Poker Pro computer tables

I just played my first extended ring game session at Oaklawn Race Track in Hot Springs, AR on a computerized Poker Pro table. I have to say, I did miss having a dealer, doing some theraputic chip riffling and having actual cards- but it was nice to be able to get a hand dealt on the order of once every 45-60 seconds. The rake was about the same as having a live dealer, except for the one fact that the poker pro tables did not adhere to the "no flop, no drop" rule on chopped pots between the BB and SB.

It was almost a nice compromise between the (sometimes) agonizing wait of having the dealer shuffle, collect the cards in the muck and calculate the rake- and the hyper speed of playing online. I would hate to see these machines completely replace dealers, but I think it's a nice alternative to have in some casinos. I was just curious to see what other people's opinions and experiences wer with the Poker Pro table or any similar machines.

I think they updated the operating system recently. The last time I used one of these tables was about a year ago, and the interface seems a lot more intuitive now.

I think if it is your only choice it beats nothing at all. I have played on them on cruise ships several times and was thrilled to have them.

Given a choice though I would take a live dealer any time.

I think the 'no flop' 'no drop' is configurable, I played a few months ago in Cherokee, NC and they did not take a rake when you won pre-flop.

Also consider the tipping. When I play with a dealer I'm tipping $6-15/hour. That can cut into profits pretty quick at a $1/2 game.

Edit: oh yeah, almost forgot, I like the tables. More hands, and I think easier to read people since they were concentrating on the screen and not paying attention to if they were being watched or not.

I didn't have an opp to take a test drive; Excalibur had them & opted to remove them, after less than a yr, in favor of live dealers. As dakota-xx pointed out, if it's the only option, it's better than nothing.

They seem really cool to try but how does it work? Can't someone just try to peek at your cards real quick?

The whole thing works on a touch screen system. Everybody has a screen in front of them and your cards get "dealt" onto your screen face down. They only turn up so you can see what they are when you cup your hands over them, pretty much the same as looking at real cards in a game with a live dealer.

I know this is an older post but I wanted to get an opinion. I have a guy that is making a virtual table for my poker tour I'm starting up and I thought of something after I read about the Poker-Tek debacle at the Excalibur.

My question to you guys is this, if you had an electronic table that the only thing it did was deal out the cards, shuffle the decks, cut the decks, and the player only has a button to fold his hand, would you have more of an interest in playing on a table like this (a hybrid so to speak) or a fully electronic table? On a hybrid table, you would still have actual chips and betting would be the same with the dealer only having buttons to deal the flop, turn and river, plus buttons to shuffle, cut, and deal a new hand. This would eliminate a lot of dealer and player errors and still speed up the game, letting you play more hands per hour while still keeping the allure of a real live table we all know a love to play on? Any thoughts?

I think that would be confusing, and a disaster. You would then need someone there to count chips and make sure the pot was right. driving up the cost for the casino.

Once you get used to the pokertek tables they are not that bad to play on. I think there are more tells on a pokertek table than with cards and chips, they are just different.

Either have a dealer or have it electronic. not a hybrid!

I like both ways of playing poker.

(sorry in advance for derail)


Just a tip, since I have seen a couple of these one liner nonsense posts from you on a few threads. (As a matter of fact, I looked up all your posts and they are ALL this way).

If you want to build up a post count, this will not work.

Please contribute to the thread or just leave it out. ..... please.....

I don't understand what it is? I thought the whole idea of going to the casino was to experience the real effects of a poker scenery. Wouldn't it be just like playing the same on a computer at home?

Sorry for being naive but I haven't seen these in any of the casinos I've been too.

Are there real people you're playing against and a "computer" or something?

I don't think I'd go that far, the only electronic aspect would be the cards. You'd look at your cards, then bet with actual chips, and either win or lose the hand, how is that confusing? That is the main gripe from people about the fully electronic tables is there is no dealer or chips. This way you get the best of both worlds and faster play, I don't see how it would be a disaster.

Yes, on a hybrid table you'd play just like you were on a live table with chips and a dealer but you'd just have the cards dealt electronically. The dealer would have a small control panel in front of his chip tray for dealing and would count chips like normal with regards to your bets, splitting pots, and payouts.

