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

I was on graveyard again a few years ago when my wife changed careers and had to do grave shift. Thought it would be no problem because I had done it before. Nope.
Being in my 50s now, I could never switch sleep times, it killed me to do that. That meant my days off were spent watching TV at 4am instead of living a real life like a proper day-walker.
Back on days now, four 10hr days. I can't imagine going back to grave. Have passed on management opportunities because I don't want to stay there for years until seniority gets me back to a reasonable time.

I actually thrived with the late hours even at my advanced age. My brain is wired for late nights.

It was the players and lack of support from management that killed me. Locked in, dealing to the same trouble makers every night. Nobody was ever even given a real warning for bad behavior. Falling asleep at the table? The floor would come over once and say "hey, wake up!" then walk away. I would just hope they fell fully asleep so I could deal them out.

Even some of the players I liked were a problem because I knew they couldn't afford to be there. If I got them banned they would just go to home games and dig their hole faster thanks to easy credit.

Often we had no poker pit boss so it would be some random floor game supervisor who knew nothing about poker. Some knew to defer to my judgment, others just made a random ruling and stuck with it.

It got to the point where I dreaded going in every night.

That was a major problem for me when I was doing GY. It was in a new room that had opened and so it was a gathering point for scumbags that had been banned from another room. They had a new place to act like ****wits.

If the money was roughly apples to apples I'd rather just floor full-time.

I understand that at some level, but......

In most cases it isn't apples to apples. Most dealers (especially good ones) make more than a lower level floor. That is obviously a generalization that can have many exceptions.

Plus dealing allows many other benefits. Being able to EO is huge to many. Generally flooring doesn't allow for that. Dealing is also generally less stressful.

All of that said, and I mean this genuinely, flooring is generally trial by fire. A person steps back in order to have the opportunity to step forward. I really wish there is a better path forward for those who seek higher places in the poker community. I really do. Great poker management is lacking unfortunately. So I hope you succeed.

Even if the pay is lower, being a full time floor is considered a higher status position. People suck up to you because you're in a suit, and you have slightly more power to change how the room operates. You also (usually) get a more consistent schedule and pay. Some people just like being in charge of things.

Others do it because they're too beat up physically or emotionally to keep dealing.

I'm not there yet but am toying with the idea of trying to get a manager job.

I worked in one room where 12% of the dealer's toke box went to the host and the floors, with the floors getting the majority of that cut. The result was that the floors made about the same as the dealers. It was near impossible to get a floor job in that room.

The room I'm in now, the floors make approximately 3x what the dealers make, except the floors make no tips, while the dealers obviously do get tips. The result is that the dealers all make more than the floors, and in less time, and with the ability to EO. The dual rate floors make about 2x as much as the dealers, again without tips. When I have a floor shift (which probably works out to about once per month) I invariably spend the day more relaxed, feeling like I'm helping the room run better, and of course the job is way easier on my back, neck, and shoulders.

I've had other jobs in other industries that are way more stressful than being a floorperson in a poker room. And none of those jobs was in a hospital, police station, fire station, or one of the hundreds (thousands?) of other careers that can significantly affect another person's life based on whether you did your job well.

Back in the day it used to be nearly all dealer positions were part-time which meant no benefits.
The way to become full-time - and attain the security and benefits afforded full-time employees was to take that "demotion."

I did it while already a full-time dealer and became a dual-rate.
While it was good from an educational and resume standpoint, it was terrible in every other way.
I would not have done it had I knew how things would go.

Although that is looking solely at how things went at that particular employer as a direct result of my move.

Big picture? I got a very PT dealer job to offset the financial hit I took when I floored; I am still there eleven years later.
I probably don't get terminated over bullshit after many stressful months of dealing with terrible leadership.
If I remained a dealer I never would have Forrest Gump-ed my way into a full-time job in the online casino world that I have been at for ten years.
I also would have been a poker dealer when COVID hit which would have been devastating financially.
To make things even worse, the poker room was shut down forever before COVID even ended; employees got the news on a Zoom call.

So it led to the best possible outcome for me, but in a vacuum, it was a mistake.

Covid also led to a long term improvement in my working situation as well, though wouldn't have guessed it at the time. Strange the butterfly effect.

I don't think I would ever floor without aspirations to go higher into management. For me personally (and I fully recognize everyone is different) flooring would only be a step to higher levels.

