So to give some further context, the players weren’t warned, weren’t given prior notice or an apology to say last half an hour etc.
One player in the game was doing maybe 700 and the Omaha was deep stacked. They then break to a Holdem where players maybe sit down with 100bb average and capped at 400 max. These are the areas that management never seem to address.

The Omaha was definitely more for them rake wise as everypot was above the minimum for applicable rake so to argue a business decision from a financial standpoint didn’t make sense.

I think even just making this decision sets a really bad presedence going forward that they have the power to break an active game if they see fit.
I’m not sure what the Grosvenor policies are but this seemed really obscure to me.

A 4-5-6 Omaha game has been running for 4-5 hours. Queensway can accommodate three tables but are severely understaffed due to the Grosvenor cutbacks and only two tables can currently be ran this evening. While one Holdem table is full around 6 players has grown on the waiting list and the Omaha is now down to 4 handed.

Management just made a decision to turn the Omaha table into a Holdem. The floor manager claimed it to be non negotiable and that it was a business decision.

What are people’s thoughts? I’ve never heard of this happening and I think it shows complete disregard to the players in the game.

So Pads, unsure if you've seen the latest Joey Ingram and Tonkaaaa interview but they touched upon the topic of sponsorships etc... and how Party's new model seems to be copying that of the late pokerstars in recruiting more prolific names in the poker sphere. Of course I'm unaware of how much visibility you have into these decisions but one of the points that was made was audience reach and content creation.

Interested to hear your thoughts on why for example Party isn't signing the Tonkas / Jaime Staples / PAVs etc... of the world who spend their times generating content that reaches large numbers of audiences and has potential to increase site traffic over some of the pro's and ambassadors that seem to have been added in the recent months.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmnL4x2jwm8
Gratz

For anyone that hasn't seen it.. 3mins in. I think given Maria is first to act in a 4way pot where Niall has just overbet jammed the flop it's not awful.
Considering she's now an overwhelming chip leader I'm pretty sure it might have been the best fold of the tournament for her

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etH_kBhgK44

He folds 22 if you shove the river surely every time?  Maybe you get him to fold 88 as well although unlikely.  How can he call the river given the stack sizes if you shove the river with 22 given how tight you think he considers you? I think i am always shoving the river for the extra £400 into such a big pot just to have the bluff edge running for me when he folds 22 and/or 88.  You should always have aq in his mind.   Waiting for the 'stick to darts arb'!

Well it's like 450 into 2300. He only has to be right a fifth of the time to profitably call. We're also using the power of hindsight to assume that he doesn't wake up with AQ himself in this spot or A8s aside from 22 or 88. The river jam is a sexy play if we have significantly more behind where he's getting worse pot odds to call with 22/88 but for 450 for 2.3k I just don't think we get it through enough.

Not sure exactly why we think we're at the top of our range.
.

We get to the river with AA, aq, a8s, a2s, 88, ak and aj

We may even check turn on occasion with aj. A bunch of our ax will fold to turn x/r or just check turn.

don't think we have to be overly concerned about folding this part of our range.

All very true and short handed I'd be three betting most hands mentioned in position, possibly not A2s but that's just me.
Based on stack sizes on the river and feeling that our opponent wouldn't fold to the additional 4-450 do you feel we have to call AK though or fold?

Much appreciated for the responses

All in

I completely agree with this, but as SuuPRlim has pointed out I feel it only works if we were much deeper.
I ran it by Charlie Carrel and his response was very similar, "Jam if we think he's willing to fold 88... otherwise cry", hence why I think it's very plausible to just fold in this spot vs his perceived range on the river.

I decided to tank, sigh call at the top of our range and get shown but in hindsight of how the hand plays and especially stack sizes I do genuinely think it's a fold with all things considered.

[Pre-Flop - 4 handed:]

So it's late night 1-3 at the Vic and we're down to 4-5 handed as everyone is trying to get the last few hours in for the cash race.
Our stack is around 1.15k and the villain in the hand covers us with around 1.8k. The villain is highly competent, plays for a living and has good awareness of game flow dynamics.
His perception of me is likely on the tighter side but the fact the table is down to 4 handed makes it more interesting as everyone is playing position much more aggressively.


Pre-Flop - 4 handed:

Dealt to Hero  

Villain opens UTG to 10, I three bet to 40.
The blinds fold and the Villain completes after a small dwell.

Flop - Pot 84
 

Villain checks, I bet 35, Villain calls

Turn - Pot 154
  ..  

Villain Checks, Hero bets 80, Villain Check Raises to 240.
Hero Calls


River - Pot 634

  ..   ..  

Villain bets 350
Hero (750-800 behind) ... ?


I've ran this spot by quite a few people and would be intrigued to hear people's thoughts in the blonde community seeing as the hand histories thread is dieing a slow death.
After flatting the check raise on the turn I'm entirely at the top of my range and the Villain would be well aware of this point.