2 Decks in play for Cash Games?

[Triantafylidis]

I never said it was a tourney did i?
I was simply implying that you would be able to see more hands, and its a lot more than a couple per hour. It's almost double if your players actually know how to shuffle/deal without any stupid mistakes ie) skipping people
If you prefer 1 deck then play with one deck....but then why is this post even here...?

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
My typical home games are 4-6 players and we almost never have a need for 2 decks but lately I've been in some games where the hosts and other players insisted on 2 decks and I felt like it really was more trouble than it was worth as I'd end up having to shuffle all the way through playing the next hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rott, how is 4-6 players any different than 8-10? If you have 2 decks, you have to shuffle while playing the next hand, regardless of the count. Of course, you do it more often with smaller fields, but it's faster for the group than using one deck and waiting.

We use 2 decks for even heads-up play (cash and tourney). PITA, but still faster.

[Triantafylidis]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My typical home games are 4-6 players and we almost never have a need for 2 decks but lately I've been in some games where the hosts and other players insisted on 2 decks and I felt like it really was more trouble than it was worth as I'd end up having to shuffle all the way through playing the next hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rott, how is 4-6 players any different than 8-10? If you have 2 decks, you have to shuffle while playing the next hand, regardless of the count. Of course, you do it more often with smaller fields, but it's faster for the group than using one deck and waiting.

We use 2 decks for even heads-up play (cash and tourney). PITA, but still faster.

[/ QUOTE ]

We finally agree on something Larry [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] yayy

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
We finally agree on something Larry [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] yayy

[/ QUOTE ]

Damn! I KNEW I didn't want to post that answer!

:P

btw, you heading back to school/are already there?

[PantsOnFire]

I prefer playing more hands to any possible inconvenience of having two decks.

Our group uses the deal, collect, shuffle, player to the right cuts, pass to new dealer method. The group is used to this method so people are not forgetting or screwing up. It runs seamlessly.

I've never used an automatic shuffler but a good one might be a good idea.

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
I've never used an automatic shuffler but a good one might be a good idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never seen a good one that wasn't too expensive for a home game.

[Small Fry]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Very simple, very effective, saves you time and time=money [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Like I wrote, it's a home ring game, not a tourney. I'd much rather have the rest of the players getting drunker and more tired than I would to get in a few extra deals per hour. I guess the consensus here is that 2 decks is perfectly fine so I won't say anything else in the games I play that use them but I still prefer a one deck game.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're better than them you want more hands so you should want 2 decks. If you're worse, until they're drunk, tired, etc. and then you have the edge, then you should want 1 deck. Up until you have that edge, then you want to suggest playing with two decks......lol

And I have to agree with Larry about the card shufflers. Noisey and inefficient. Plus they take up too much room.

[Triantafylidis]

Larry-

Goin back on the 22nd, im doin a Co-op right now in CT
Why do you ask?

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My typical home games are 4-6 players and we almost never have a need for 2 decks but lately I've been in some games where the hosts and other players insisted on 2 decks and I felt like it really was more trouble than it was worth as I'd end up having to shuffle all the way through playing the next hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rott, how is 4-6 players any different than 8-10? If you have 2 decks, you have to shuffle while playing the next hand, regardless of the count. Of course, you do it more often with smaller fields, but it's faster for the group than using one deck and waiting.

We use 2 decks for even heads-up play (cash and tourney). PITA, but still faster.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I am in my 4-6 player game we all like to talk in between hands while one player shuffles and deals. It's never been any big deal and we get in plenty of hands/hr. Our games have never lacked for action.

Even though we would get in less hands/hr in the 8-10 person game I still haven't seen a huge increase because people are always forgetting to shuffle, pots need to be scooped and stacked, etc and since I play in the cardrooms for the real money and play in the home games for the fun and money it never bothers me that we don't play as many hands.

I think I will suggest that we have the BB do the shuffling instead of the CO as someone here suggested.

[pfapfap]

[ QUOTE ]
When I am in my 4-6 player game we all like to talk in between hands while one player shuffles and deals. It's never been any big deal and we get in plenty of hands/hr. Our games have never lacked for action.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you mostly regular players who play a lot all week? This would make sense then. It seems at my two weekly games, people are itchy to get in as many hands as possible. They come here to play. We still get plenty drunk and stoned and [censored] a whole lot, but it's during all the fast and furious poker action. Hell, last week I suggested a break when half our table went outside to smoke, and those remaining were all, "MUST! KEEP! PLAYING!" I wonder how the tone would change with one deck.