So I do hope you become management. Also, to be honest, I think you would be good at it. I like your attitude here and frankly poker needs better management in general. As a random internet poster, I say go for it. You have my random internet vote.

A few stories about flooring and dealing. These are not meant to influence anyone in any particular direction, but just to help people think. Everyone is different and what is fine for one is different for another. Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough is the best flavor of ice cream, no argument, but some deranged people might think different.

Anyway...

I enjoy dealing. Period. I really like watching the action. I spend more time thinking about what players have than anything else. In fact 90+% of the time when I make a mistake, it is because I am thinking more about the action than doing my job. You will never catch me distracted watching a football game on TV. If I am distracted it is because I was thinking about the action in the last hand.

Also, from a physical standpoint, I find poker easy. Granted I deal far less than full time hours (not even close), and I have worked in very many physical jobs in my life. I have owned a low voltage company that sometimes required me to help the actual workers out. Every now and then, I would spend an 8 hour day on a ladder with my arms raised above my head the while time. Not every day, or even every week, but often enough to know what real hard work was. I have also managed a factory where we received shipments of perishable goods. If the truck got there late or people had called off and there was an emergency I helped unload a 40' truck of perishable goods. This consisted of lifting 50 pound bags and boxes by hand. The whole truck. Again, not my regular job, but more often than I would ever want. To me, dealing is a breeze. It is easy and can be done in my sleep. Unless I am working a series with 14 hour days, I never notice it physically. I understand other feeling it though.

That said, I know many long time dealers who have carpel tunnel issues, or worse, back issues. Dealing can be brutal physically in very subtle ways. I will never minimize dealer physical issues. It can be brutal. It hasn't been a problem for me yet and I enjoy it, but I understand.

For me, dealing can be more mentally stressful than physical. Don't get me wrong, usually (90% of the time) dealing is mentally easy. It doesn't mentally bother me. My problem is that I recognize that players are playing with real life money and it REALLY matters to them. So if I am having a subpar day, I will let it get to me. If I make a mistake because I am tired, I take it to heart and try to do better, but I also know that I am tired. So stress increases. I get stressed when I am tired. My problem. Others might not feel the same.

There is one dealer I used to work with who was my hero. He was a long time dealer who probably dealt to Doyle and Slim in Texas in the early 70s. He was ancient. He also did not give a f#$k. He would call a floorman in a second. Even if it was his mistake, call a floorman. It didn't matter. A customer got angry for any reason, he called a floorman. It did not matter to him, anything that was going to cause a problem for him, he called a floorman. He recognized that the moment he called and floorman it was no longer his problem, it was the floorman's problem. I am grateful to him for that lesson which he gave me very, very early in my career. I probably call floorpeople more than most dealers, especially those that consider themselves good dealers. However, I also think most dealers do not call floorpeople enough. Too many fix things on their own without realizing it isn't their job to fix things. Floorpeople should. For one, players are more likely to trust someone in a suit than a dealer, for two the floor should be made aware of any problem in case it comes up again.

As a dealer, once you tell a floor it is literally not your problem. No matter what. Period. That can be a stress relief.

As for flooring, I think that it is easier than dealing 95%+ of the time. Mostly floor people walk around, shoot the **** with players about football games or other stupid ****. Easy.

However it is that last little bit that can be way worse. WAY WORSE.

As a dealer I experienced two players get angry and exchange dirty words to each other. Nothing that anyone who has ever played poker for 20 years hasn't seen before. Really bad, but not unique. Stuff happens in poker. Money is on the line. In this instance, the floor immediately called security and had one of the players thrown out. Afterwards, I talked to the floor because I naively thought they could be calmed down. He explained that the reason he had the player thrown out was that he had crossed a personal line. He had mildly threatened violence against the other player. I say mildly not to minimize it, but just to reinforce that what he said was stuff that two men (it is always men) occasionally say to each other when things are heated. Wrong? Absolutely. Extraordinary? Unfortunately not.

His reasoning was that he will give people arguing every benefit of the doubt until they threaten violence against another no matter how mild. He later acknowledged that he though it was mild and would likely lead to nothing, but his reasoning was that he didn't want to be morally responsible if someone got beat up (or died) later after there were threats. I never thought about it that way and I greatly respected it. It made me realize I didn't want to make those moral decisions.

