Should I add a second table to my cash game? (1 Viewer)

BleedingChips

Sitting Out
Joined
Jul 9, 2024
Messages
34
Reaction score
52
Location
USA
I have been developing my small stakes (.5/.10 cash game with $20 buy in, unlimited rebuys) since last summer and finally have a big enough group to regularly fill a table with friends. There’s about 20+ guys in the pool of players and I capped my upcoming game at 10.

My unexpected situation is that the table rsvp filled up a month ago (I know that probably seems far out - I usually stay a month ahead of scheduling games because everyone has family calendars to juggle).

I added a waiting list in case anyone drops out, but I am up to 13 people that want to be there with the possibility of 1-2 more wanting to play. Should I keep it capped at 10 or consider adding a second table to split the group into tables of 6-7? I have enough chips to cover, but am interested to hear if anyone else has experience and what pros/cons I should expect?
 
Luckily for me I still had my old table, so a couple of times we've been over 10 but one or two almost always cancelled laste minute. So I said if there's 12 signups, I'll put up another table, if there's 11 then last guy is on waiting list. Since it's quite a hassle to set up and rearrange my living room for two tables, I didn't want to rig up everything, have a last minute cancellation and we're reduced to 1 table.

Anyways, I've had 2 tables a couple of times, with 15 being my max I think, but it's usually 8-10. I ended up buying more chips and chairs to accommodate this and I've been reluctant to buy a 2nd ShuffleTech since the 2nd table seems so infrequent and it's always good for the players to feel a bit FOMO and sign up early before it's full. It might be that running two tables in my living room is a bit too crowded, noisy, disorganised (I'm playing as well), whatever which has reduced the frequency - I'm not sure. It could also be coincidental.

My advice would be to wait and see if two tables are more of a regular thing happening in the future before pulling the trigger. Having two tables is more likely to increase the recruitment if you manage to run it as well as one table. If not, it might have the opposite effect.
 
If you have the space, I'm of the opinion that you should accommodate as many people to play as possible. With all of these items, just be upfront to the whole group about your plan.

For my cash game, we start with one table and then split it up to two once 12 people show up (6 and 6 on each table, adding a player to each table as they show up, rebalancing as necessary) and then go back down to one table when we're back to 10. Also, we randomly split up the table by drawing cards once we hit 12 players.

I guess the con is that we do have to stop the game when we hit more than one table, but it's really not a big deal.
As a pro, if you let folks know that you will have two tables, that may encourage more people to come, since they know they'll have a seta.

If you've got 13-15 people, I say go for it, but just let everybody know upfront what your general plan is.

Of course, this all assumes you have the space, table, cards, and chairs to have a second table.
 
Luckily for me I still had my old table, so a couple of times we've been over 10 but one or two almost always cancelled laste minute. So I said if there's 12 signups, I'll put up another table, if there's 11 then last guy is on waiting list. Since it's quite a hassle to set up and rearrange my living room for two tables, I didn't want to rig up everything, have a last minute cancellation and we're reduced to 1 table.

Anyways, I've had 2 tables a couple of times, with 15 being my max I think, but it's usually 8-10. I ended up buying more chips and chairs to accommodate this and I've been reluctant to buy a 2nd ShuffleTech since the 2nd table seems so infrequent and it's always good for the players to feel a bit FOMO and sign up early before it's full. It might be that running two tables in my living room is a bit too crowded, noisy, disorganised (I'm playing as well), whatever which has reduced the frequency - I'm not sure. It could also be coincidental.

My advice would be to wait and see if two tables are more of a regular thing happening in the future before pulling the trigger. Having two tables is more likely to increase the recruitment if you manage to run it as well as one table. If not, it might have the opposite effect.
Thank you for the advice. I like the idea of creating FOMO to encourage early signups and also don’t expect this to be the normal - if it is, then I will need to get some more chairs!
 
If you have the space, I'm of the opinion that you should accommodate as many people to play as possible. With all of these items, just be upfront to the whole group about your plan.

For my cash game, we start with one table and then split it up to two once 12 people show up (6 and 6 on each table, adding a player to each table as they show up, rebalancing as necessary) and then go back down to one table when we're back to 10. Also, we randomly split up the table by drawing cards once we hit 12 players.

I guess the con is that we do have to stop the game when we hit more than one table, but it's really not a big deal.
As a pro, if you let folks know that you will have two tables, that may encourage more people to come, since they know they'll have a seta.

If you've got 13-15 people, I say go for it, but just let everybody know upfront what your general plan is.

Of course, this all assumes you have the space, table, cards, and chairs to have a second table.
I like your approach and thanks for the advice. I do have a smaller octagon table that is probably most comfortable for 4 people, but could probably squeeze 5-6 if needed. Would it be unfair/poor etiquette to have a big table (7-9) and small table (4-6) running at the same time instead of equally sized tables?
My concern is the smaller table might feel like they can’t win as much or they’re missing out on the big group.
 
