How/When/Why Did You Go to Multiple Cash Tables (1 Viewer)

[MrCatPants]

So (good problem to have, I know) my games have been filling up faster and faster, and more often going to wait lists. e.g. I released my June and July dates this afternoon by email, and games were full+ within 3 hours.

I don't really want to go to hosting multiple cash tables, but I do worry about continuing to grow the game and my ability to provide seats when they go this fast (and shutting out regs/semi-regs who are slow to respond.) I host two tables for tournaments but it's kind of a nightmare, and I don't know that I want to do that more often to myself or my family. I'd like to keep my un-peed on walls free from urine, etc.

Also - making a jump from 8-10 seater single table games to 14+ on the regular is quite a jump.

How/when/why did you start hosting multiple tables?

 

[Tonystark137]

I have ran two tables once ; mostly to be more inclusive of two different stakes of poker players. It was pretty tough at the time to play, bank , host and socialize.

 

[Suited Connector]

I have been dealing with this exact issue. I don't like my regulars getting shut out just because they are slower to respond to my invites. I also don't want to always be running two tables. I decided to run one table for two months and then run two tables for a month. My game is twice a month. It has been working out well. I also stopped being the dedicated dealer and that has helped.

 

[dizzyChipper]

If you want to keep it one table:
Raise the stakes OR
Add a second night (and Raise 2nd night if necessary)

 

[Tonystark137]

Depending on the frequency of the game you could give some less responsive player a bit of a heads up on games?

 

[doublebooyah85]

@CraigT78

 

[Tonystark137]

End of the day I'm learning that it's your game. Host the stakes you want; invite players you like.

I do try and be inclusive when I can; but given I host maybe once a month. It's tough.


Chippers answer: when your set is big enough for two tables.

 

[Rhodeman77]

I would rather host more games than 2 tables. Maybe the people that fill the first game have to wait to give the other players that missed out a chance at the second game before they can RSVP.

The last time a random a 2 table game I was exhausted afterwards (more so than usual) I had less fun, and lost a lot. I prefer the single table game because it is much more relaxed.

Also, as mentioned above, let people know the dates of the games and when the email will be going out for it so they can reply quickly if they want a seat.

I prefer to use a “preferred” player list for the initial invite. I give them that day to lock up a seat before going to the wider group.

 

[MrCatPants]

If you want to keep it one table:
Raise the stakes OR
Add a second night (and Raise 2nd night if necessary)

my experience with this is both sides infest each other and separate stakes never last.

 

[MrCatPants]

Depending on the frequency of the game you could give some less responsive player a bit of a heads up on games?

to me this ends up playing favorites though. ive had some guys say "just sign me up for every game and ill tell you if i cant make it". ive told them no to this, first come first serve.

 

[Tonystark137]

to me this ends up playing favorites though. ive had some guys say "just sign me up for every game and ill tell you if i cant make it". ive told them no to this, first come first serve.

I tend to go with players that I know are dependable to show up and not cancel near last minute.

It does mean given a small player pool that it does end up being a similar group each time with some slight change ups.

 

[PepperPaul]

i could easily go to two tables but have kept my game at one table. Two tables is double the work for no additional benefit. It’s going to be a lot more work for you to run two tables, and for me at least, it’s just not worth it. Especially since I run my game every week.

I do keep a tiered invite list and keep the people I want to play with most (i.e. action players) on the top tier and the less desirable players on the second tier. If I don’t fill it with my first string, then I roll out invites until it gets filled.

 

[CraigT78]

I went to multi tables once I had a solid 10 players. I start the first table at noon, and as soon as players 8, 9 and 10 commit to a time, we split to 5 and 5. I have to handle balancing, but we frequently get to 12-14.

We only play dealers choice, max 7.

 

[allforcharity]

I've never seen 2 simultaneous cash tables in a local home game. Probably because hosts would rather cut off at 9 or 10 due to lack of equipment.

 

[Poker Zombie]

I went to 2 tables when the first table was full, but players could flake and put me back down to 1 full. When fewer players would flake, the second table was no longer an option, but a necessity.

We are currently at 3 tables, and had a handful of games at 4 tables. I would say 2 is optimal (tables 3 and 4 have to be in another room), but all my players are friends that I would rather not shut out.

Running multi-tables is a chore, but a responsible player at the "outside" table can make it much easier on you. Have one such responsible player buy in for 3-4 rebuys and give them the chips to set aside. He can run a mini-bank for that table and viola, you are running just a single table again.

 

[drgg]

It's tough to have two tables. I've done it a handful of times but prefer to have one table. If it's looking like I'll have around 10-11 people I'll try to only have one table that night and try to have it so people all don't come at the same time. If it looks like there's 12, I'll try to recruit more so there's 14+, so there's a decent amount on both tables. You don't want 6 on each table and then once one hits 5 things get Awkard.

 

[Highli99]

For cash games one table is my preference. It annoying getting handcuffed with 10 or 11 people. At 15/16 you're okay again but it is a bit more work. Not too bad though.

My approach would be an ABC list situation. Build the list with priority given to the players you most want, then expand to other people as needed. I am not letting flakes take up a spot only to no show or leave after one buy in. But I will let them come if a spot opens up shortly before my game.

“Hey [Flake], I decided to host a game tomorrow night. Interested?”

The luxury of this approach only works with hosts who have demand greater than supply, which is a tough point to get to.

 

[Poker Zombie]

I utilized the A-B list at the end of 2015.

So far, only 1 of those players has gotten an invite again (and that was only because he asked).

I would feel weird at this point to invite someone to a game that has run continuously since then (small pause during the COVID lockdown), because I "needed" them. Something to consider it you divide your friends into "Preferred" and "Overlooked".

