One table or two short tables?

Dazzler · #1 (**permalink**) 10-16-2007, 03:45 AM

I have a poker night each month and we play 2 two-hour tourneys. No matter how much I try we don’t seem to be able to get it above 2 ½ hours per game. More chips – longer blinds seem to work against it as in the end the 3 or HU there are lots of chips to the blinds thanks to reckless play - people play crap, people get restless and when they get busted out they get bored. We also have quite a slow hand rate – about 20 hph which doesn’t help. Don’t get me wrong they are great nights and lots of banter etc.
Anyway – my idea – instead of having a 10 person table I have 2 tables of 5. We play down to 3 on each and then combine to a final table of 6.

Pros:
More action per person on short handed tables
More hands per hour with less players involved (this is important and drives me nuts – it destroys the play, how can you tell someone to be patient and not donk off their chips if they only see 7 hands per level>
When a table breaks there is potential for a cash game starting with 4 players (we rarely play these)
Less pressure on the final table to complete if there is a cash game going on

Cons:
Splitting the group into two
Faster action could bust players out a lot quicker
Playing down to 3 is very short handed
Rebuys not really an option –people seem to hate them and would prefer 2 tournaments to a rebuy format.

Anyone out there done this and can offer advice? I'm hoping to get to 12 for 2 table of 6.

Muchas Gracias

shadesofgrey · #2 (**permalink**) 10-16-2007, 03:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dazzler

I have a poker night each month and we play 2 two-hour tourneys. No matter how much I try we don’t seem to be able to get it above 2 ½ hours per game. More chips – longer blinds seem to work against it as in the end the 3 or HU there are lots of chips to the blinds thanks to reckless play - people play crap, people get restless and when they get busted out they get bored. We also have quite a slow hand rate – about 20 hph which doesn’t help. Don’t get me wrong they are great nights and lots of banter etc.ffice

ffice" />>>
>>
Anyway – my idea – instead of having a 10 person table I have 2 tables of 5. We play down to 3 on each and then combine to a final table of 6.>>
>>
Pros:>>
More action per person on short handed tables>>
More hands per hour with less players involved (this is important and drives me nuts – it destroys the play, how can you tell someone to be patient and not donk off their chips if they only see 7 hands per level?)>>
When a table breaks there is potential for a cash game starting with 4 players (we rarely play these)>>
Less pressure on the final table to complete if there is a cash game going on>>
>>
Cons:>>
Splitting the group into two>>
Faster action could bust players out a lot quicker>>
Playing down to 3 is very short handed>>
>>
Rebuys not really an option –people seem to hate them and would prefer 2 tournaments to a rebuy format.>>
>>
>>
Anyone out there done this and can offer advice? I'm hoping to get to 12 for 2 table of 6.

Muchas Gracias!

i'm cuban,,,mom teaches engligh as a 3rd dealer, shocked office word..... read your post then translate = we are CT talking.... what?

ffice" />>>

Dazzler · #3 (**permalink**) 10-16-2007, 04:16 AM

Yarrrrrr matey- I be writing this in ye olde Word and be copying ye text accross - Curse that scurvy devil Nobeard-bill-gates.

banter etc. that how it be

Captn_All_In · #4 (**permalink**) 10-16-2007, 06:53 AM

I run my tournaments with tables of 7, and I am sure that 2 tables of 6 would be short yes, but not a stretch to pull off. Also I have never started with 2 tables of 5, but I would consider it because I don't think I could fit 10 around my round tables.

I would try it once and see what happens...explain to the guys your thinking and see what happens. Oh and I would definitely push for a cash game afterwards, it may take some time to develop but after your regulars get used to it you may find they like it more!

Good luck!!

hod · #5 (**permalink**) 10-16-2007, 10:09 AM

If you have the space I would stick to one table of ten (if it were me).

I like the dynamic of starting with 10 and working down to fewer players, and the different attitudes you have to take to play depending on the number of players round the table. I think I'd play far looser at a short handed table (makes sense really as you are competing against only half the number of players) so I would have guessed your tournaments would end even earlier??

If the players keeping busting out with stupid bets etc then would upping the buy-in and making them think about their investment more not stem that?

Just my 2 pence

wijwij · #6 (**permalink**) 10-16-2007, 10:16 AM

I think having fewer people at the tables means blinds come around more quickly, which means that you get blinded out faster and have to make moves earlier. I think that structure would lead to more push-or-fold type play, and be less beneficial to the skilled player. So I tend to think this suggested format change will make your problem worse.

cdnmoose · #7 (**permalink**) 10-16-2007, 11:20 AM

I think a shootout would be worse. You can't control when each table will hit 3 players, so you will have one table sitting around waiting for someone to bust on the other table.

Where is the slow down? Slow players? Get a kitchen timer, call the clock on a slow player and give him one minute more to act.

Slow dealing? Use two decks or get the best dealer to deal all the hands. Also after one player busts, make them the dedicated dealer.

cdnmoose · #8 (**permalink**) 10-16-2007, 11:24 AM

Also when it gets to HU we usually use 2 dedicated dealers. Really speeds up the HU action.

Double Eagle · #9 (**permalink**) 10-16-2007, 11:50 AM

Going to two tables would shorten the tournament.

Captn_All_In · #10 (**permalink**) 10-16-2007, 12:04 PM

Going back over this again makes me think that part of the problem may stem from the experience of you players...they sound inexperienced, but I may be wrong.