Optimum number of players for NLHE on a 10 seater table ! (1 Viewer)

[fishandchips]

This thread: https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/best-number-of-players-for-texas-hold-em.114405/
comes down almost 100% on 6,7,8 players as optimum.

I wonder how much of that is due to ergonomics vs game dynamics. eg when someone says 10 players, you imagine yourself at the end of a big oval, but when they say 8 players you picture a nice octagon or round table.

For social interaction a round table is best, and maybe 7 or 8 is better than 10 even at a round table (family meal vs wedding)

Anyway, I have a 84"x42" oval at the moment (no fixed cups). which seats10 comfortably. 7 people signed up for my first cash game so far (dedicated player/dealer arranged because I decided no dealing from the ends).

Should I try to get more players or be happy with 7 ?

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

Be happy with 7. No need to cram everyone in. 6-8 is a good mixture of action and opportunity, 9 or 10 can still be fun with the right crowd but less room on the table and playing less hands.

 

[fishandchips]

Up to 8 now Should I close entry ?

 

[Nymor]

7 is fine, as is 8. If you're happy with 10 then keep trying to fill up.

All my games, cash or tournie, are 8max but we do play mixed cash games though so 6/7 is ideal for those.

We do play 9 handed at my pub league games although thankfully final table is 8 handed. Very occasionally there may be 10, charity tournies for example, and I hate it.

 

[BottomPair7]

I would let it ride. In my experience, there can always be last minute cancellations for a variety of reasons.

 

[Rooster410]

8 is the best IMO

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

Up to 8 now Should I close entry ?

No way you've got room and you're just building your game.

"hey mate, yeah the table seats 10 but some geeks on a forum told me you can't come cause its not optimal. Sorry! RSVP faster next time."

 

[buzzmonkey]

For cash I max at 9, but I deal that game so it makes things work well.

For tournies I've switched to 8 max with a final table of 9.

 

[BGinGA]

10-handed cash NLHE is a much different game than 6-max. Games with 7, 8, or 9 players fall somewhere in-between (7 plays closer to 6, 9 plays closer to 10). 8 is the sweet spot imo, although I prefer 7 so that circus games can also be dealt.

10-handed is a snoozy fold'em-fest, 6-handed is an any-two-cards free-for-all. I dislike both, but would pick 6 over 10 every day, all day.

With your table and a dedicated dealer, I'd cap it at 8.

 

[doublebooyah85]

84 inch table 8 max for sure. 96 table 9 max + dealer.

 

[fishandchips]

I have closed entry at 9.

Blamed it on the 'Forum Nerds' who all hate full ring.

Seriously though, I want to give it the best chance of being accepted which means going with the best format. And I believe you that short handed cash games are better.

A number of this crowd would specifically say they don't like short-handed tourneys and that's partly why our pub game died out. It was a 9seat table and if some players only want to play if 7 or more, it's hard to bring it back when it starts to dwindle. A few of us (6 or 7) were happy playing it with 6 but then when only 4 can make it

 

[CraigT78]

I think 8 is a good number for NLHE, even though I hate that game. I'd much rather play mixed, but this isn't about me.

I commented because I offer this advice, don't ever stop recruiting. Even as the day arrives, send messages to your group, let them know you can wait list if they become last minute interested. Always be recruiting. It will help you build a strong player pool of regulars and also a group of "seat fillers" who may only play a few times a year.

 

[krafticus]

8 is preferred for me, then 7, then 9, than anything other than 10+

I think the game moves better, action is better, and even if you have a bigger table, you still get some elbow room.

 

[wickedwonka121]

7 seems to be perfect. When we play 9 or 10 there's always an issue with elbow space, which sucks. Chips, drinks, cards, that's a lot of S on the table for 10 people.

 

[JackJack]

Up to 8 now Should I close entry ?

Buy a second table and find 7 more

 

[4SUMERZ]

8 is the most that you want playing cash games. 7 is OK as well. Any less than 6 and not worth the trouble in my opinion.

 

[Poker Zombie]

Buy a second table and find 7 more

^ This

I started with a 8-seat octagon, but if a couple cancelled, 6 was weak-sauce, and cash games can break early if someone leaves. Having an "overflow" table is optimal, even if the overflow table is just a tablecloth on a blanket on a dining table. Getting butts in the seats is paramount. Optimal number of players is secondary.

 

[LeCoq]

8 players is the sweet spot for me.

 

[Dann1215]

I have the Costco Barrington. I invite 9.

Between a person or two arriving late and a few getting knocked out within 2-3 hours, I’ve found this to be a good number to keep a game going for 5ish hours.

 

[KHarp1]

7-8...it's easier when you transition to Omaha.

 

[Taghkanic]

No way you've got room and you're just building your game.

"hey mate, yeah the table seats 10 but some geeks on a forum told me you can't come cause its not optimal. Sorry! RSVP faster next time."

There’s no way an 84 x 42 table is comfortable for 10 people, unless they are 95-lb. supermodels with no hips

 

[fishandchips]

There’s no way an 84 x 42 table is comfortable for 10 people, unless they are 95-lb. supermodels with no hips

yeah, I'd probably call it a 9 seater now. But this tourney gang had previously had 10 people around a 72x36 topper. So fitting ten around this was quite easy. Side tables help with that.

 

[Taghkanic]

This tourney gang had previously had 10 people around a 72x36 topper.

TBH I find that puzzling.