Planning to head to Vegas hopefully soon. Anywhere they offer a game like this now? What casino would have this?

Excalibur was the only one who had them but they were removed because players preferred a live dealer and to be able to have actual chips in front of them. What i'm tryng to see is if you can give them the best of both worlds. If they have to pay a dealer anyhow, why not at least increase the hands per hour so the casino can make more money in doing so. I know I would prefer to play more hands per hour, I don't know about anyone else.

I know of two casinos that have them. One is in Michigan, at Four Winds Casino in New Bufalo. And the other casino is in Indiana at Indiana Live Casino in Shelbyville. Those are PokerTek tables. I noticed on their site they list 10 other locations that currently use them that are land based. http://www.pokertek.com/locations/

I think he was asking if there are any in Vegas.

Not of the PokerTek tables. Closest is in Reno.

Does anyone know if there is another manufacturer of these electronic tables?

Its against live players sitting right at the table with you.

My impression, which may be flawed, is that the real chips would be more of a hassle than a benefit. What happens if someone has an high denomination chip hidden in their stack? Also, there are so many angles people can pull with chips. String bets ... announcing more than their all in chips are worth ... etc. Who is going to moderate that?

The closest Casino to me is the one in NC which is on that list.
BTW: I have played in many live casinos from Florida to Michigan to Vegas To LA to San Francisco and several places in between.

@Mer071898: Have you played on pokertek tables? If so was it more than one session?

I tend to agree with Bigjoker, I just can't see it working.

The entire point of an electronic table is it does everything faster and eliminates disputes. The entire point of a live dealer is they're there to do everything including resolve disputes.

What you're proposing, I fear, is probably the worst of both worlds. When you use real chips you slow the game right back down again as well as opening it back up to all sorts of mistakes (not to mention angle shooting), thereby largely negating the advantages of using an electronic table. You're also losing the dispute resolution benefits and game management expertise of a live dealer.

I only need three words to prove that point, by the way: multiple side pots.

EDIT: missed the later post about there still being a dealer at the table. Now I just think it seems a bit silly to be paying for both. Shuffling and dealing live cards doesn't actually take that long (I can do a full table in about 20 seconds and most competent dealers should be the same) and if you're not making the savings on having to pay live dealers I'm not sure I see the point...

I have played with these tables and found them very confusing. If i wish to play with a screen I will stay home, pet my dog and play on my computer.

Do you find your home computer confusing also?

I was going to say the same thing . Is having a small 7 or 8 inch monitor in front of you guys that distracting, really? If it wasn't for the small monitor, the table would look exactly the same as any other time.

If you can mix, shuffle, cut, and deal a whole table in 20 seconds, your faster than the average dealer by far. I sat in and timed our dealers down in riverside for 2 hours one night and after each hand, from mixing up the cards to dealing a new hand, they averaged about 45 seconds. On my hybrid table, all the dealer presses is a "shuffle and deal" button and it take less than 2 seconds from the end of a hand to get new cards in front of you, do the math.

If your already at a table with a dealer anyhow, just think about it. If you have a good dealer staff that can average 30 hands an hour you would save 43 seconds a hand (45-2) which would save you 1290 seconds or 21.5 minutes (30 hand/hr.(=2 minutes a hand) x 43 seconds saved per hand) which comes out to almost an extra 11 hands per hour (10.75). You can't sit there and tell me a casino would not have an interest in adding an extra 10-11 hands an hour per table for live cash games.

And for those who think Shuffle Tech is any better, go to their website and they mention in their video that a three riffle shuffle takes 45 seconds and a seven riffle shuffle takes 1 1/2 minutes! How is that faster than dealing electronically?

OK, a few things.

First of all it's almost impossible to get 30 hands per hour in a live game. The catch is it's not the dealer's fault because it's the players that have by far the biggest influence on how many hands they see per hour. Thinking, counting chips and tanking all take time. So even if you save 43 seconds per hand on dealing it still won't work out to be an extra 10 hands per hour. Yes, you'll get more but it won't be that many.

My local casino aims for about 20 hands per hour and that's with shuffle machines saving time (see below).