Your "problem" is not a problem it is a blessing. Go to Costco, get one of those tables everyone here is injuring themselves to get their hands on, and enjoy having a 2 table game
 
Your "problem" is not a problem it is a blessing. Go to Costco, get one of those tables everyone here is injuring themselves to get their hands on, and enjoy having a 2 table game
Good perspective! Funny enough I upgraded my big table a couple months ago to the Barrington Costco special.
 
1736026363012.jpeg
 
Thank you for the advice. I like the idea of creating FOMO to encourage early signups and also don’t expect this to be the normal - if it is, then I will need to get some more chairs!
This has very much been @merkong 's approach and it's been working for him for 2-3 years now.

There are some complications with adding tables. I have only done it for cash a few times myself.

If you keep it all the same stake, I think you can still create some of that FOMO urgency using "must-move" seating. Have a main game and a second game and when you split (say when the 11th player arrives) the first six players that arrive stay in the main game and the others go to the 2nd game. (The "must-move" game. )

After the must-move game is created, all new players get added to the must-move game and then they "must-move" to the main game in order of their arrival when there needs to be balance.

The main game should always have the benefit of the imbalance when there are an odd number of players in the room. 11 players is 6 main, 5 must move. 13 players is 7 main, 6 must move, etc...

You can also add a rule that after the initial split, no one moves back to the must move game unless they are more than 2 players short.

Now if you Take the opportunity to run two different stakes, then must-move seating doesn't make sense. If this is the case you need to be pretty sure you have 5-6 players willing to play each stake.

So bottom linez, usually the good outweighs the bad when accomodating more players, but understand the complications and decide on a seating plan in advance.
 
Short answer, Yes, you should add a 2nd table. It gives you much more flexibility and options as explained above when you have the different number of players.

Having 1 table puts you in the bind you mentioned, and here is what happened to me when I had 1 table...

My table fits 8 comfortably, 9 is very cozy, 10 no way. I put in the Evite maximum of 9. The day before the game I was 8 Yes's, and a couple (husband/wife) wanted to play and evite wouldn't let them RSVP both of them. He messaged me and I told him the situation. I guess he didn't take it well as I never heard from them again. The day of the game, 1 joker cancelled so I could have accommodated them - @##$%*! Having the 2nd table could have avoided all that.
 
He messaged me and I told him the situation. I guess he didn't take it well as I never heard from them again.
Hard to tell. I've had a few people that have requested invites/adds to interest lists on a whim out of FOMO after hearing about the games from a mutual friend/acquaintance, but after they weren't available for the first date following that stopped responding even though by that point I had a regular schedule. To me, it came off like they were never really interested in the poker in the first place outside of that whim arising from it being what other people were doing.

More likely along those lines than taking offense, speaking generally about that kind of situation.
 
Last edited:
A friend and I host games with an overlapping player pool. 2 years ago we decided to have a 2 table night as a special event and filled it with 20 people. It took some cage rattling but we got all the seats filled and had a great time. That got us some more players in the door. This last summer we managed to put together a 3 table night and get it filled up. We told everyone we wanted to do 2 tables once a month moving forward and we have managed to fill them since July. It takes work though. I always send out reminders the Monday before the Friday night game so we can fill seats if people drop out. We have a rotating group of 3 people that manage the tables and their banks. When we are ready to go down to one table, table 2 breaks and the host and 2nd table runner settle up real quick so the host can cash out the bank at the end of the night.

AMA (ask me anything lol).
 
I host mixed games, and frequently run into your predicament. I strongly prefer a 7 max table. So I make it clear that I'll split to tables when I have ten confirmed players. I'll play 5-5. The challenge comes when one of the ten is a flake. So I've implemented a penalty scenario. If you sign up for my game and no show, or are late, you are on a one month penalty. It gives me confidence that I won't have two guys sitting there twiddling their thumbs waiting for the second table to make.

So in your scenario, assuming your RSVP list is solid - go with two tables. Then manage the must move and balancing accordingly.
 
Last edited:
A friend and I host games with an overlapping player pool. 2 years ago we decided to have a 2 table night as a special event and filled it with 20 people. It took some cage rattling but we got all the seats filled and had a great time. That got us some more players in the door. This last summer we managed to put together a 3 table night and get it filled up. We told everyone we wanted to do 2 tables once a month moving forward and we have managed to fill them since July. It takes work though. I always send out reminders the Monday before the Friday night game so we can fill seats if people drop out. We have a rotating group of 3 people that manage the tables and their banks. When we are ready to go down to one table, table 2 breaks and the host and 2nd table runner settle up real quick so the host can cash out the bank at the end of the night.

