Fallsview 1/2NL $200 max?
This past weekend I had a quick conversation with one of the pit bosses and he mentioned a possible 200 max 1/2 NL game being spread starting Monday (yesterday). Can 13cards or Fallsview elaborate on this please? Mainly has this happened and what is the session fee structure now for all the games? Has anyone by any chance played it and what did you think?
Comments
As well, $2-$5 NL buyin has been changed to $100-$300 (making it a MUCH better game).
From now on, Fallsview (the member) will not be replying to questions regarding FCR. He may continue to lurk/post on here, however.
Now if you can do something about the # of tables I might show up again...
I R xcited.
Why will he not be posting?
He may still post here but he is no longer asociated with Fallsview Casino.
sounds like he got canned; I thought he was the poker room manager?
Not at all. (Yes he was the poker room manager and the TD).
He is still lurking here so I will leave it up to him to answer any questions; it is not my place to speak about his business.
It was there on Christmas eve and the board only showed 1/2 with $40-$100. Is there a separate list for 1/2 $200 max?
He is always welcomed to create and post under a new username.
Good luck to Fallsview. My guess is that he got an even better position at another casino.
Yes, there are currently two different lists for $1-$2 NL.
I am actively lobbying to have just one $1-$2 NL game with buyins from $40 - $200. IMHO, this would be better.
well you brought it up... is he running the casino now and therefore can no longer comment? his helpful and informative posts will be missed.
Fallsview (the member) is no longer associated in any way with Fallsview (the casino).
Thanks, I'll keep a look out for that next time I'm there after the New Years.
I agree. I have a feeling that the 200 max will only appeal to the better players potentially making the game tougher to beat than the 100 max. If there is only 1 game we get the best of both worlds.
At the same time, whenever you give the better player an even bigger advantage you run the risk of ruining the game (especially at NL where the edge of a good player over a bad player is already significantly larger then compared to limit lets say). The bad players will lose their money quicker and the games might dry up. Although judging by the waiting lists at Fallsview this might not happen for a while.
Has he turned to professional poker as his new form of employment?
With his skills in $2-$5 Limit.....ummm...most likely NOT!
Good Skill!
Unlike Seneca which opens up a table as soon as there are 10 players waiting, I was told by a floor person that Fallsview was restricted to having only 6 tables open. This meant over 50 disappointed players on the waiting lists while there were 10 empty tables missing out on $120/hour revenue.
Fallsview's 2/5 & 5/5 does have some advantages for me.
1) Table selection.
Casino Niagara & Seneca have mostly 1/2 tables, while Fallsview is the place for higher limit games. Of the 6 tables, there was one 2/5, 5/10, 1/2 & three 5/5, so it was good that there were 5 tables that I wanted to play at. At Seneca, usually there is only 1 NL table higher than 1/2, so I am stuck playing in the only 2/5 table, whether the table is good or not.
2) Game selection.
You will usually find the best & most successful players at the highest limit tables. At Seneca, sometimes the only "big game" available is the 2/5 table, so the best players in Seneca are all in that table. It is obviously higher EV to play against donkeys instead of a table full of sharks who have won big at Seneca, Turning Stone or multiple WSOP bracelets. :eek: At Fallsview, there is usually 5/10 NL & higher tables going on, so there are more exploitable players in the 2/5 & 5/5 tables.
3) Session fee can be better than rake!
While rake is better for tight players in a table that has always 10 players, session fee becomes better as the table becomes shorter. The cost per player remains constant at $12/hour at Fallsview. In short tables with a rake, the amount of money being taken out of each player becomes much more than $12/hour. For example, when there are 6 players left in a 2/5 table at Seneca, I estimate that the average amount of money being taken out of each player is three times higher! (~$4 average rake/hand * ~54 raked hands/hour / 6 players = $36/hour) Obviously, it is much easier to win when there is only $72/hour being taken away from a 6-player table at Fallsview compared to $216+/hour in a raked table.
This is why most good cardrooms are willing to reduce the rake when the table becomes short enough. For example, I think Seneca reduces the maximum rake to $2 instead of $5 when there are five players or less. If the club or casino you play in is never willing to reduce the rake even though they are raking in 2-3 times as much per hour with the short table, then it is highly -EV to keep playing in that place. You should cash out as soon as the table has become short & try out another cardroom with a session fee or is willing to reduce the rake.
Conclusion: Playing 2/5 or 5/5 at Fallsview or other casino with $5 maximum rake is much better than playing at any of the clubs that has a rake of $10-$15+. Instead of losing because of the unbeatable $25-$50/hour rake in a club (especially with less than a full table), a player will have a much higher EV at Fallsview with only $12/hour fee. Taking the $5 bus to Fallsview is a good option for those who don't have a car.
The one I usually take is the one ran by Safeway...various pickup locations throughout GTA, Markham, Richmond Hill, Mississauga.