Second, casinos are obviously interested in getting more hands per hour in because it's more hands they can rake. But if you're putting up the money for an electronic table you might as well do it properly and go fully electronic, getting rid of the expenses for dealers and physical chips altogether, as well as the delays that moving and counting physical chips (not to mention calculating side pots) cause. Plus when you don't have to seat a dealer at the table you can fit an extra, paying player in.

That's actually one of the biggest things I can't work out about your system - it's the worst of both worlds from a business perspective. You've got a much more expensive table but you're not making any savings on staffing or having to actually provide chips and by keeping physical chips there will still be delays in the action and potential for mistakes.

Third the machine shuffling times are a moot point because anyone who uses them should be using two decks - you play with one and have the machine shuffle the other during the hand. At the end of the hand you just change decks. My local casino (and I'm sure many others) has been using this system with flat-mounted shuffle machines built into the tables for years now.

Lastly though, and possibly most importantly, WHY ARE YOU ARGUING WITH US?!? You asked for our opinions and as poker players we're telling you we can't see the point / don't like it. Whether your system is technically superior or not is irrelevant if nobody wants to play on it and that's mostly what I'm reading here. If I were you I'd save the money and just use regular tables based on what I've read here.

First off, you're arguing with me, get that straight. Remember that this is a forum and I still have a right to speak and defend my position on this. Yes, I asked for opinions, and I respect them, but I can't stand those people who do not have an open mind and just rip apart or shoot ideas down without really looking at the whole picture. I also think it's funny that all these online players are dissing an electronic table, that's priceless.

Secondly, your casino is really slow then because my casino here averages around 30 hands an hour pretty consistently (I've seen the reports and talked to the poker room manager), and we're just a lowly Midwest casino.

Third, I still don't get where you think it's the worst of both worlds. Nothing has changed from a regular table except you get in more hands per hour by just dealing electronically, how is that bad from a player standpoint. Yes, the casino has to purchase the tables, but that is what's called an "investment" in their casino business and I'm sure they would easily find a way to recoup their "investment". And it's not all about the money, the goal is to keep the allure of a real game as well and I don't see any other way to do so. That's why the fully electronic tables were yanked from the Excalibur in 09 because they lacked the realism of a live table. And by the way, a dealer using a card shuffler, in my opinion, it would be the same thing as dealing electronically because he isn't doing anything but sticking cards in a box that does his job for him. All a shuffler is is a manually operated number randomizer, isn't it?

No you asked us our opinion and when we replied with what we though you are trying to convince us we are wrong.

I am not dissing electronic tables, I actually like them. I even stated that earlier.

I have played in casinos that you get less than 8 hands every 30 min. 30/hour is only if every player is very fast. It depends on the players more than the dealers. I don't think I have ever topped 35 with cards and chips, but I don't keep track of that all the time. I did time them on the 8/30min though.

I thought I explained it pretty clearly. You need to have someone there to mediate stuff and to keep people from shooting angles etc. If someone is there now you need to tip them (you don't tip with a pokertek). Say you win 4 hands/hour and tip $2-5 on each win. Thats $8-$20 into your hourly profit. That adds up quick.

I asked this before, but you didn't answer, let me reword it. How many hours have you played on a PokerTek table? Did you like it?

I have topped 60 hands/hour on a PokerTek table, but it usually closer to 45-50. A lot has to do with how many people see the flop.

You'd have to tip at a live table anyhow, what does that have to do with anything? Whether you deal electronically or with a shuffler, the dealer still has to perform his/her job and in turn you should tip accordingly. Again, the only thing to change from a regular table would be the dealing of the cards, every other aspect of a live game would stay intact.

You'll have to point out where you asked me this because I went back and couldn't find it? But yes, I have played on PokerTek tables in Davenport, about 45 minute from my house. I personally didn't like the fact that there were no chips but I did like the fact of the cards being dealt electronically and the fast pace, but I'd rather have the socialization at a live table, hence the reason for my idea. Keep the socialization but increase the pace.

And I apologize if I'm coming across as argumentative, I have a strong passion for poker and I still feel my idea has a place, whether it be in a casino or re-designed for a home game atmosphere. Maybe it should lean toward the latter of the two, I don't know.

I've talked to the builder with all the info from these posts and he's decided he has the input he needs, thanks for the time.

*shrugs*

It's your money, obviously you're welcome to waste it however you see fit

Ok, Good luck with that.