 

[MC_CPA]

Off topic but did you sort our your 8 8 6 table fiasco?

 

[BleedingChips]

Jumping in a little late to add my four cents (with inflation):
I have enough chips to run two tables and did multiple times last year. It was a ton of fun, but as some have mentioned on this thread, balancing tables once numbers got into the 5-6/each table created a weird dynamic for me. I almost lost one of my friends and regs because of how I handled it...the action and dynamics on one table were more exciting than the other - he didn't want to leave even though it was technically his seat to move over to the boring table. blah blah blah.... I do one table now to avoid that risk again. Plus, it creates a sense of urgency to only have one table that *will* fill up instead of two tables that probably won't fill up with last minute flakes. What seems to be working right now is opening up 10-11 seats for RSVP on a 9 person table. 1 or 2 people always bail so it helps me keep a full table for game day. Maybe two tables will come back, but for now it's the one. Good luck, OP!

 

[Poker Zombie]

What seems to be working right now is opening up 10-11 seats for RSVP on a 9 person table. 1 or 2 people always bail so it helps me keep a full table for game day.

Waiting for dropouts would give me ulcers. I know it's something you can almost count on, but I would hate to invite 11 and find out nothing else was happening in the world and 11 showed and 2 would have to stand in the corner waiting for a seat to open.

 

[BleedingChips]

Waiting for dropouts would give me ulcers. I know it's something you can almost count on, but I would hate to invite 11 and find out nothing else was happening in the world and 11 showed and 2 would have to stand in the corner waiting for a seat to open.

You're totally right...although I did find out that I can fit 10 around the table as long as a couple guys are slim. So worst case scenario? I don't mind sitting out for a bit if I ever needed to, but I don't think it will come to that. Aside from people dropping out before, there's always a straggler who comes late and a party pooper who leaves after an hour.

 

[MrCatPants]

Waiting for dropouts would give me ulcers. I know it's something you can almost count on, but I would hate to invite 11 and find out nothing else was happening in the world and 11 showed and 2 would have to stand in the corner waiting for a seat to open.

Yeah...i just strike fear into the hearts of potential no showers. They know the watlist is several deep, and they are in the back and/or soft banned if they late cancel or no show without a significant positive track record.

 

[SetToBean]

I started run up to 2x8max tables because hosting every week is just not feasible for personal reasons (twice a month is the absolute limit most months), because I had accumulated the equipment for it, and because I'd found regulars who enjoyed being dedicated dealers for the second table or at least tolerated it for the extrinsic benefit of helping games go later into the night. Also managing to run 14-16 confirmed players regularly helps.

Never had an issue with hosting difficulties, but I get a lot of enjoyment out of managing that stuff so very personalized experience there.

 

[CrackedAce]

2 tables can be a mess to host. If I get enough players I just end up running a tournament. This doesn’t work if your players are unwilling to switch from cash games on a whim

 

[JustinInMN]

I like hosting two tables, but I have the space.

One reason is that I have had the awful experience of thinking I have a solid 9 and suddenly end up with 5 at start time hoping a couple others are just late. If you can have even just 12-14 players show up on a night, you know you will at least have action for the night.

Recently I was hosting a game on a Sunday, I actually had 14 players signed up by Friday and for various reasons, ended up a 7 player game by game time. If I had capped at 9 players, I probably would have lost the game entirely.

My tips.

1) Seat of host privilege.

Make sure you have the space by your chips and that all transactions come to you.

2) Seating plan rewards first arrivers.

I suggest you seat everyone on table 1 to start. And then you form table 2 with the last 5 players to arrive. So say you are doing 9 max tables, when the 10th player arrives, they go to table 2 and the 4 last players to arrive on table 1 also go to table 2.

From there you can either seat players alternately to keep balance, or you can send all new players to table 2 and invite the earliest arrivers to move from table 2 to table 1 and balance that way. (In public cardrooms, this method is called "must-move seating.")

Having this level of demand is a good problem to have, and if you have the space, running 2 tables should be doable. Eventually you will consolidate back to 1 before the game breaks for the night.

 

[Rhodeman77]

I like hosting two tables, but I have the space.

One reason is that I have had the awful experience of thinking I have a solid 9 and suddenly end up with 5 at start time hoping a couple others are just late. If you can have even just 12-14 players show up on a night, you know you will at least have action for the night.

Recently I was hosting a game on a Sunday, I actually had 14 players signed up by Friday and for various reasons, ended up a 7 player game by game time. If I had capped at 9 players, I probably would have lost the game entirely.

My tips.

1) Seat of host privilege.

Make sure you have the space by your chips and that all transactions come to you.

2) Seating plan rewards first arrivers.

I suggest you seat everyone on table 1 to start. And then you form table 2 with the last 5 players to arrive. So say you are doing 9 max tables, when the 10th player arrives, they go to table 2 and the 4 last players to arrive on table 1 also go to table 2.

From there you can either seat players alternately to keep balance, or you can send all new players to table 2 and invite the earliest arrivers to move from table 2 to table 1 and balance that way. (In public cardrooms, this method is called "must-move seating.")

Having this level of demand is a good problem to have, and if you have the space, running 2 tables should be doable. Eventually you will consolidate back to 1 before the game breaks for the night.

Exactly how I run 2 tables. I normally have run 1 table but my last game I wasn’t sure if it would fill up and or stay filled because we were playing circus games. My group isn’t fully adjusted to them yet. So I invited everyone that might want to play and was pleasantly surprised to get 12 confirmed. Main table was filled at 8. Once we got to 9 the new players and the last couple to show up at the main table started the 2nd table.

 

[ThrowBack]

Do you have a solid regular who you can just guarantee his seat to keep the action going on table 2