There is also a story about a floorman where I currently work. I never met him (different shift), but he was well regarded by many. One night, two young Asians walk in (boyfriend/girlfriend). Only the male was going to play (girlfriend was going to watch). He carded the boyfriend. Boyfriend gives him an ID. It turns out it was a fake ID. Furthermore, later that night when it slows down and there are open seats, the girlfriend decides to play. She just moves to an empty seat and buys in. She plays and loses a crapton of money. Like maybe $1000. It turns out that he was 19 with a fake ID and she was 18 with nothing. Her parents got pissed and raised a stink with the casino.

The casino reviewed tape and the floor was fired. He accepted a fake ID that was probably shaky at best and then the girl was never checked.

I am not saying he wasn't wrong. He screwed up. That said, I am 100% sure that he was busy and probably distracted with dealing with other stuff.

Obviously a rare occurrence, and something that could happen to anyone. That said, that is the life of a floorperson. 99% of the job is easy. Walk around, sit people, make change, chat with people. Nothing hard. But on those rare occasions, **** matters and you are in charge. It is easy to lulled to sleep, but it can bite you at any time.

Earlier in my life I would have loved that. Chat, laugh, watch sports. Great. Even the craziness would have energized me. I liked making tough calls and being in charge. All great.

Now. I do not want to deal with that crap. I like yelling for floor and washing my hands of stuff.

TDLR; everyone is different and has different goals, desires, and needs. There is no right path, you just need to be aware of the benefits/downfalls of the path you are on.

Yeah I forgot to include the people who become floors simply because they're lazy, or would rather spend most of their time hanging out socializing. There's one dealer in particular at my old job who doesn't seem interested in becoming a good dealer, but she would probably be a good floor. And it might even pay more since she doesn't get tipped a lot.

For me it would mostly be a contingency plan. I don't know if my wrists will hold up until I'm ready to retire. I'm tempted to jump on the first good opportunity so I can find out if I like it and at least have it on my resume.

Working graveyard does take a special breed, it is not for everyone. Personally I have always been a night person, in fact in the four plus years I had a "regular 9-5" job I had trouble waking up in the mornings, never could get use to it. I came back into the poker world a few months ago and one of the main reasons was that I walked into full-time dual rate and I was going to end up on graveyard.

Also as far as flooring, once I hit my 90 days in the next few weeks I am basically being "fast-tracked" into a full time floor supervisor role. They opened the spot last year and have only had one person hired for it, who did not make it past his 90 probation period. The reasons I am flooring fulltime is because one, I did not really want to get back into dealing but only did so because it was full-time and graveyard. Two I was burned out when the room I worked in never re-opened after Covid and pretty much anywhere I was going to go was going to be less money. Three I have neck and back injuries that have lingered for many years and really do not have the stamina to keep dealing for much longer.

Its less money than dealing of course but still more than I was making at the jobs I had in-between casino stints but long term picture, I am only a year of floor supervisor experience away from qualifying for a shift manager spot and from what I understand there will likely be two openings sometime by early 2026 with one person retiring and one possibly leaving to go be a room manager a few states away this summer.

Yes, my life got weird and I never wrote that.

I wasn't dealing, but sort of saw this (I was a table over). Details might not be exact, but close enough.

A tournament. Registration closed but no where near the bubble. Something like 50 or 60 players left and twenty something are paid. Blinds are $1000/$2000. Pre-flop raiser in middle position raises to $4500 pre-flop. Next player calls. Folds to big blind who calls.

Flop comes out something like a mostly uncoordinated 8 or 9 high. Something like 9(8) 5 2 rainbow. Big blind (with about $90,000 behind) says something that is unintelligible and throws out a $5000 chip. Pre-flop raiser (with about $200,000 behind) immediately throws out a $5000 chip. Next player quickly follows up by putting his $30 thousand something short stack out. All happen relatively quickly. Boom, boom, boom with no pause.

Dealer heard inital better say something, but did not hear what he said. Despite it being too late due to following player action, dealer tries to confirm with big blind on what he said. Big blind says he said all in. Next player immediately complains that the big blind said "bet". Dealer immediately calls floor (obviously).

