LV Hilton closing poker room 10/17

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Which is more responsible for the NL rake overall to be lower? The rake per hand, or the hands per hour?


[/ QUOTE ]

Hands per hour.

[/ QUOTE ]

Qualitatively, that's what I would think (going into the tank, theatrics, etc). But good to know from someone measuring this for real.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can see RR now, with a measuring tape, measuring your bluffs.

fo real!

[psandman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
hourly rake = (rake per hand) * (hands per hour)

Which is more responsible for the NL rake overall to be lower? The rake per hand, or the hands per hour?


[/ QUOTE ]

Hands per hour.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the opposite of it appears to me.

I find my NL games to be faster than $2-$4 limit largely because every $2-$4 hand goes to the river, the players are much slower in $2-$4 limit, and oddly enough I get asked how much the bet is much more often in a $2-$4 limit game then I do in a NL game. NL players tend to pay more attention to the game, and though there are some hands that go slow, overall I get out more NL hands.

However, I also deal many more NL hands that have no rake (no flop) or a small rake because a bunch of limpers all fold to a bet on the flop.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
hourly rake = (rake per hand) * (hands per hour)

Which is more responsible for the NL rake overall to be lower? The rake per hand, or the hands per hour?


[/ QUOTE ]

Hands per hour.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the opposite of it appears to me.

I find my NL games to be faster than $2-$4 limit largely because every $2-$4 hand goes to the river, the players are much slower in $2-$4 limit, and oddly enough I get asked how much the bet is much more often in a $2-$4 limit game then I do in a NL game. NL players tend to pay more attention to the game, and though there are some hands that go slow, overall I get out more NL hands.

However, I also deal many more NL hands that have no rake (no flop) or a small rake because a bunch of limpers all fold to a bet on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am guessing if you were to actually count you would find the limit hands still move faster. The dealer never has to figure out how much the bet is in a limit game. Given where you deal I can see a 2-4 game being really slow.

[psandman]

I have no doubt that our $4-$8 game is the money maker of the poker room. It moves fast and always max rake.

[steamboatin]

[ QUOTE ]
which is why I think 4/8 as an intermediate step between 3/6 and 6/12 is a practical idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

YMMV but in my experience this is incorrect. If a room spreads $4-8 it eats the next higher and next lower limit. It is perfectly logical that if you spread $4-8, $6-12 would be the next step and you should be able to maintain a $6-12 limit game with no problem but the real world doesn't seem to match that perception.

Especially now since NL has eaten limit poker.

[PokrLikeItsProse]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
which is why I think 4/8 as an intermediate step between 3/6 and 6/12 is a practical idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

YMMV but in my experience this is incorrect. If a room spreads $4-8 it eats the next higher and next lower limit. It is perfectly logical that if you spread $4-8, $6-12 would be the next step and you should be able to maintain a $6-12 limit game with no problem but the real world doesn't seem to match that perception.

Especially now since NL has eaten limit poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm thinking mostly of rooms where there is no next higher limit, but you want to build toward it. If you have a sufficiently large 3/6 base, then it is sustainable even if 4/8 eats at it a bit (and you don't mind if a 3/6 tables turns into a 4/8 table if you are running a room, as long as it doesn't make the table break sooner), and if you do get a sustainable 6/12 then you have the option of cutting out either 3/6 or 4/8.

I've talked to a few people who normally play 6/12 or 10/20 and it sounds like some of them would never let themselves be seen playing 3/6 while waiting, but might find 4/8 a tolerable level to go slumming while on a list. I've also talked to a few 3/6 players, who are willing to take shots at 4/8 if it cuts down their wait but not 6/12. That doesn't mean that everyone is that snobby or timid, but there are a few.

[RR]

If it was up to me, I would never allow 4-8 t be spread. It is big enough that it consumes games like 6-12 so you end up with a gap from 4-8 to 10-20 and that is too big of a jump so the players never move up so you aren't able to build bigger games. If you have a 3-6 you can build a 6-12 and from there you can build a 9-18 (I am opposed to the 10-20 limit).

[that_pope]

[ QUOTE ]

I've talked to a few people who normally play 6/12 or 10/20 and it sounds like some of them would never let themselves be seen playing 3/6 while waiting, but might find 4/8 a tolerable level to go slumming while on a list. I've also talked to a few 3/6 players, who are willing to take shots at 4/8 if it cuts down their wait but not 6/12. That doesn't mean that everyone is that snobby or timid, but there are a few.

[/ QUOTE ]

I play as high as 40/80, and will sit down in a 3/6 game while waiting for a 20/40 or 40/80 game to open. No problem there, I can order my dinner while waiting, and relax for a bit.

[PorkchopDJG]

Hey,
I was staying there last weekend and this place needed to be put out of it's misery. It had a great location right next to the nice huge sportsbook but I never saw more than 1 table of 1/2NL going even though there were a ton of people milling around that area.
I ended up not ever even playing there because it looked like the same 7 guys playing every day and I normally play limit holdem which they seemed to never have. If they can't get 3 or 4 tables going on a busy Saturday and Sunday when there were a lot of people there watching football I don't know when they ever would.