Critique my House Rules (after a year of tweaking) (1 Viewer)

[TheYeti]

I posted my house rules a little over a year ago and you guys gave some great advice! Since then, there have been more than a few tweaks and I'd like to get some more opinions/suggestions on what (if anything) should be added/removed/changed. Thanks in advance!

Link to PDF

For reference; this is a .25/.50 NLHE cash game and we do double-board bomb pots at the top of every hour.

 

[Chubbs]

Just 1 thought brought on by another post in this forum…maybe adding some kind of rule about cash outs and that once a player receives the cash they must count it and acknowledge its correct so they can’t complain later that they were shorted.

 

[TheYeti]

Just 1 thought brought on by another post in this forum…maybe adding some kind of rule about cash outs and that once a player receives the cash they must count it and acknowledge its correct so they can’t complain later that they were shorted.

Good suggestion! I saw that thread, too.

 

[jpoppaaa]

Can I use this for my home game?

 

[TheYeti]

Can I use this for my home game?

Of course! Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

 

[CraigT78]

These look great, but I do not like your bad beat distribution.

I'd strongly advocate for a table share, especially if you have a core group of players who contribute weekly/monthly.

If your game is full of random or once a year types, I could be swayed, but I very much prefer the 50/25/25 split.

 

[seyff45]

Look good in general... the only suggestion that I'd make is a designated dealer (or two) to help speed up the game.

We have two dealers at all tables and it makes things a whole lot faster.

 

[TheYeti]

These look great, but I do not like your bad beat distribution.

I'd strongly advocate for a table share, especially if you have a core group of players who contribute weekly/monthly.

If your game is full of random or once a year types, I could be swayed, but I very much prefer the 50/25/25 split.

Thanks!

That is something I've been considering. Our Bad Beat has only paid out once since implementation (about 3 months ago) and it was only at $120. If we were to split that 50/25/25 the table share would've been a measly $3 to each player.

The BB currently stands at around $140 and growing, but I don't think a table share is really doable until it gets over like $500-ish.

Thoughts?

 

[TheYeti]

Look good in general... the only suggestion that I'd make is a designated dealer (or two) to help speed up the game.

We have two dealers at all tables and it makes things a whole lot faster.

Oh, I'm with you! I tried to implement this a few months back, but the couple of guys good enough to trust to be dedicated dealers "don't want to deal all night".

 

[CraigT78]

Thanks!

That is something I've been considering. Our Bad Beat has only paid out once since implementation (about 3 months ago) and it was only at $120. If we were to split that 50/25/25 the table share would've been a measly $3 to each player.

The BB currently stands at around $140 and growing, but I don't think a table share is really doable until it gets over like $500-ish.

Thoughts?

Maybe a tiered jackpot is in order with that said. If it reaches $1k than move to a table share.

My BBJ has hit 6-8 times. Twice over $2k, twice over $1k and the rest were either at minimum $100, or under $1k.

We hit it three times in one night, lol. I still table shared the $100 on both occasions.

And I pay out in chips, so the money is in play.

 

[seyff45]

Oh, I'm with you! I tried to implement this a few months back, but the couple of guys good enough to trust to be dedicated dealers "don't want to deal all night".

As one of the designated dealers in my game, my guess is that it's less about the dealing and more about the shuffling. You can always "spin" the shuffle to the right of the button, but it saves SOOOO much time and there are typically a lot fewer misdeals (cards flip over when trying to deal all the way down an 8' table), but I get it... you can't really force the guys to deal all night.

 

[PlaidDragon]

I posted my house rules a little over a year ago and you guys gave some great advice! Since then, there have been more than a few tweaks and I'd like to get some more opinions/suggestions on what (if anything) should be added/removed/changed. Thanks in advance!

Link to PDF

For reference; this is a .25/.50 NLHE cash game and we do double-board bomb pots at the top of every hour.

View attachment 1249666
View attachment 1249667
View attachment 1249668

Seems fine.

You also might want to do what I do and have a printed copy handy for everyone in case there is ever an issue.

 

[Beakertwang]

Looks good overall.

Just a small thing: it’s not really a “rebuy penalty.” I’d call it a “rebuy requirement” or similar. Also, one hour is a rather short time period to allow someone to rathole. I’d make it to the end of the night.

 

[Brad1316]

Great post. Thanks for sharing. The difference between a good poker game and a great poker game is the level of gamesmanship and etiquette of the players. I don't know if it is appropriate to address "silent players" meaning players that never announce their action or declare their hand. I think it's poor etiquette. It drags the play of the hand backwards when somebody didn't catch the silent player's action. If you're going to raise, say raise. If you're worried about your voice cracking and having a tell, take a public speaking course. Thanks for listening.
Maybe you want to have a small discussion about string bets. What constitutes a string bet and whether or not you want to allow them.