Floor comes over and listens to the dealer then asks everyone at the table what they heard. Here is where it gets crazier. Everyone at the table heard something different. The two players closest to the inital bettor heard different. One heard all in, the other heard bet. The next player to act heard bet, to other active player heard all in. The table was pretty much 50/50 split on what the bettor said. The kicker though was that almost everyone agreed that it was mumbled and indistinct and confusing like it had been all night.

At this point I spoke up, I called the floor over as I had been at the table the previous down. I quietly told the floor that I had multiple issues with clarifying the action with that player. I constantly had to ask to clarify what he was doing. He spoke very low and slurred his words. It was confusing what he said. I would even go far enough to say that it wouldn't surprise me if he was trying to angle by being unclear.

I got lucky that no one acted too quickly as follow up action before I could confirm, but it was frustrating as it happened multiple times. The floor took this under advisement.

Now a couple of quick thoughts:
1. First and foremost, the following players acted to quickly. No doubt. They went with what they heard from someone with a track record of ambiguity without waiting for confirmation. Their quick action leaves them open to the mercy of the floor. I hate rewarding slow play, but this is one of thise situations where slowing down and getting confirmation is the smart play.

2. That said, a player hears what they hear. Every player has reacted quickly to something they have heard from a previous player. If everyone confirmed every single action from every previous player the game would drag. At some point there has to be some understanding that what you think is the action is correct.

I really like what the floor did as a resolution, but I want to hear some thoughts before revealing the ruling.

I'm actually surprised we don't get more players weaponizing mumbling.

In this case, especially given the previous issues with not speaking up, I'm probably ruling it a bet of 5k and giving the player a warning that they may be subject to random rulings if they don't learn to speak up or push out the correct amount of chips.

It does get tricky when asking players actively in the hand what they heard. People often hear what they want to hear, and may take the opportunity to angle.

This. The player said "something" and put out 5000, which is a legal bet.

How does a dealer just not get tipped? Isn’t that weird if they are just doing their job normally

I don't mean she doesn't get any tips, just way below average. She's very slow and likes to sign the EO list.

I am noticing more and more players mumbling their action in tournaments and it is frustrating. Players are sitting at a poker table in the middle of a casino. Slot machines may be in the distance but they are still audible. There are hundreds of players packed into a small area so there is the constant din of conversations and shuffling of chips. They are playing for lots of money and yet when they act they seem to act in the most ambiguous way possible. They speak as softly as possible and either throw one or zero chips out. They seem to be protecting the amount of their bet like it is a state secret and they will get jailed for sharing it. I have had more than a few times where I have heard bets from players at other tables louder than players at the table I was dealing at. It is ridiculous.

I have always been big on complementing players who I feel play very cleanly and clearly. I won't go out of my way where it is awkward, but if I can somehow fit it into a conversation with a player I will mention that I am appreciative.

I know this thread is for dealers, but for the lurking players, besides tipping, the best thing you can do for a dealer is to play fast, clean, and clear. Especially in tournaments. When you want to be all in, put all of your chips accross the line (in one motion), or make clear eye contact with the dealer and make it undeniably clear you are all in. If you have a much larger stack than your opponent, still put in a large enough amount of chips that cover him.

I think one of the biggest problems in poker is that it has become custom to throw one chip accross the line while declaring all in. That should be the absolute minimum. Players should generally do better. Push your mother loving chips in.

whats the deal with EO lists, I asked wsop dealers and they said usually eiitehr after deal they can deral cash games or leave

how does EO do for that at most casinos?

The number of dealers needed varies a lot depending on how many cash games are running and what stage a tournament is in. Tournaments need a lot of dealers the first few hours, then tables start breaking down.

When you sign the EO (Early Out) list, you're telling management that you want to go home as soon as they are able to cut an extra dealer. Sometimes this means you can go home immediately without ever dealing a table, sometimes it means you go home in 10 hours instead of 15 like everyone else.

Every room has slightly different rules about who gets to go home first and when.

WSOP is different than most. When you break a tournament table, you go to the dealer coordinator to be re-assigned. Sometimes they need dealers in multiple locations so they'll give you a choice - deal cash, deal the nightly, deal the mix game tournament, or go home. Or just deal cash or go home.

The reason I wanted to hear thoughts first was the floor ruling was way outside of the box. When I first heard it I didn't understand it and thought it crazy. After talking to the floor afterwards, I understood it far better and the more I thought about it, the more I thought it was a really good ruling (albeit only really possible in really rare situations).

