To Deal or not to deal that is the question...

Shortstack

If you were give the choice would you prefer dealers or longer blind levels with a smaller reg fee?

NickyOD

In order to save what little hair I have left, I'm willing to pay extra for dealers.

Hitman Actual

I'd be happy enough with no dealers and a longer clock. If it's a tourney with a lot of newbies, then I think dealers are essential, but I'm sure you'd have a lot of experienced players at a €250 game.

roryc

I think the 40 minute clock is definitely a much, much better option. AND with a smaller reg fee! I can't see how not having dealers would be a problem. There will almost always be someone willing to deal for the table. The fitz freeroll has never had dealers and it has always got by just as good as the games with dealers. Sure, the TD will be called for more rulings but at least then he's doing something

I can't see how you can honestly sacrifice a longer clock and smaller reg fee for something as small as having dealers.

Waylander

I would definitely prefer to have a dealer. 2 reasons for this, firstly there are alot of players out there who cannot shuffle etc and this slows things down. Secondly I have seen some people do some impressive tricks with a full deck of cards, since then I always prefer to have a non playing dealer in any game I play.

roryc

Waylander wrote:

Secondly I have seen some people do some impressive tricks with a full deck of cards, since then I always prefer to have a non playing dealer in any game I play.

Cut the deck, cut the deck......

bohsman

25 minute clock with dealers is a lot more play than 40 without, also cant see anyone being willing to deal a table for free in a 250game and personally if there are no dealers I have to take a 5 minute walk between hands to stop me from going insane

AmarilloFats

longer clock = good..But only if more hands are dealt.
At a 250 game players may not readily agree to deal, especially at the business end...If your dealing surely you'd give off more tells...Not that I've ever spotted a tell in my life.
Perhaps a hybrid, with dealers for the last X number of tables

Shortstack

AmarilloFats wrote:

longer clock = good..But only if more hands are dealt.
At a 250 game players may not readily agree to deal, especially at the business end...If your dealing surely you'd give off more tells...Not that I've ever spotted a tell in my life.
Perhaps a hybrid, with dealers for the last X number of tables

I should have said that the self deal version would have dealers from the bubble in.

NickyOD

bohsman wrote:

If there are no dealers I have to take a 5 minute walk between hands to stop me from going insane

I hear you and I'm not even much of a dealer. I keep wanting to just take the cards off them off them and bitch slap everyone at the table. Can't imagine what it must be like for you.

Shortstack

NickyOD wrote:

I hear you and I'm not even much of a dealer. I keep wanting to just take the cards off them off them and bitch slap everyone at the table. Can't imagine what it must be like for you.

But Nicky you want to bitch slap everyone anyway so what difference would it make

jem

longer blinds def.

roryc

I can understand how it can be annoying when the dealer doesn't know what he's doing, but in a €250 game, the standard would be much higher, and almost all the players would have a much better understanding of the game.

You will notice at any of the fitz €250 games, that when the dealer makes even the smallest mistake, it won't be missed by the players!

I can guarantee that if you went around every table of the fitz €250 game, there would be at least 2 people at every table that would be able to deal. Whether they would be WILLING to deal would be different story....

Maybe you could ask at the start who would be willing to deal and allocate 1 per table? And you could change the dealer after the break? I just feel that having a dealer isin't as important as people think, once you have a player that is a decent enough dealer at the table.

As far as 'card tricks' are concerned just make sure the deck is cut EVERY time. Also I find that dealing doesn't usually affect my play. It actually keeps me more aware because I'm constantly doing something. I'm watching every hand and picking up on how people play. Ive noticed that the same people deal the fitz freeroll every week so it must not be affecting them too much!

Fatboydim

It depends somewhat on the quality of the dealers.

I would in general prefer good dealers and 25min clock with higher reg fees.

30min clock would be better :-)

What really annoys me about self deal games and probably why Nicky's bitch slapping arm gets so much exercise - is that you spend so much time and energy worrying about the deal... some people can do it... some people can't. Some do the correct shuffle and others just do rubbish shuffles where you know the same cards are coming out. Then you get cards flipping over and missdeals... Even though I do occasionally deal myself and I'm alright at it... [and getting better] I was in the gutshot playing and made to deal a hand three times because an a**hole reckoned he could see the cards... Who was he Ray Miland??? [Showing my age] Then you get the nobbers who alaways have to deal out the rest of the cards after an all in bet has taken the pot on the flop.... NO! Get on with the game....

So deffo dealers.

NickyOD

Shortstack wrote:

But Nicky you want to bitch slap everyone anyway so what difference would it make

Well, yeah you got me there. :rolleyes:

bohsman

Rory theres a big difference between a freeroll and a 250game, nobody is going to pay 250 to play and deal the table

ollyk1

In summary shortstack you are asking a guy who's willing to pay €275 whether he'd prefer to pay €12.50 more and have dealers all the way and a 25 minute blind level or keep his €12.50 and have 40 minute levels of self deal.

I personally think the number of hands will work out approximately equal.

IF I was playing a small field of <40 where I knew the players were decent and it wouldn't be chaos I'd be happy to go with no dealers, if you're talking a big >120 player field then I wouldn't even consider turning up without dealers. 12.50 doesn't matter to me compared

No way I volunteer to deal in a €250 game. I have dealt many a freeroll and Oscar's game but no way I deal when I have €250 riding on it.

Good luck with the game either way Shortstack.

roryc

bohsman wrote:

Rory theres a big difference between a freeroll and a 250game, nobody is going to pay 250 to play and deal the table

Fair enough, I'm fighting a losing battle here:D
I just thought that the extra €1000 or so in the pot would be more important than having dealers. Obviously not! :rolleyes:

I still think the 40min blinds are better though...

Davey Devil

There would be no extra money in the pot as it's extra reg fee. I voted to have dealers, it allows you keep focused without having to pay attention if mistakes are being made.

gerire

Davey Devil wrote:

There would be no extra money in the pot as it's extra reg fee. I voted to have dealers, it allows you keep focused without having to pay attention if mistakes are being made.

I think that pretty much does cover it. People who know me know I have no problem playing and dealing, but as has been mentioned before I wouldnt even consider to do it in a 250 game.

roryc wrote:

fitz freeroll has never had dealers

Oh it used to many moons ago before us boardsters managed to get our hands on it, just after the start of the poker forum, amazing coincidence that....

JuliusFranco

i hate not having dealers
the only thing i hate more than not having dealers is having to deal and play myself. after the last sunday game i played in the fitz i swore i'd never do it again

The Troll

NickyOD wrote:

In order to save what little hair I have left

Hair? What hair?

As for the OP, much rather have dealers. Can't stand having to deal myself / have another mug at the table deal for me.