AMA (ask me anything lol).
Looks like you got your system down pack!! A lot of a trial and error I bet lol
 
This is my setup for tonight’s game and thank you everyone who gave some great advice. I decided to add second table and will see how it goes! So far, I am expecting 11-12 players but expect 1 or 2 will bail.
IMG_7171.jpeg
IMG_7170.jpeg
IMG_7167.jpeg
IMG_7163.jpeg
IMG_7168.jpeg
 
I realized I never updated this post after my game. We ended up with 11 players and thanks to all the great advice from others here, it went very smoothly. My 2nd table maxed out comfortably at 5 so I drew for seats with 2 different suites of cards (5 spades and 6 hearts) face down. We lost a player from each table around the same time and merged to the big table with 9 people. 10 would be too tight to play on the Barrington.

My group agreed that 9 and 5 for each respective table would be the max to be comfortable. This is obviously lopsided so I would like to add another Barrington (or at least a nice table topper for a folding table), but will wait until later in the year to see how consistently I am maxing out the tables.
IMG_7170.jpeg
 
I realized I never updated this post after my game. We ended up with 11 players and thanks to all the great advice from others here, it went very smoothly. My 2nd table maxed out comfortably at 5 so I drew for seats with 2 different suites of cards (5 spades and 6 hearts) face down. We lost a player from each table around the same time and merged to the big table with 9 people. 10 would be too tight to play on the Barrington.

My group agreed that 9 and 5 for each respective table would be the max to be comfortable. This is obviously lopsided so I would like to add another Barrington (or at least a nice table topper for a folding table), but will wait until later in the year to see how consistently I am maxing out the tables.
View attachment 1451219
Solid Hosting brother !! Two tables is always a different ball game and can be tougher happy it went smooth
 
If a poker game isn't growing, it's dying.
Agreed wholeheartedly... But with caution.

Tumors grow too.

A two table cash game is a lot to manage. Are all players fully vetted or is it partially a friend of a friend thing? The taxing of the hosts reserves physically and mentally are arbitrary and vary from host to host. I have 35 in my rolodex. I play 10 every week. We're always looking for players to audition but once I procure, I fully vet, and then when I have a seat which isn't often I consider an audition.

I've filled 141 tables over the last 2 1/2 years and nearly 500 in a 9 year span before that. When having to contemplate the move for sudden and exponential game growth I proceed with caution.
 
That's the advantage that 2 tables provides. If you book 1 table and have a couple players bail you are stuck short. Now you have a "buffer zone" against that
All hosts have a different definition of "short." With illness and forgotten plans, there will be a 10 player game that is suddenly 8. That is not a short table at GFC. Tournaments are different which is why I rarely spread them outside of the Club Championship Series.

If we have two call outs say for illness, after thanking those players for being responsible, we welcome the chance to play poker like it used to be played where any ace is live preflop.

"Short" is a definition unique to every host but one well advised to consider strongly before one gets locked in on it and always making sure to condition players to see it for it is as well.
 
I realized I never updated this post after my game. We ended up with 11 players and thanks to all the great advice from others here, it went very smoothly. My 2nd table maxed out comfortably at 5 so I drew for seats with 2 different suites of cards (5 spades and 6 hearts) face down. We lost a player from each table around the same time and merged to the big table with 9 people. 10 would be too tight to play on the Barrington.

My group agreed that 9 and 5 for each respective table would be the max to be comfortable. This is obviously lopsided so I would like to add another Barrington (or at least a nice table topper for a folding table), but will wait until later in the year to see how consistently I am maxing out the tables.
View attachment 1451219
Bubble Hockey!! So cool! Although I think your snack table is creating a fire hazard :)

Great setup, glad to hear the game went well.
 
Glad it worked out!

For the group: Is it best practice to have a separate set of chips and banker for the second table? What if the plan is to eventually merge the two tables?
 
Glad it worked out!

For the group: Is it best practice to have a separate set of chips and banker for the second table? What if the plan is to eventually merge the two tables?
For the one that I help run we have one set of chips for both tables. Second table has a separate bank and a rack of chips for rebuys. As people put in their 30 minutes before they leave we try to work down to 9 or 10 players at the same time. I.e if a guy says they want to leave at 1145 or 1215 and a few are leaving at midnight we just ask that they all leave at the same time so we can do cash outs and redraw for seats for the main game. Before we start action, second table runner settles up to make sure bank matches. Then it's just a single table with a single bank from there on out. We did similar things for 3 tables but had a 3 bank in play. Each table runner is responsible for their table/bank to balance. Main runner is on the hook at the end. This far it's been working. Little tweaks each month.
 
For the one that I help run we have one set of chips for both tables. Second table has a separate bank and a rack of chips for rebuys. As people put in their 30 minutes before they leave we try to work down to 9 or 10 players at the same time. I.e if a guy says they want to leave at 1145 or 1215 and a few are leaving at midnight we just ask that they all leave at the same time so we can do cash outs and redraw for seats for the main game. Before we start action, second table runner settles up to make sure bank matches. Then it's just a single table with a single bank from there on out. We did similar things for 3 tables but had a 3 bank in play. Each table runner is responsible for their table/bank to balance. Main runner is on the hook at the end. This far it's been working. Little tweaks each month.
Thanks, Lupus!
 

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.

Back
Top Bottom