When I asked the floor what he was thinking he explained his thinking as thus:

It was his impression that the big blind was responding to the dealers confirmation of his action just as the other players were acting so he wasn't quite aware of what they had done. Furthermore, by the time he (the floor) had showed up and started questioning everyone, he felt the big blind didn't really want to be all in anymore. The big blind wasn't pushing for an all in and two calls to be the ruling. He was looking for a way out. Therefore it bothered the floor to make the inital bet be $5000. He felt like he was giving the big blind the out he wanted.

He was rather stunned that the table was pretty much split 50/50 on what the bet was. He asked everyone at the table expecting to get a clear, dominant answer (either way). When it was wishy washy (and I further clarified that ambiguity was not uncommon in the big blinds actions), he realized the confusion was genuine.

Also, the next player to act made a comment that he still might call an all in, he just wanted the time to think about it first before being forced to act. He genuinely thought he was calling $5000 so it was easy.

Also, the big blinds intended flop all in was a huge overbet. He was betting $90,000 into a $16,500 pot.

The only solid piece of information he clearly had was that that the 3rd player (the short stack at $30 something thousand) was willing to get it all in.

He said that if it was the WSOP or some other tournament where he didn't feel comfortable going outside the box, he would have ruled the big blind bet was $5000. He would have no problem with anyone ruling that way (and that is what I thought the ruling initially should be). However, he couldn't escape the nagging feeling that such a ruling was rewarding the BB by letting him get out of his all in.

He thought it through and came up with a rather elegant solution. He announced that the big blind would be given the option of betting $5000 or going all in. Nothing else. Then everyone else would be allowed to act in turn to whatever happened before them. Furthermore, if the BB opted to only bet $5000, he could not reraise any further action (i.e. he could not choose to bet $5000, have the 2nd player call, and then shove after the 3rd player went all in. He would be restricted to calling the $30 thousand something all in).

Obviously that is the weird, out of the box part.

Furthermore, no one would be hurt by rewinding the action to the big blind as compared to the standard ruling of a $5000 big blind bet. If the Big Blind truly wanted to be all in he could be and the others could act appropriately. If he only bets $5000, the others can act appropriately. No one hurt.

It turns out the BB tried to check. He literally tapped his hand on the table. The floor then re-explained to him that he could either bet $5000 (and not reraise any subsequent action) or go all in. He again tried to check. Finally he understood and bet $5000. 2nd player thought a really long time and called. 3rd player shoved. BB thought a little and folded. 2nd player called. 3rd player had 1010. 2nd player had AKs (backdoor flush draw).

Like I said, I think in most situations the right ruling is a $5000 bet by the BB, but the more I think about it, the more I like this floors ruling, it hurt no one and gave all players options. Obviously a corner case, but interesting.

When I was first starting as a floor, I was taught that figuring out a player's intention should rarely factor into my decision.

"Why would I check with this hand on the river? I have a straight!"

I don't care what you have. You said check. The dealer heard you.

...

Sure there are instances where someone puts out 2 white chips and a black chip at a 1-3 table and they clearly meant to call and no one else has acted and I'll let them fix their bet. But for the most part, what you did is 95 percent of my decision while what you meant to do is about 5 percent of my decision.

I 100% agree with this. In fact, my only quibble would be with the 95/05 split. I think it is more 99/01......

The reason I posted this was I think it was one of those rare cases where considering intent made a difference. If I didn't make it clear enough, the floor would have defaulted to the standard ruling of calling it a $5000 bet if there was any doubt or if the stakes were higher. He was leaning ruling that way even in this situation. He just thought it through and realized it was a rare situation where he could go against the grain and make it a better ruling.

One of the benefits of angling is that in general, angles use actions that are not against the rules. They rely on ambiguity and a good idea of how floors will rule to take advantage of other players.

So I really like rulings in places that can negate the advantage of the angle. Unfortunately those places are really rare (and should be) because there are really good reasons standard rulings apply. Really good.

To your greater point, I think a floorperson can become a really good floorman by never considering intent. They SHOULD go by actions. That said, the best of the best recognize why standards exist and when it is ok to go against them.

I posted this because I found it to be interesting, not because it should be the standard. It shouldn't.