Changes to Bay Area NL games?
 

Towards the end of this BBV thread (TR by DJ Sensei of destroying Lucky Chances' 10/10/20 like he usually does) some people are discussing that Lucky Chances and Artichoke Joe's have new "true NL" games. swope posted this:

[ QUOTE ]
just called.

they [Lucky Chances] now spread *two* 2/3/5 games; one spread limit, one no limit.

also, AJ's now has a 5 to go NL game as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Has anyone played in either of these new games? I hadn't heard anything about them before today.

Re: Changes to Bay Area NL games?
 

Garland posted a nice TR to the AJs game. There's some discussion in that thread of how the game compares to other NL in the area.

The mention in the Sensei TR was the first I heard about a true NL 2-3-5 game at LCs.

Re: Changes to Bay Area NL games?
 

Oh, right, for some reason I interpreted the "five to go" as meaning that AJ's had a new $5-blind NL game in addition to the one Garland wrote about.

Re: Changes to Bay Area NL games?
 

DMW's mini Bay Area Trip Report. C notes at bottom.

I was at artechoke Joe's this weekend. blinds 1-2-2 but first opener must make it at least 5 to go.

When I first came in they made do a Missippi straddle to get cards (which necessitated any openers make it 10 to go). I thought they made it up on the spot.

tight passive players, they seemed to know each other. wouldn't commit without top pair. most only bought in for 100$. 6$ per 30 min time charge.

So 'true nl' as in there was seemingl no limit as to the rules they could invent to take your money. I didn't think anyone other than the one big stack was actually winning. And I don't think his nitty ways would win in a long run with that much money coming off of the tables.

I endured for 90 min and went to play 3-6, which had a messed up rent in itself as 1$ pf was raked followed by 3$ on the flop. If the game was loose (usually was) then the rake wasn't so bad. But if the pot was say, 3-handed. then there was a nice 45% rake took hold.

CLIFF NOTES: Don't go.

Re: Changes to Bay Area NL games?
 

That time charge at 1-2-2 sounds brutal.

Re: Changes to Bay Area NL games?
 

I'm not sure that LC has true 2/3/5 NL, i havent seen it. The last time I played it was spread limit like always.

Re: Changes to Bay Area NL games?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure that LC has true 2/3/5 NL, i havent seen it. The last time I played it was spread limit like always.

[/ QUOTE ]

the brush said on the phone that its new, he made it sound like it happened within days, not weeks.

btw lol at the description of the NL game at AJ's, thats exactly what ive heard from like a dozen different sources. people buying in for 100$ and paying 12$ an hour + 5$ an orbit to donate to the big stacks.

good times, good times.

Re: Changes to Bay Area NL games?
 

[ QUOTE ]
DMW's mini Bay Area Trip Report. C notes at bottom.

I was at artechoke Joe's this weekend. blinds 1-2-2 but first opener must make it at least 5 to go.

When I first came in they made do a Missippi straddle to get cards (which necessitated any openers make it 10 to go). I thought they made it up on the spot.

tight passive players, they seemed to know each other. wouldn't commit without top pair. most only bought in for 100$. 6$ per 30 min time charge.

So 'true nl' as in there was seemingl no limit as to the rules they could invent to take your money. I didn't think anyone other than the one big stack was actually winning. And I don't think his nitty ways would win in a long run with that much money coming off of the tables.

I endured for 90 min and went to play 3-6, which had a messed up rent in itself as 1$ pf was raked followed by 3$ on the flop. If the game was loose (usually was) then the rake wasn't so bad. But if the pot was say, 3-handed. then there was a nice 45% rake took hold.

CLIFF NOTES: Don't go.

[/ QUOTE ]

This structure sounds just like the old game at the Palace in Hayward. That was one of the best games that I've ever seen for the stakes played.

The 1-2-2, 5 to go structure is fantastic for action and encourages multiway pots. How could you not want that?

As for your "kill" when you posted in, this is the way all of the no limit rules have been in the Bay Area since the old lowball days. Same with the 3 blinds and the double-sized opener. They weren't making up rules, even though they seem kinda weird to you. That's just the way it is.

I'm telling you the time charge isn't that bad at all, either. Assuming the game has no cap, this would be the best place for low limit players to play in the Bay Area. When I used to play that game in Hayward, there were a couple of us playing 1000+stacks and others playing their 100. Every one of the deeper stacks loved playing against the 100 dollar guys (usually less when the money would go it) under that structure.

Re: Changes to Bay Area NL games?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure that LC has true 2/3/5 NL, i havent seen it. The last time I played it was spread limit like always.

[/ QUOTE ]

i should point out that LC also spread 10/20 PLO, then, after about 3 weeks, stopped, the brush wouldnt even admit they had spread it without me pointing out specific dates and times the games took place. ("Ohhh... *that* PLO game! Yeah thats dead.")

so its honestly not impossible that the 2/3/5 NL game has been retired already, although i consider it pretty unlikely.

Re: Changes to Bay Area NL games?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm telling you the time charge isn't that bad at all, either.

[/ QUOTE ]

It sounds pretty bad to me. $12 an hour is the equivalent of 2 1/2 raked pots at the "normal" games. I know I don't average 2 1/2 pots per hour. It sucks badly enough getting raked when I win, it would be even worse to get raked when I lose too.

[ QUOTE ]
Assuming the game has no cap, this would be the best place for low limit players to play in the Bay Area. When I used to play that game in Hayward, there were a couple of us playing 1000+stacks and others playing their 100. Every one of the deeper stacks loved playing against the 100 dollar guys (usually less when the money would go it) under that structure.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's an incongruous statement. If I'm a low limit player, what do I care about a cap? I'm not buying in for a big stack anyway. And if the deepstack players love playing against me, how is that good for me?