Cash Game 1 table to 2 tables - Moving Players (1 Viewer)

[B0mbp0t]

Home game, 2 tables, one has tourney, one has cash, full table of 10.

@ cash table, Player X has taken stacked Player Y once and Player Z twice, still has all that money and then some.

Tourney ends, 4 players from that table want to join cash game, but need to get some players from original cash game table. Same stakes/game.

What's the best protocol for Player X? The friendly way in my view (and this is a friendly game that's been running for years), Player X should stay at the table unless Y or Z leave. Gives Y or Z change to get them money back from them. But if either leave.....so be it.

Other options I see are everyone redraws for tables, or it really doesn't matter, do whatcha want.

Thoughts?

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

Read the room, you know your group better than we do, but redrawing is fair and usually encouraged if theres the full 14 people. Cash is cash and poker includes luck, we'll see if they're lucky enough to get seated next to moneybags.

 

[BGinGA]

Ask if two or three players at the current cash table want to voluntarily join the four tourney players at the new cash table. If so, you're good to go. If none or only one player wants to go, then do a random draw of the remaining cash game table players to determine who must move. I see no reason to 'force' equal tables of 7 players each; 6 and 8 are perfectly fine to me when you are forcing players to change tables.

So worst case, two random players are forced to move. And mr.big.stack is under no obligation to stay or go, it's his choice like everyone else (unless randomly selected to move).

Alternately, everyone draws for seats for 2 tables, 7 players each. Biggest loser so far for the night has the option of immediately moving to the other table (making tables of 6 and 8). Call it a consolation prize.

But the first option above likely results in fewer players (and possibly none) disliking the outcome of any table changes.

 

[JustinInMN]

@BGinGA is right here. Asking for volunteers aside from X, Y, Z so those three have the option to stay put seems fair.

I do want to introduce the concept in home games that order of arrival matters, and this would be a possible application. I would say the last two players that arrived at the cash game are obliged to move to the new game with the four tournament players if there are no volunteers. (And I do agree, there is no reason to force a 7/7 situation, if you happen to get 3 volunteers, then fine, otherwise I don't think the second game needs to be seven, doing at 8/6 or at an extreme 9/5 is okay too.).

But if no volunteers and you don't want to use order of arrival, I would just have the players at the full game draw cards and the two lowest cards move to join the new game with the 4 tournament players, and the "main" game remains largely in tact. I don't see any reason to do a full redraw.

 

[Nine_high]

I do want to introduce the concept in home games that order of arrival matters, and this would be a possible application.

I go to this in my game if I don't have the volunteers.

It's not the same situation as the op since there's no tournament. But if my game gets a 10th player, we go to two tables. I let volunteers join the tenth player at the new table, and fill any remaining seats in reverse order of arrival. No one complains. Or if they do, I don't hear it

 

[Rhodeman77]

On the rare occasion that I run a 2 table game we go by order of arrival. It helps to make sure the game starts on time and the earliest players get priority to stay at the main table (which should have the most money on it). Of course players can choose to go to the second table, and they sometimes want to if it looks like the action will be better because of the new players. But that isn’t the case most of the time.

But whatever you do, do it consistently. Changing how you move players the next game could cause some animosity.

 

[B0mbp0t]

This is all really great input. Thank you all, really appreciate it.