A standard rule of thumb is that you want 24 inches per person at a table.

At a rectangular 72” x 36” table you can only get 3 people on each long side and 1 person on each end = 8.

If you put 2 on each end that’s only 18” each on the short sides.

I have a 94” x 46” superelliptical and it is really only comfortable with 9 (8 + 1 dealer). I’ve had 10 (9 + 1 dealer) but it is tight. That’s much roomier than 72 x 36. IDGI

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

There’s no way an 84 x 42 table is comfortable for 10 people, unless they are 95-lb. supermodels with no hips

I get where you're coming from, everyone has different standards for space. But if I'm starting a new game and trying to get people interested in a recurring game I want more players in my pool, plus always good to plan for a no-show or an early leaver. For a cash game I hate 10 but I don't mind it for my tournaments, just a good way to get the social atmosphere going and there's more people to talk and socialize with.

I am a 95-lb supermodel with no hips, so I'm not sure I can speak to this problem you're having.

 

[allforcharity]

I'd play 10+1 at a 72" table with a bunch of no-hip 95lb supermodels!

 

[UncleMilty]

No way you've got room and you're just building your game.

"hey mate, yeah the table seats 10 but some geeks on a forum told me you can't come cause its not optimal. Sorry! RSVP faster next time."

I always figure out a way to accommodate everyone that wants to come. The only time it’s difficult, is when exactly 11 show up.

 

[Taghkanic]

I get where you're coming from, everyone has different standards for space. But if I'm starting a new game and trying to get people interested in a recurring game I want more players in my pool, plus always good to plan for a no-show or an early leaver. For a cash game I hate 10 but I don't mind it for my tournaments, just a good way to get the social atmosphere going and there's more people to talk and socialize with.

I am a 95-lb supermodel with no hips, so I'm not sure I can speak to this problem you're having.

The seats at my 94 x 46 superelliptical are 21 inches wide after I removed the armrests.

My table has a circumference of 231, with no corners and no legs in the way, so every inch is usable. (At a rectangular non-pedestal table, you usually lose space to the corners and legs.)

If I arrange 10 of them around the table that is 23” per seat.

21” is a relatively wide seat, but when you factor in elbows, people not sitting straight to the table, turning to the side, etc, it’s just enough.

In any case, what keeps my table full is running a good game where people feel comfortable. MOAR players is not necessarily better. We sometimes start with 9 since there is bound to be attrition over the course of a long evening. But I think the game gets good when we settle down to 6-8. More room, more hands per hour, less nitty folding.

On nights where I’m oversubscribed I’ll sit out until someone busts to make room, or just tell the later reservations to come later. Usually someone either has to leave early or is runnning bad and decides not to rebuy a fourth time.

P.S. I have a couple regs who simply refuse to play 10-handed. I’ve seen them leave another game when the host insisted on trying to squeeze in a 10th player plus a dealer. These aren’t finicky people. They just recognize that 10-handed play kinda sucks.

 

[UncleMilty]

I get where you're coming from, everyone has different standards for space. But if I'm starting a new game and trying to get people interested in a recurring game I want more players in my pool, plus always good to plan for a no-show or an early leaver. For a cash game I hate 10 but I don't mind it for my tournaments, just a good way to get the social atmosphere going and there's more people to talk and socialize with.

I am a 95-lb supermodel with no hips, so I'm not sure I can speak to this problem you're having.

I always invite only 95lb supermodels to my game. There’s plenty of room for 9 of them and myself

 

[Taghkanic]

P.PS. re.: starting a new game:

A game where players know they have to reserve quickly and arrive on time to secure a seat will survive longer (and be easier to host) than one where people know the host is always going to try to cram another seat in for their late-reserving, late-arriving ass…

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

The seats at my 94 x 46 superelliptical are 21 inches wide after I removed the armrests.

My table has a circumference of 231, with no corners and no legs in the way, so every inch is usable. (At a rectangular non-pedestal table, you usually lose space to the corners and legs.)

If I arrange 10 of them around the table that is 23” per seat.

21” is a relatively wide seat, but when you factor in elbows, people not sitting straight to the table, turning to the side, etc, it’s just enough.

In any case, what keeps my table full is running a good game where people feel comfortable. MOAR players is not necessarily better. We sometimes start with 9 since there is bound to be attrition over the course of a long evening. But I think the game gets good when we settle down to 6-8. More room, more hands per hour, less nitty folding.

On nights where I’m oversubscribed I’ll sit out until someone busts to make room, or just tell the later reservations to come later. Usually someone either has to leave early or is runnning bad and decides not to rebuy a fourth time.

P.S. I have a couple regs who simply refuse to play 10-handed. I’ve seen them leave another game when the host insisted on trying to squeeze in a 10th player plus a dealer. These aren’t finicky people. They just recognize that 10-handed play kinda sucks.

I know you don't prefer 10 handed. That's okay, I don't either, hence my first comment. Prefer 6-8 for our dealer's choice. There's no chance I'm sitting out of my own game so that someone can have more elbow room, that's bananas.

I 100% stand by no, I'm not going to cap my invites when I'm starting a new game. If 10 show up the first night that's a great problem to have and will mean less 5 or 6-handed nights down the road. I know you run and play in some serious long standing games and appreciate the insight, but our nights are more social and we don't mind overcrowding occasionally, keeps people coming back. You play in card games with card players, most of my games are just friends looking to play cards to pass the time.