bsdunbar1
4 of a Kind
What is the preferred table diameter for a round table seating 8 players?
Preferred Table Diameter for 8 players (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter bsdunbar1
- Start date
Jambine
Full House
I have a 54" round. Any larger is going to be hard to reach the pot.
Edit. Pretty easy build. 48" table with a 4" rail (1" reveal on the rail)
Edit. Pretty easy build. 48" table with a 4" rail (1" reveal on the rail)
^ This.
Rhodeman77
Straight Flush
I had played on 60” round tables with toppers on them for years. Plenty of elbow room but it can be require people to have to stand to rake pots. Also the bigger the table the more space it takes up in the room if that matters.
I’d build 60” with a pedestal base. The thing that bothered me the most about the plastic round tables was the folding legs. They were in the way for 6/8 people at the table.
I’d build 60” with a pedestal base. The thing that bothered me the most about the plastic round tables was the folding legs. They were in the way for 6/8 people at the table.
Last edited:
Three more: go a way
Very inefficient use of space if 6- or 7-handed. Only works well at max capacity. And even then, you get more player space with a round (if diameters are identical).
If I had room, I'd do a 72 inch with a stick to drag pots in. but if you win a big pot, you should get your lazy ass out of the chair to rake it in.
OP
OP
bsdunbar1
4 of a Kind
72" for 8 people is overkill
My decision is between 54" or 60"
My decision is between 54" or 60"
Personally, I find 60" tables comfortable but annoying. Best advice I can give you is to set up something temporary and play a few hands on each size to see how you like it.
I've got a 50" and it perfect for 6 can squeeze a 7 but it is a squeeze, no way I would want to try an 8th.
54" would be tight for 8 guys my size but doable if everyone wasn't large ie: my size.
60" would be tiresome having to stand up and stretch for pots IMO.
So I'd say 54"-56"
54" would be tight for 8 guys my size but doable if everyone wasn't large ie: my size.
60" would be tiresome having to stand up and stretch for pots IMO.
So I'd say 54"-56"
Jake14mw
Flush
I built a 58" because I read about 60" being difficult to reach the center. I love the 58", but I wish it was 60". I don't remember anyone having any problem at all reaching the center.
58" is perfect for 7 people. I think 60 would be better for 8 people.
58" is perfect for 7 people. I think 60 would be better for 8 people.
Jake14mw
Flush
I have no idea why anyone would consider an octogon over a circle. If you have 8 people at your octogon, great, but what about any number less?
59in (150cm). 
Just right for 8 people elbow-wise and just 75cm (less than 30in) from the rail to the centre, so that people 69in tall can still reach the latter without getting up.
Round tables are ideal, especially for self-dealt games, but they take up too much space for a given circumference / number of players. 8 players is the absolute maximum before they become dysfunctionally big.
Hexagons or Octagons take up less space for the same number of players, but feel odd when one or more players are missing.
Just right for 8 people elbow-wise and just 75cm (less than 30in) from the rail to the centre, so that people 69in tall can still reach the latter without getting up.
Round tables are ideal, especially for self-dealt games, but they take up too much space for a given circumference / number of players. 8 players is the absolute maximum before they become dysfunctionally big.
Hexagons or Octagons take up less space for the same number of players, but feel odd when one or more players are missing.
I was going to make a joke and say "it depends on the diameter of your players".
Why would you make the diameters identical? An octagon is more efficient than a circle because you can get the same amount of space per player with a shorter diameter. Translation - everybody's comfortable and everybody can reach the pots.
I assure you, octagon tables work very well with only 6 or 7 players.
Wrong on both accounts. Ask around....
Jake14mw
Flush
Explain this. When you have 6 players on a circle table, you spread out and get more room. With an octagon, do you stay in your spot and have less space, or do people spread out and deal with someone sitting on a point?
I would never ever ever take an octagon over a circle. You can easily spread out very organically on any table that doesn't have outside corners (of any size/angle).
I don’t have to ask around about the first point because it’s scientific fact. Or geometrical fact. It’s a more efficient shape because it gives players more perimeter while keeping them closer to the middle.
as to the second point, yeah, everybody can spread out in a circle when the table isn’t full. Score a point for circles. Doesn’t mean the octagon plays bad short handed. I own one. I’ve played lots of 6-handed games on it. it’s fine. Seriously. If it’s fine for 8, it’s fine for 6.
You stay in your spot. The people broadening the empty seat may speak out a bit, but that’s not the point.
The point is that if the octagon is big enough to sit 8 comfortably, then everybody’s still sitting comfortably if one leaves. Dave said it only works well at max capacity. Well if it’s working well at max capacity, it doesn’t work any less well if somebody leaves.
Yes the players can more efficiently use the table space of a circle by spreading out when it isn’t full. Maybe you all are playing at tiny circles and are dying to spread out. My point is, we don’t need to spread.
And we’re closer to the middle than we’d be in a circle
Superellipse. Not round.
Man, I think all this time at home is getting under everyone's skin. Knives are flashing over 54" vs. 60" and round vs. octagon.
I used to own a 60" round, and it was pretty comfortable for 8-9 players, but most had to stand up to reach the middle. Not me, of course, because I'm huge and have gorilla arms.
I used to own a 60" round, and it was pretty comfortable for 8-9 players, but most had to stand up to reach the middle. Not me, of course, because I'm huge and have gorilla arms.
This is about 45” x 55”. The curves are a slightly bowed out ellipse. This gives about 20” of perimeter per player. It should feel roomier than 20” on a racetrack, though, because straightaways are tighter at the elbows than seating on a curve.
I favor variations on these shapes because the sight lines are better than a racetrack, but there is more room for gameplay and players, without requiring as much reaching as a round 55” table. It’s a nice compromise:
Anyway, the shape generator is interesting to play with. Unfortunately this one is only in centimeters, but you can always do the conversion yourself:
http://www.procato.com/superellipse/
I favor variations on these shapes because the sight lines are better than a racetrack, but there is more room for gameplay and players, without requiring as much reaching as a round 55” table. It’s a nice compromise:
Anyway, the shape generator is interesting to play with. Unfortunately this one is only in centimeters, but you can always do the conversion yourself:
http://www.procato.com/superellipse/
Last edited:
Here’s one at 47” x 57”:
This is more like 21” raw perimeter per player, but a more spacious seat area in practice.
This is more like 21” raw perimeter per player, but a more spacious seat area in practice.
Last point — you can sit 8 players two different ways at a superellipse. One is at the points of a compass (N/NE/E/SE/S/SW/W) and the other is offset in between these positions, as in the very rough diagram below:
This lessens the maximum length of a reach to the center, where the chips and cards are, because no one is sitting at the longest span (W and E). But it diminishes the sight lines, when looking at a player immediately to your left or right.
This lessens the maximum length of a reach to the center, where the chips and cards are, because no one is sitting at the longest span (W and E). But it diminishes the sight lines, when looking at a player immediately to your left or right.
I like this. This might be the answer (not that this was the original poster’s question.). Ive never played on an ellipse, but it makes sense. I think a circle is perfect for 6, and octagon is perfect for 8, and for 9 or more, you need and ellipse or an oval or a kidney thing. But what you’re saying, an ellipse might be better than a circle and an octagon - i’d like to try it.
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account and join our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
