Time pots.

[Woolygimp]

I was playing at another casino a couple weeks back, and they did a standard time charge. Well a couple players asked if everyone else just wanted to do a time pot, and if so they'd switch over if all agreed.
I didn't know what he was talking about, so I didn't speak up and the switch was made.

After I found out what a time pot was, I am amazed at the stupidity of the concept. So whoever wins the first pot of the down gets all of the rake taken out of it for everyone?

If so, when a dealer sits down and I pick up AA what [censored] incentive do I have to play it when I know I'm going to lose $60 out of the pot which is far more than the average equity two aces hold against a random hand, not to mention reverse implied odds.

It's good when you want idiots to eat up all the rake, people who don't know better. Can someone explain the advantages, if I'm overlooking them.

[Photoc]

Advantage: you almost never have to pay the time if you're a tight player. +EV for most TAG's.

[Woolygimp]

Technically, is there any point in being dealt in until someone wins the first major pot and eats up the rake?

[jkamowitz]

You're out of the time pot if you don't receive a hand.

[Photoc]

[ QUOTE ]
Technically, is there any point in being dealt in until someone wins the first major pot and eats up the rake?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, you have to pay the time on your own then.

[SellingtheDrama]

Which is why I prefer to play time pots with a qualifier - as well as to split it between multiple pots generally.

I always keep a mental tab on my results in time pot games, and only once have I paid more in time by playing time pots than I would have by simply paying my own time. And that was a very large win (four figures), so the extra 6 or 12 bucks was insignificant.
A more normal result for me is to pay less than I would have under rake or regular time.

Additionally, you can generally opt out of the time pot by paying your own time and the rest of the table playing a $54 time pot.

[Woolygimp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Technically, is there any point in being dealt in until someone wins the first major pot and eats up the rake?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, you have to pay the time on your own then.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't need to play the first hand of the down. It doesn't matter if you get two aces in the BB, if you fold until someone eats the rake then you can't be affected.

[hamsamich]

As mentioned time pots are +EV for TAGS. They also keep the game moving faster, especially in certain games. Not sure where you play but in a 5/10 game where the time charge is $6 per down and almost no one has whites it's a pain in the ass waiting for the dealer to make change for 6 or 7 people.
More hands = more gooderer for you [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Photoc]

[ QUOTE ]
Which is why I prefer to play time pots with a qualifier - as well as to split it between multiple pots generally.

[/ QUOTE ]

Usually there is a pot minimum size and a lot of times they'll split the time charge into 2 pots. One guy just will pay the time pot up front and the winners of the first 2 pots (over X amount of dollars) give him half of the time charge.

There are multiple ways of doing this that work out for most people. For example, during the Venetian Deep stack series, the 5/10 NL games had a time pot of $300 minimum and must see a flop. There probably were other variants of this as well, this just happened to be one I witnessed.

[chopchoi]

[ QUOTE ]
They also keep the game moving faster, especially in certain games.

[/ QUOTE ]

This has never been my experience. Seems to me time pots kill action cause no one wants to risk their chips just to pay the rake, so everyone plays tighter than virgins until the time gets paid.

Then again, this was at a $1/$2 10 handed game with a $5/ half hour time charge, split between the first 2 pots over $100. $25 is a huge chunk out of a $100 pot. They probably work better at higher stakes.