A player bets, his opponent moves all of his chips forward except the one $100 chip he leaves covering his cards. I count down the bet and announce the raise. The original better thinks a long time whike tanking. The almost all in player starts to question my count. He wonders why his extra $100 chip is not included in the count. I explain that he didn't move it forward with the rest of his chips.

He gets justifiably angry. He thinks he is all in. While we are talking about it, his opponent says "call". Almost all in player shows and wins. He then starts arguing me over the $100. I explain to him that he didn't announce all in and he left the $100 chip behind when he shoved his chips forward so technically he wasn't all in. He then argued with me and said it was stupid and no one would leave $100 behind. I explained what the rules were and this was not satisfactory for him. He again tried to argue that no one would leave $100 behind.

My mistake was trying to argue that lots kf people leave 1 chip behind. It blew up from there.

I am torn like 8 ways in this. Yes. I completely understand his intention. I also know the rules. Furthermore I know that leaving one chip behind has been the latest trend so I cannot make any assumptions about what his intention was.

Worst of all, he got tilted and we were arguing over a $100 chip at the $200/$400 level. It was highly (massively) unlikely that this $100 chip was going to make a difference in his results .

It was a situation where following the rules sucked compared to using my brain and figuring out intention, especially given recent trends.

You didn't do anything wrong, and the player was not justifiably angry, he was being a douche.

He also may have been angle shooting. If he had lost the hand, I bet he wouldn't be throwing a fit trying to give his last chip to the other guy.

I never had a problem answering either of these questions and didn't know it was very controversial.

1) Room dependent.

2) If a seat is sold, and you have the chips for it, you should deal them in. The floor should have given the alternates enough time to check in (if not, that's a floor issue). Of course you wait until your floor says you can deal.

Had the biggest $hit show at work today over players leaving a few chips behind when they almost go all in.

Player in seat two and player in seat seven get involved in a tournament hand. It gets to the river and there is about $15,000 in the pot. Seat two checks, seat seven bets about $3500. Seat two then puts in a large stack of chips that looks to be ~$24,000 or so. It is close to all of his chips. When he puts the chips forward I get a glimpse of a single $1000 chip he left behind, but I am not sure. It could be a card protector or something else.

Furthermore, the player in seat two leans forward and crosses his arms covering the area in front of him. I cannot see if he has any chips left. I start moving my head around trying to get a better view to see if he is all in. I just want to know if I should put out the all in button or if I should count down his bet and announce it without being asked.

I finally see a chip still behind his arms so I start to count down his bet. At the same time, the player in seat seven takes approximately half a stack of $5000 chips and puts it forward of the line, but doesn't release them. I am not sure how many chips seat seven put forward. Gun to my head I am guessing $45,000 or $50,000, but it was fast and his hand was on it the whole time so it was hard to see clearly. It could have been $35,000 or it could have been $60,000. I don't know.

Seat two immediately turns over his cards revealing two pair, seat seven then turns over his cards revealing a straight. Seat seven then pulls his ~1/2 a stack of $5000 chips back and puts them with the rest of his $5000 chips. I try to tell him to stop, but he continues and says he has the other player covered.

There are a few issues here. Seat two raised the bet of $3500 to about $24,000 (I never got to count). When seat 7 put his partial stack of $5000 chips forward was it a call or a raise? It depends upon the amount he put forward. Furthermore, by turning over his cards, did seat two accept the action of calling the potential raise with his few remaining chips.

Seat 7 genuinely thought seat 2 was all in and he was calling. But he probably put enough chips forward to constitute a raise, but never released them. Seat two immediately turned over his cards causing seat 7 to turn over his cards thinkingbhe beat the all in of seat two.

A mess.

I immediately call the floor. The floor is a very good floor. Easily one of the best in the industry. However this is not a cut and dried situation. There is more than a few points of contention in both players actions. I think a floor could rule many different ways here and all of them defensible. I even think outside factors (such as the reputation of each player) should factor in.

Of course seat two insisted that the other player only called and he should still have $1100 behind (it turns out there was a $100 chip left back in addition to the $1000 chip). Of course seat seven insisted seat two was all in.

A huge mess.

I also have a question. Why are players pretending to go all in but intentionally leaving a couple of chips behind against someone who has you covered?

I am trying to figure out the advantage of doing this? Why are so many players doing this?

I am not talking about raising and putting in a large portion of your stack, but still leaving yourself 15 or 20 bbs behind. I understand there are reasons to do that on rare occasions.

I am talking about a player putting in 95% of their stack as a raise and leaving 2 bbs behind (or less).

The only thing I can think of is that it isn't strategic, it is for a story. Only have two bbs and come back to cash and you have a good story.

Am I missing something strategically?

Maybe it is only my area, but the move has seemed to happen a lot more lately. More and more players are doing this and I am trying to figure why because it is making my job much harder.

I'm not saying it's a sensible strategy, but people do nonsense things all the time...

Only thing coming to mind is that a player might want to add-on for less than an allowed buy-in if they were felted.

This happens here and there in tournaments I deal, so I'm gonna imagine myself in a tournament with 10 big blinds. Whether I open shove 10 BB, or open to ~8 BB I'm obviously committed to the hand. If I open to 8 BB, people may see that I don't have an all-in button in front of me and assume my hand/range is stronger than if I shoved. Even a perceptive person may not take the time to see my stack is super short, especially if I'm covering up my play area with my arms, which I personally consider angling.