blonde poker forum

It seems to have disappeared !

 ???

think we annoyed Nightfly.

Nightlfy removed it because he was upset that some members were debating and questioning some of the rulings.

Well I did express surprise that the "lowest chips" moves is company policy for Gala.

I hope this didn't cause offence, as it was not intentional.

no, my response to yours either. I did remove my post and said you probably would to but I think he's just starting again.

The thread was removed after needlessly critical comments appeared on it.

While constructive criticism, questions and suggestions do have their place on this forum this thread was not the place for them.

The idea was to simply provide a comprehensive and up to date information thread as a service to those forum members who were/are in search of such information.

The information on the home page link regarding the Nottingham schedule has not been updated to reflect changes and i believed that a thread on this forum was a suitable solution to that. I discussed the idea with tikay the other day and believe that it would be a good model for all Supervisors to follow. If there were an info thread for Blackpool, Walsall, Broadway, Luton etc then a sticky topic could be created with links to these pages. This would allow anyone to quickly link to the relevant information they desire.

As information/schedules change it is possible to edit the original thread to make reflect those changes.

I provide this information in my own time as a service to those forum members who will benefit from having such information readily available.
Since the thread has been removed there has already been a request for information that it contained concerning this saturday's super satellite.

Please respect my intentions and refrain from posting comments which have a negative tone or are critical of my efforts.

Yes we move lowest chips when balancing tables. This is a Company rule and I prefer it. I do not wish to change it. It is not weakness or inability to stand up to my employer. I believe that Next BB is open to abuse and is NOT the best way. If you do not wish to be moved because you are lowest chips. Don't allow yourself to be lowest chips. As for a 'seat of death' which can be created... if you have a short stack, you have a short stack regardless of where you are sitting. Any appropriate tournament structure does not allow any player an advantage over another and should not be required to give the 'short stack' a break. They are elimination tournaments, people are eliminated for a whole host of reasons. You MUST play poker to survive.

The information thread will be posted later today. Unfortunately i cannot get back the 3 hours of my time spent creating it.

Post your negative and critical comments on your own thread. Do not expect me to retain them on a thread which ultimately i can and will delete!

you didnt need to delete it. I removed my post and I'm sure others would have too.

I was not critical of you or your efforts in any way Nightfly.

Nor did I make any negative comments about you or the way in which you run the Nottingham Gala cardroom.

Threads on this forum have a tendency to ramble, we like it that way.

Your threads are no different to anybody else's in that respect.

You could have sent me a PM had you wished.



To clarify my question about table balancing:

Some time ago (three months maybe) it was announced on this forum that
Nottingham had decided to change from the old "lowest chips" method to
the "big blind" form of table balancing.

I posted then praising Nightfly and Nottingham Gala for what I perceived as a forward move.

When I next went into the casino to play one Sunday night for the $50 rebuy
it became apparent that they had reverted to "lowest chips" metod.
When I asked why this was, I was told that the "big blind" form of table balancing
caused problems if there were no house dealers (i.e. when the dealer is the big blind)

This is why I asked Nightfly if the "big blind" method would be reinstated for a tourney with house dealers.

I must admit to being surprised by Nightfly's "preference" for the "lowest chips" to move.
I see it as one of those old outdated methods which is unfair on the players.
It frequently leads to an imbalance of chips on one table which leaves all the players
at that table at a disadvantage vis-a-vis the other tournament tables.

No major tournament venue still uses this method of balancing tables as far as I am aware.

I see it as purely a matter of evolution before it becomes extinct.

i have to say that moving the shortest stack is the worst way to move players, moving the BB is the best way for these small events and works much better but thats IMHO

I don't know what all this was about, but let me clarify......

Members do NOT have the ability to remove a thread, so far as I know.

BUT, removing the FIRST POST in a thread removes the entire thread. So if Nightfly made the first post, he can, in effect, remove the entire thread. I assume this is what happened here. In any event, it was NOT removed by a blonde administrator or moderator.

If Members make a post, & want to delete it, that's their right.

blonde's view on "negative feedback & criticism" is, broadly......

Negative feedback & criticism IS acceptable to blonde. Rudeness, personal flaming, insulting posts, etc, are NOT acceptable. "It's not what you say, it's the way that you say it".

It seems Nightfly went to time & trouible to make some points, & got criticised - unfairly in his view - & decided to remove the post, &, in this case, the entire thread, see explanation above.

I understand his "hurt". But it's a fact of life. Put your head above the parapet, & someone will throw the occasional stone at you.

Oh, & my view on table balancing. Personally, I believe the "moving the BB method" is far and away the fairest method. It is used at every venue I visit, except Notts. Notts is the only Casino I know of anywhere that still moves "lowest chips". And the only Casino I know where the person moved can "choose" his seat at his next table, resulting in all sorts of daft "racing to the easy/best/preferred seat" situations. This is clearly unfair - unarguably unfair - one guy can get two BB's in a row, & another can miss a round. I hope thats not conceived as "negative". It's fact. And it's constructive. And it's not impolite.

Tell you what though - who'd be a Cardroom Manager........!.

seconded ironside, (oh and now Tikay) i two believe the BB moves rule to be fairest as long as they are moved to the NEXT AVAILABLE BB on their new table (Walsall always do this and in my opinion it works well). And Tikay puts forward the best argument for doing this of them all. - players allowed to choose their seat on the next table (this can effectively buy them up to 25 minutes at crucial stages of a comp where if they had stayed where they were then they would have been forced to play in due course as the BB would be on its way around to them.

- it is a game of opinions.  We all have our own that we believe to be correct, thats just the way life is....

I dont think people should have opinions

That's an opinion.

What do you think?

I don't have an opinion.

(Message to all new blondeites - this is the "Blonde Let's Cool it Task Force" dong their diversionary Tactic).

Is it still raining there?

think so either that or no one has told the cricketers to get back out and play so i can get some sleep

Tipping down Robert.

Good for the garden, though.

Stopped now, but clouding over again. Only live 1/2 a mile from cricket ground so i could be our resident weather reporter but im not sure i can be bothered

Anyone else think these two are like the Two Ronnies?

Someone should put them on stage.  :)

So its goodnight from me......

dont give em ideas, tikay and his media whoring lol ( joking before anyone goes nuts lol)

I resent the notion that I am a media whore.

Still, that's given me an idea for an article. I wonder who I could sell it to......