 

[TheYeti]

Maybe a tiered jackpot is in order with that said. If it reaches $1k than move to a table share.

My BBJ has hit 6-8 times. Twice over $2k, twice over $1k and the rest were either at minimum $100, or under $1k.

We hit it three times in one night, lol. I still table shared the $100 on both occasions.

And I pay out in chips, so the money is in play.

Our problem is we aren't building the jackpot very fast, only about ~$35 per month. It would take forEVER for us to hit $1K. I think it's almost a certainty that the bad beat would hit before then. Also, we would obviously never pay-out the BB more than once a night since we require a $40 minimum.

Seems fine.

You also might want to do what I do and have a printed copy handy for everyone in case there is ever an issue.

There's always printed copies available. I can count on one hand the amount of players who have read them.

Looks good overall.

Just a small thing: it’s not really a “rebuy penalty.” I’d call it a “rebuy requirement” or similar. Also, one hour is a rather short time period to allow someone to rathole. I’d make it to the end of the night.

Great suggestion! Thanks! Changed it to:

“Rat-Holing” a.k.a. “Going South” is not allowed. Once you put chips into play at the table, you cannot remove any of them until you remove all of them to cash out. Additionally, if you cash out then buy back in during the same session, you are required to buy-in for the same amount you previously cashed out for if that amount was greater than the maximum buy-in.

 

[hbrwhammer]

I like it. Mary have to put some more thought into my house rules.

 

[PlaidDragon]

There's always printed copies available. I can count on one hand the amount of players who have read them.

Heh... I don't expect anyone to read them. That they are there and can be referred to at any time is the key.

 

[KingZilla]

Looks fine to me but I have a question on "running it twice" rule. It says ALL players. I've never seen a "run it twice" scenario involving more than 2 players left in the pot. We have run it twice (or multiples) rule but it only applies to 2 players left in the pot with at least 1 all-in and both must agree to it.

 

[TheYeti]

Looks fine to me but I have a question on "running it twice" rule. It says ALL players. I've never seen a "run it twice" scenario involving more than 2 players left in the pot. We have run it twice (or multiples) rule but it only applies to 2 players left in the pot with at least 1 all-in and both must agree to it.

Hypothetical scenario; Player 1 goes all in with $100, player 2 calls with $90, player 3 calls with $80, all others fold. Would this not be a situation where all players could agree to run it twice?

 

[glynn]

That's perfectly fine. I don't understand why run-it-twice couldn't involve more than two people.

Where there is controversy, it is around allowing run-it-twice between two players when a third player has an interest in the pot, but your rule covers that. There is no issue here.

 

[glynn]

“Rat-Holing” a.k.a. “Going South” is not allowed. Once you put chips into play at the table, you cannot remove any of them until you remove all of them to cash out. Additionally, if you cash out then buy back in during the same session, you are required to buy-in for the same amount you previously cashed out for if that amount was greater than the maximum buy-in.

Please accept this as an fyi, since I don't know if it was intentional, but this rule still allows for rat-holing. Consider a max buy-in of $200 and a min buy-in of $60. A player buys in for $60, runs it up to $100, and is allowed to rat-hole by this rule because $100 < $200.

I think you meant "...if that amount was greater than the minimum buy-in". More technically, the player is required to buy in for no less than the larger of the amount he cashed out for and the minimum buy-in.

 

[TheYeti]

Please accept this as an fyi, since I don't know if it was intentional, but this rule still allows for rat-holing. Consider a max buy-in of $200 and a min buy-in of $60. A player buys in for $60, runs it up to $100, and is allowed to rat-hole by this rule because $100 < $200.

I think you meant "...if that amount was greater than the minimum buy-in". More technically, the player is required to buy in for no less than the larger of the amount he cashed out for and the minimum buy-in.

Oh man! Good call! Minimum buy-in makes much more sense. Thanks!

 

[KingZilla]

Hypothetical scenario; Player 1 goes all in with $100, player 2 calls with $90, player 3 calls with $80, all others fold. Would this not be a situation where all players could agree to run it twice?

I didn't say it couldn't. All I said is I've never seen it (not even on televised games) and the rules in the game I play in limit that to heads up action only. Your home, your game so you could do what you want. Good luck on getting 3 people to agree on something . Sounds like it could get complicated as well, if all 3 want it run 3 times. Good chance 2 people will end up chopping the pot and the 3rd guy is out of luck. I wouldn't agree to multiple runs if I'm in a 3 way pot.