Stars 10 player nl cash Tables?

[[censored]]

emonrad,


the 10 handed game has 10 players whereas the 9 handed game only has 9. Hope that clears it up

your OOT friend,
[censored]

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
10-handed is defintely preferable to 9-handed. One of the main reasons I play Party over Stars..

[/ QUOTE ]

why?

[spino1i]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
10-handed is defintely preferable to 9-handed. One of the main reasons I play Party over Stars..

[/ QUOTE ]

why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because it is less like 6-max and involves much more patience, which fish seem incapable of doing heh

[APerfect10]

I prefer 10 handed to 9 handed as well..

Not because 9 handed plays any differently than 10 handed. It might be a touch looser but not really noticeable. I dont like the mere fact that 9 handed tables break up faster -- get short handed much quicker. The mere fact that I need to change tables more frequently playing 9 handed than 10 handed means I actually get less hands in per hour. If i wanted to play short handed i'd play 6-max...

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure that NL cash-game has generally always been played 9-handed.
Why that is I'm not exactly sure. But it dates to pre-internet-poker and I think that poker old-schoolers will tell you that other sites are in the wrong for having their full-ring NL cash-game tables at 10-handed.

Pretty sure I saw Randy Refeld make such an explanation previously because otherwise I'm pretty sure I would have not know this at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wish I had made a good explanation, but I haven't it is just the way it has always been. A lot of people prefer 9 handed because it makes the better for everyone involed. The casino deals more hands, the recreational players have theit action, and the skilled players are able to loosen up a bit and use their skill rather than sitting and waiting as much. In California all (not just NL) holdem games are 9 handed. Prior to internet poker I hiad never seen a NL or PL game played 10 handed. I think wiht the rapid spread of NL a lot of games are being spread 10 handed because it never ocurred to the people spreading them that it is a 9 player game, just like it never ocurred to them that the rules of how to put chips into tthe pot are differnt in NL than limit.

[carlo]

I think somewhere in Doyle Brunson's early book he states that the ideal number of players at a no limit table is nine. As mentioned above by a previous poster the "old guard" probably had some measure of agreement with this(experience based) and I believe that the WSOP has always used 9 man tables.

I'm not sure what "ideal" means but is probably related to volatility(less tight is right) and cash flow .

carlo

[Davey]

Not sure how true this is but I think East coast is 10 handed while the West coast plays 9 handed. Ive only been to a few casinos so Im not sure if everywhere is 10 handed here though.

And the WSOP used to use 9 players, now they go as high as 11 because they can.

[xmbs]

[ QUOTE ]
I prefer 10 handed to 9 handed as well..

Not because 9 handed plays any differently than 10 handed. It might be a touch looser but not really noticeable. I dont like the mere fact that 9 handed tables break up faster -- get short handed much quicker. The mere fact that I need to change tables more frequently playing 9 handed than 10 handed means I actually get less hands in per hour. If i wanted to play short handed i'd play 6-max...

[/ QUOTE ]

That's certainly one reason why I'd prefer them, another is that I basically "grew up" in poker terms playing 10 max and therefore it feels better. Now granted that's not terribly objective, and having played a fair bit at Stars now, the adjustment (which you have to be able to make if you want to be a good player anyway I suppose) is not all that great. All the same when I go back to sites with 10 max I do feel more comfortable with the play somehow (and my winrate is a little better) So it may be in the long term that the presence or lack of 10 player tables at Stars could turn out to be a bit of a deal breaker which would be a pity.

Does anyone know if they even actively considered changing at any point?

[Miah]

People take longer to make decisions so I'd prefer the time saved by eliminating that extra player. I also like it because when I was at Commerce (where all their games are 9 handed) there were plenty of people who didn't like playing short and weren't very good at it, as opposed to people who specifically seek to play short tables.

[Guthrie]

[ QUOTE ]
In fact there must be a reason why they chose to go with 9 player tables in the first place - I'd appreciate it if someone let me know what it is/was.

[/ QUOTE ]
More elbow room.