Etiquette in a B&M casino

[Poshua]

[ QUOTE ]
So as to not hijack the thread about the clock I pulled this out.
[ QUOTE ]
To be quite honest, too much time is wasted playing B&M with staredowns. If you had a minute to decide, I dont see why needing one more minute would be quite enough time. Before going to b&m, the most time for a decision with stars with the additional 40 second clock. tilt and party gave no extra time and they spread 5K games. So bottom line, I dont see anything wrong with calling a clock after 60 seconds.

[/ QUOTE ]

This line of thinking causes a lot of problems these days. This is an online player. Takes how they do things online and decides they should apply to B&M. B&M cardrooms existed long before the internet and have their own established customs. To suggest they should change to be like online is at the root of a lot of problems the older players ahve with the younger players.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this a fair point, but I would also consider that:

1) In my SSNL experience, the biggest staredown offenders are younger players. So, I'm not sure the gratuitous staredown is a B&M institution, though provision for extensive decision time is. What these players asking to stop may be new abuse of a longstanding custom.

2) To the extent that younger players with internet experience comprise a substantial part of a cardroom's clientele, their voice should be heard in establishing both policies and customs. The established B&M players don't own the cardrooms, and so there is no special reason that the rooms should operate as they want rather than as a new customer segment wants.

[that_pope]

I had two cases come up in a 2 hour session at the Casino AZ 5/150 game, that I had to think about over a minute.

The first was when I tried to steal with J8s, button and blinds called, and the flop came KT9, it was checked around, turn a Q, I bet 3/4 pot, and get raised by button 100 more. I can't put him on anything but AJ, but I still had to think it out, and about 2 minutes, I finally folded and showed the J, and he showed AJ.

About 20 minutes earlier, I raised UTG with AK, and the button called, as did the blinds. Flop comes A83, I bet 3/4 pot, button again raises 100, and I am not ready to go broke on TPTK, and think and think, and finally conclude he has 88 or 33, and I fold and show, and he shows AA.

In either of these cases, if I only had 40 secs, I woulda ended up calling more than likely, and lost my stack in each case.

For limit, yes it is crazy to ever spend more than 40 secs, but NL, a few times a session it is necessary.

[NickMPK]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Last night three times I had players ask a dealer to spread the pot and the dealer did so. I growled about it once hoping the dealer would get the message but the dealer just growled back (BTW three different dealers spread pots for players to count).

This has to connected to internet players always being told what is in the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont play internet poker that often, but Ive been asking to spread the pot out long before party poker told me what was in it. Its not rude want know I general idea of the pot size. Now if someone asked in a limit game on the river...well thats a little different.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not rude that you want to know the pot size. didn't suggest that. Its just improper for a dealer to spread the pot for a player to count. And its the players expectation that the pot be countable that I trace to the internet. While it might have occasionally happened before it certaiunly happens with greater frequency now.

I have no idea why you think it makes a difference if this is NL or Limit. Either game it is very easy to track pot sizes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think the dealer should be counting the pot, but it seems reasonable to me that high-value chips in the pot should at least be visible.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How many times do you really think a player needs more than 60 seconds to make a decision?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I started this thread to have a discussion that was seperate from taking too long to act. This same line of thinking applies to many things in a B&M (lists, blinds, number of players at the table etc). It is unreasonable for the online player to expect the B&M cardrooms to change how they do things to make the game like what he is used to online.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. We tend to see it in this forum. Many of the threads about showdowns tend to make good examples.

That said, I think 60+ seconds to make a decision is ridiculous. Hell, flip a damn coin by that time.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is unreasonable for the online player to expect the B&M cardrooms to change how they do things to make the game like what he is used to online.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree completely. The worst is when online players think that they can use IWTSTH any time they want, because they have the "right" to see mucked cards (because that's the way it works online).

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never had a problem with players using that rule.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Last night three times I had players ask a dealer to spread the pot and the dealer did so. I growled about it once hoping the dealer would get the message but the dealer just growled back (BTW three different dealers spread pots for players to count).

This has to connected to internet players always being told what is in the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont play internet poker that often, but Ive been asking to spread the pot out long before party poker told me what was in it. Its not rude want know I general idea of the pot size. Now if someone asked in a limit game on the river...well thats a little different.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the difference whether you do it on the turn or river?

b

[IndyGuy]

[ QUOTE ]

About 20 minutes earlier, I raised UTG with AK, and the button called, as did the blinds. Flop comes A83, I bet 3/4 pot, button again raises 100, and I am not ready to go broke on TPTK, and think and think, and finally conclude he has 88 or 33, and I fold and show, and he shows AA.

[/ QUOTE ]

Be glad he wasn't patient enough to let you keep betting at that pot.

[cpk]

What are you trying say, though, RR? Is it always bad form to call a clock on a player when you're not in the hand? I don't think it is.

[NickMPK]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How many times do you really think a player needs more than 60 seconds to make a decision?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I started this thread to have a discussion that was seperate from taking too long to act. This same line of thinking applies to many things in a B&M (lists, blinds, number of players at the table etc). It is unreasonable for the online player to expect the B&M cardrooms to change how they do things to make the game like what he is used to online.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. We tend to see it in this forum. Many of the threads about showdowns tend to make good examples.

That said, I think 60+ seconds to make a decision is ridiculous. Hell, flip a damn coin by that time.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

How many times do I think a player needs more than 60 seconds to make a decision? Not very often.

But on those rare times when it is reasonable to take more time than this, a player's wishes should be respected unless that player has a history of being disrespectful to the game.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How many times do you really think a player needs more than 60 seconds to make a decision?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I started this thread to have a discussion that was seperate from taking too long to act. This same line of thinking applies to many things in a B&M (lists, blinds, number of players at the table etc). It is unreasonable for the online player to expect the B&M cardrooms to change how they do things to make the game like what he is used to online.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. We tend to see it in this forum. Many of the threads about showdowns tend to make good examples.

That said, I think 60+ seconds to make a decision is ridiculous. Hell, flip a damn coin by that time.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

How many times do I think a player needs more than 60 seconds to make a decision? Not very often.

But on those rare times when it is reasonable to take more time than this, a player's wishes should be respected unless that player has a history of being disrespectful to the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a minute is about max. I agree that a players history could come into play here, but then you have to draw the line somewhere. You're really going to let one guy do it, then tell another guy 4 hands later he can't because he has a history of stalling? That wouldn't go over too well.

I still think a minute is more than enough time.

Someone just mentioned taking possibly 3 minutes. Can you imagine waiting that long? 3 minutes is an eternity in a live game. 3 minutes online is a disconnect.

b