NL max buyin games? Casino/Floor people please read - Page 3

Rottersod · #21 08-16-2006, 09:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Most of you do not know me but I am a longtime lurker of these forums and have learned a bunch from you guys.
I work the floor at a cardroom in Vienna (Austria). A couple of months ago german tv started showing poker tournaments and we are having a poker boom in Austria much like you did in the states when the WPT started going on air. Our daily tournaments have gone up from around 50 people six months ago to well over 200 now and we started spreading NL cash games which we never had up until now.

Our most popular limit is 1-2 blinds 50 min 200 max buyin and we now have 2-3 tables going every night. On to my question: when a table breaks and the remaining players draw cards for the open seats in the other games do you allow them to keep their stack or do they have to start at the new table with the max buyin at most?

I ruled that as the players come from the same game/limit they are allowed to take their seat with whatever they had at their old table even if it is more than the max buyin.

I later learned that another floor had ruled different as he said the max buyin is part of the game and if your table breaks you have to start over at the new table. I realize this is the easier solution as it also prevents players adding to their stack when between tables but on the other hand if you played for hours and come over to the remaining table which maybe also ran some time and most players have a couple of hundreds in their stacks you would be at a disadvantage by being reduced to a max buyin, just because your table happened to break.

How do you handle this? I asume that if a player asks for a table change he can only bring the max buyin and not more? What about the situation I described?

Rick, Randy, and all the others your input would be greatly appreciated.

Regards,
RegBarclay

[/ QUOTE ]

If a table breaks then the players must bring his entire stack to the other table. If a player requests a table change then he can only bring the max buy in for that table.

Assani Fisher · #22 08-17-2006, 03:57 AM

I think there should never be any max buy in(the Wynn does this for all games) and we wouldn't have this problem.

groton · #23 08-17-2006, 04:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think there should never be any max buy in(the Wynn does this for all games) and we wouldn't have this problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

lmao then u get guys buying in to the 1/2NL for One Grand
when everyone else are siting on 40-300doller stacks

SossMan · #24 08-17-2006, 12:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think there should never be any max buy in(the Wynn does this for all games) and we wouldn't have this problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

lmao then u get guys buying in to the 1/2NL for One Grand
when everyone else are siting on 40-300doller stacks

[/ QUOTE ]

so what?

meleader2 · #25 08-17-2006, 12:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think there should never be any max buy in(the Wynn does this for all games) and we wouldn't have this problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

lmao then u get guys buying in to the 1/2NL for One Grand
when everyone else are siting on 40-300doller stacks

[/ QUOTE ]

so what?

[/ QUOTE ]

what's the opposite of ratholing? powerhousing?

AKQJ10 · #26 08-17-2006, 01:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
so what?

[/ QUOTE ]

In strictly game-related terms, very little. Deep stacks confer a slight advantage ("the Hammer of future bets" - Sklansky & Miller, not the Harrington Hammer) when going up against other more timid deep stacks, but in the hands of untrained opponents that's not much of an advantage, and against short stacks it's irrelevant.

The problem is, all the fish think it's a horrific disadvantage to be short-stacked. If the fish think they're huge underdogs they won't play. So you put a max on to make the fish think they're on even footing -- call it "limit lite".

NL Rounder · #27 08-17-2006, 02:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So you put a max on to make the fish think they're on even footing -- call it "limit lite".

[/ QUOTE ]

aka No Limit with training wheels

steamboatin · #28 08-17-2006, 02:34 PM

I am amazed at how many people believe that having a short stack in a NL is a terrible disadvantage.

AKQJ10 · #29 08-17-2006, 02:50 PM

It is! Otherwise how can you blow people off their drawing hands that they're not getting odds to chase? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

bav · #30 08-17-2006, 05:10 PM

Wynn's NL games are all uncapped. The NL1/3 rarely sees silly buyins. The typical buyins are all $500 and below. Now and then you'll see someone saunter over and check out the table and see nobody has more than $600, and buy in for $2000. Color us impressed.

However, now and then I'm told (but I've never seen with my own eyes) that a NL1/3 game will be run where there's $100K at the table, with every player having >$10K. I've wondered how Wynn separates that table from the "normal" 1/3 tables. It would be a bit of a shock to get called for your 1/3 game, and wander over with $300 only to find that's just a normal pre-flop raise. Not that this would be a totally bad thing... I think it'd be kinda fun to sit down at that game with my rake of $3's. But it wouldn't be exactly the same game.