Must Move

[Rams_Law]

I've read that they give the person longest on the table the option to move, then move down the 'seniority' list; if no one volunteers, then they move up the list forcing people to move or leave. It sounds like a good idea, but seems like a lot of work for the floor, I imagine it doesn't work out so well in practice.

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
I've read that they give the person longest on the table the option to move, then move down the 'seniority' list; if no one volunteers, then they move up the list forcing people to move or leave. It sounds like a good idea, but seems like a lot of work for the floor, I imagine it doesn't work out so well in practice.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm sure it varies from room to room, but I don't think anyone has an option to move, hence why it's a must move. If you don't want to move, I think you generally are choosing to quit the game and have to get back on the list if you want back in (and must wait a certain amount of time usually too).

[chucksim]

My first must move experience was a 2-4 Omaha/8 game at the Taj about 1.5 years ago. I had no clue what it meant when the floor told me the game I was sitting in was "must move". I figured it out about 3 hours later when I was told I "must move"!!!

[mrkilla]

A must move works pretty much as described.
What is done is when there is a list for a game [doesn't matter the game a must move can be for any game] they seat those players at a table in order they got on the list.
When someone from the original or main game gets up the first person who signed up MUST move to main game. This is to keep the main game filled. The draw back is the must move can get down to 3 or 4 people.
Take for example a 10/20 game if there at 15 people who want to play , what they might do is create one main table with 9 players and a must move of 6 and keep one game filled at all times , instead of having 2 short person tables where if one person got.
New players who wanted to join go to the must move and rotate in from there.

[Rams_Law]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure it varies from room to room, but I don't think anyone has an option to move, hence why it's a must move. If you don't want to move, I think you generally are choosing to quit the game and have to get back on the list if you want back in (and must wait a certain amount of time usually too).

[/ QUOTE ]

To avoid the variation of room-to-room, let's talk about the way it should be. The house makes the second/feeder game must-move in order to protect the main game. They really don't care who moves, so long as someone does. I see no harm in giving a player in the feeder game the option to move before forcing someone to move or quit.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
When they make you "must move", why don't you pick up your stack and go home. That will end this nonsense.

[/ QUOTE ]

At the Bike a few years back they kept the 20/40 stud/8 must move to must move to must move to must move (chaining the must move when there where several games). Auction players didn't like to be moved more than once so now we have only two or three games. I think chained must moves are a disaster for the cardrooms and most of the customer even though they guarantee daytime nits that they will always have a game (even though without the chained must move their average game will be much better).

~ Rick

[The Goober]

[ QUOTE ]
To avoid the variation of room-to-room, let's talk about the way it should be. The house makes the second/feeder game must-move in order to protect the main game. They really don't care who moves, so long as someone does. I see no harm in giving a player in the feeder game the option to move before forcing someone to move or quit.

[/ QUOTE ]

In all the small seattle-area cardrooms that I've been to, this is exactly how it works. They keep a list of everyone on the must-move table and when a seat opens up in the main game, everyone on the move table is given the option to move starting with the first person who sat down and going to the last. If no one wants to move, then usually a new player from the waiting list is sent directly to the main game. Sometimes if the main game is getting short (and no one is waiting) they will force the last person to join the move table to move up. At this point, a smart player will want to move because the move table is always the first to break if too many people leave.

I've also seen two move tables, where the first table feeds to the main game, and the second table feeds to the first one.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
I've seen some rooms make the biggest stack move in a NL game. I don't think moving the big stack is at all common, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is this done and do you (or anyone) think this is a good idea?

~ Rick

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
Often times this is a temporary situation when they start a second (or third) table at a given limit without having a long list. The new game will be "must move" to the "main game" for an hour or two, to protect the existing game. Then, if there is a list for the game, the "must move" is removed.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you (or anyone) think about a situation where the must move does not come off unless a newer game and a board for that game is established?

What do you (or anyone) think about a situation where the must move never comes off period. And if a third or fourth game is established, then there is a must move to a must move to a must move to the main game (i.e., chained must moves).

~ Rick

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
When they make you "must move", why don't you pick up your stack and go home. That will end this nonsense.

[/ QUOTE ]

At mid to higher limits, players in the games that start first deserve some protection when a weak (i.e., game not quite full with a board) second or third game is started after it.

That said, I personally believe that excessive use of must moves leads action players to often leave the game when forced to move. This is especially true with chained must moves (i.e., must move never ends and it is a must move to a must move).

~ Rick