|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks Mason: Must Move Games
And I was starting to think that I was the only person in the world who thought "Must Move" games are some sort of bad joke.
Thanks Mason for speaking out! Best Wishes Howard |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Thanks Mason: Must Move Games
Hi Howard:
They're worst than a bad joke. Perament must move games show total incompetence and a complete lack of understanding as how a cardroom really works on the part of management. best wishes, Mason |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Thanks Mason: Must Move Games
From my experience, must moves tend to cater to the regulars who play in the same cardroom close to every day and put in very long hours( And are usually there when the game starts). So I understand that the cardroom wants to keep these regulars happy by keeping their game full. What I don't understand is when the floorman will break the must move game which has say 5 players left(because the remaining players are unwilling to play 4 handed), just to keep the main game totally full. One game with 8 players and one with 5 makes infinately more sense than one game with 9 and a board with 4.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Thanks Mason: Must Move Games
But I've never understood why regulars want to play with other regulars... I have played a couple of sessions at Mandalay where I just leave when my name is called to move. Needless to say, I don't visit the room much anymore. -John |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Thanks Mason: Must Move Games
[ QUOTE ]
But I've never understood why regulars want to play with other regulars... I have played a couple of sessions at Mandalay where I just leave when my name is called to move. Needless to say, I don't visit the room much anymore. - John [/ QUOTE ] Every poker room manager needs to read your post and realize your actions are silently repeated thousands of times in many cardrooms and card clubs. That said, regulars don't really want to play with other regulars, they just hate short games or taking any risk that their game will break first. If they could see the forest from the trees (along with management), they would realize the best way to keep their game from breaking and keep it good is keeping it friendly and moving fast. In the absence of never ending and/or chained must moves, the games that break first are the bad, unfriendly games. Casinos and card clubs that use must moves the least tend to have better games, friendlier games and more games. Regards, Rick |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Thanks Mason: Must Move Games
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Thanks Mason: Must Move Games
[ QUOTE ]
From my experience, must moves tend to cater to the regulars who play in the same cardroom close to every day and put in very long hours( And are usually there when the game starts). So I understand that the cardroom wants to keep these regulars happy by keeping their game full. [/ QUOTE ] An existing game should have some protection and must moves have their place. That said never ending must moves ultimately hurt the first game(s) by filtering out action players (often when they are forced to move they move out the door) and limiting choices for the regulars. Unfortunately, cardroom management at the level that sets policy tends to over respond to daytime regulars who complain the most and loudest, since they know and tend to work the hours of these regulars and they hate to hear complaints. OTOH, they rarely hear the complaints of the evening player who quietly left the casino because he or she was forced to move excessively (if management is astute, they might note the lost games). IMO, the worst form of must move is the "chained must move", where a player is forced to move to the newest game, to the next newest game, and so on until he finally reaches a main game that is all too often full of stuck, angry nits. [ QUOTE ] What I don't understand is when the floorman will break the must move game which has say 5 players left(because the remaining players are unwilling to play 4 handed), just to keep the main game totally full. One game with 8 players and one with 5 makes infinately more sense than one game with 9 and a board with 4. [/ QUOTE ] As an aside, if you have to use a must move this can be fixed with technique. IOW, make the policy such that you leave the games at 8 and 5. This technique generally works well if you are looking at the overall well being of the games, but once again tends to encourage a few more complaints from daytime regulars so it is rarely kept in place long. Regards, Rick |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Thanks Mason: Must Move Games
IOW, make the policy such that you leave the games at 8 and 5.
Regards, Rick [/ QUOTE ] Actually, I think this is the ideal solution. Keep must-move games until it gets down to 5, at which point the must-move status is eliminated. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Thanks Mason: Must Move Games
Mason, I have found one spot that I do partially enjoy Must Moves. This is for capped NL games, such as the Mirage. Once I get to the main game, the stacks are usually much deeper. Second, the new players who come in have bigger stacks than the new players at the must move table. This allows for a lot more action and a bigger game. When I played, there was a huge wait for the must-move table, so there was no risk in moving tables. There was 1 must move and 2 main games.
Any thoughts on capped buy-in NL games with Must Moves? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Thanks Mason: Must Move Games
Having cut my poker-teeth via the online game I was pretty confused the first time I went to the Gold Strike in Tunica and was told I was in a 'must-move' game. "what the hell does that mean," I thought to myself not wanting to show-off my total live-poker ignorance.
If they have must-moves at the Horseshoe or Grand I don't think I had sat in them. But at the GS I found myself in a must-move 3/6 game which seemed pretty silly. I have since kind of figured out the general point behind them but obviously Mason's ideas on them make far more sense than the logic the poker-rooms are using. |
|
|