Author Topic: waiting list  (Read 3408 times)

markmagic

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 16
waiting list
« on: April 19, 2012, 10:13:49 AM »
a table is about to break, who will be the first to seat in a vacant seats?
players from broken table or players in the wait list?


the situation is some players dont want to seat at the table that is about
to break they are willing to wait until the other table is vacant..

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3081
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: waiting list
« Reply #1 on: April 19, 2012, 12:17:23 PM »
markmajic,
 I would have to say the players already seated from the table that is breaking down. If they pass on the empty seat, then I would move down the list.

K-Lo

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 869
  • @AskTheTD on Twitter
    • Ask the Tournament Director
Re: waiting list
« Reply #2 on: April 19, 2012, 03:23:54 PM »
Maybe I'm not comprehending the situation... if there are vacant seats at other tables and vacant seats at the table about to break, why is there a wait list anyway? 

In general, I think I'd try to get a sense of who else from the table about to be broken is still interested in playing, and find them a seat at another table before trying to seat players who have not yet been seated.  So I agree with Nick... I would give players already playing priority.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3081
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: waiting list
« Reply #3 on: April 20, 2012, 06:08:26 AM »
markmagic,
 K-Lo is correct about needing a little more information. Some cardrooms enforce a must move rule instead of trying to balance two tables with the same limit game. If I understand your situation, there are two games and one is breaking down. If you have to fill the main game the first option should go to players already seated. The only way any of this makes sense is if there are not enough players, including the list, to make two full games. Example; Main game table goes to 7 players, must move table down to 6 players and 3 new players walk in the door and want to play. The players from the must move secondary table must be given first option for the three empty seats in the main game. The remaining 6 players will either play short handed, (if they agree) or they will wait for a seat to open in the main game. The list should be according to seniority. This is a common practice for anyone that works graveyard when games begin to break and you are trying to keep a solid game going until the day shift arrives. I personally prefered trying to balance the two games as best I could, an example would be eight player's at each table after the new player's arrived, but some rooms are very strict with the "must move" ruling, by that I mean the main game must always be 10 handed.

 I hope I'm at least close to your situation.

Brian Vickers

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 451
  • Poker Manager
Re: waiting list
« Reply #4 on: April 20, 2012, 11:28:27 AM »
a table is about to break, who will be the first to seat in a vacant seats?
players from broken table or players in the wait list?


the situation is some players dont want to seat at the table that is about
to break they are willing to wait until the other table is vacant..

I think I understand the situation, please correct me if I'm wrong, I don't believe there is a "must move list" in this example...
There is a table that is very short handed .  There are players wanting to play but they don't want to play at that table because it is either too short handed or for whatever other reason.  If they don't sit down (for whatever their reasons are) and the game ends up breaking then the players already seated definitely have priority over new players (especially the new players who allowed that table to break by not sitting down.)  If there are not enough empty seats for the players at the breaking table, then those players should high card to see what order they get on the list (which will be ahead of those other players who weren't sitting down).

Spence

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 355
Re: waiting list
« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2012, 07:35:45 PM »
Happens all the time at my place late in the evening or early morning. Those players who don't want to play shorthanded go on the list. If the table breaks and you still don't have enough seats then draw cards. The players with the higher cards will take the seats on the other games and the players with the low cards go to the TOP of the waiting list.
In another scenario when you have called that a table is breaking in 15 minutes and players still wish to be seated on the short handed games then they will also be put on the list and will not be allowed to draw for the open seats on active games.
The fairest approach to ensure that priority is given to players who have logged several hours in the poker room is if you know who has been playing the longest to give them the open seats. Is this feasible? Not really, so the drawing method is best.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3081
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: waiting list
« Reply #6 on: April 22, 2012, 06:17:08 AM »
Spence,
 Do you really think it's best for player's that have been playing in a game that's about to break, to draw for a seat at another game with player's that just walked into the room? I can see drawing cards between player's at the table that's breaking down, but I would not include the new arrivals. If you find a way that the waiting player's agree on, with little complaint, that's the method to use. My explanation for using the must move table is based on the strict rules that apply. When you are asked to move to the main game, (from a feeder table), you either move or go home!d of forcing player's to keep the main game 10 handed!

 I never liked the "must move" but, I worked in a cardroom that used it regularly. I was always more in favor of trying to balance two or three cash games instead of forcing player's to keep the main game 10 handed. Example: 16 player's in cardroom playing the same game. Using the must move the main game had 10 player's and the feeder game had 6...I preferred keeping two 8 handed games going as long as possible.

Spence

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 355
Re: waiting list
« Reply #7 on: April 24, 2012, 07:05:22 PM »
Nick you misinterpreted. Those players who come after you have called the table is closing are are not allowed to draw.
When we ran must move we would allow the main to fall to 9 or 8 handed depending on how shorthanded the feeder game was. Often the tables would play 9 and 9 without complaint. With 14 players even at 8 and 6 it's not too bad. Our players would rather play a little short than not play at all.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3081
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: waiting list
« Reply #8 on: April 25, 2012, 07:42:05 AM »
Spence,
 How do you figure I misinterpreted? I clearly explained the difference between a must move rule and balancing tables, as you described. They are two completely different methods used in cardrooms everywhere. I prefer to balance the tables but if you work in a room that enforces a strict must move ruling, the main game must be full. For your information, there were times when we would add an additional seat (making the game 11 handed) if we felt it was the best way to not lose a good action player or two. This was temporary, of course. An example would be two weak 6 handed games. Most player's would agree to drawing cards to see who would be on the waiting list, and we would combine the two tables and have one full game. This was a common practice when working the graveyard shift. I will repeat how I feel again. I was never in favor of forcing a player to move from a feeder table to the main game, and that is exactly what they made us do.

Brian Vickers

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 451
  • Poker Manager
Re: waiting list
« Reply #9 on: April 25, 2012, 01:40:55 PM »
I'm fairly positive that in the OP's example, there was never a Must Move set up.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3081
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: waiting list
« Reply #10 on: April 25, 2012, 02:57:21 PM »
Brian,
 We've not heard back from markmajic, but if there was no "must move" then why not just fill both tables evenly with the player's on the list? Not enough information for a logical answer.