TDA POKER TOURNAMENT RULES & RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES => Official Poker TDA Recommended Procedures, Latest Version => Topic started by: phrox on June 21, 2012, 01:58:10 PM

Title: Exact timing of transferring a player during table-balancing
Post by: phrox on June 21, 2012, 01:58:10 PM
Hi guys, I'm a floorperson here n the Philippines where the sport is still starting to bloom. I understand that TDA is clear on the question of "who will be transferred?" during table-balancing procedure, that is, "the player who will be big blind next will be moved to the worst position". Please correct me if I'm wrong here: In the past I have players who don't want to be moved and defended themselves by saying, "I have already posted my BB" while the dealer is still scrambling the cards. So what happens is, if a player doesn't want to be moved, he'll just quickly post his BB before the TD could even approach him. To solve that problem, I stressed to them that if the hand has not started yet, you can be moved even if you have already posted your BB, and "A hand begins... (as TDA also has stated) ...with the first riffle". So it has been my practice to move a player "who will be big blind next", that is, as I understand it, who will be big blind next hand. So as long as that next hand has not started yet, that player will be moved even if he has already posted his BB. My next problem or question surfaced when a TD from another poker room confronted me that if I move a player before the start of a hand, then I should not move a player during a hand or while the hand is still ongoing. I must wait until the hand is over. The reason for that, he said, I have no way of knowing if a player will be busted out on that table thus making it shorter than the table I moved the player into. I must wait then until the hand is over before I could appropriately or fairly balance tables, and also as he claimed, moving players is very critical especially if there are only two tables left. He has his reasons, so I tried to apply his ideas but when I move players in between hands, it caused delays in table-balancing resulting in missing the appropriate or fair available seats (near the BB position or about to take the BB position) and sometimes putting players right after the button which in turn enraged others for if that player was moved immediately, he could have been the BB on that new table and not after the button. So when is the correct timing of moving a player during table-balancing? Please help me with these issues. Thanks
Title: Re: Exact timing of transferring a player during table-balancing
Post by: chet on June 21, 2012, 08:39:06 PM
My 2 cents worth: 

Once you have decided which player to move where, move the player.  If you hem and haw around waiting for this or that to happen, you will never find the "perfect" solution.  If you decide to move a player from table A to table B, and then you find that table A gets 'short handed' because a player busts, so be it.  You then have to move someone back to table A, so what, that's why you are getting the "Big Bucks"   ;D to make those difficult decisions.

So the short answer is:  There is no 'correct or perfect' time to move a player.  Do what you believe is best and to quote Larry the Cable Guy, "Git ur Done".

Title: Re: Exact timing of transferring a player during table-balancing
Post by: K-Lo on June 22, 2012, 10:17:26 AM
Hi phrox:

I agree with the way that you handle the "I have already posted my BB" situations.  If the first card has not yet been dealt to the first player, I will ask the BB to take back his blind back and move to the new table, even if the cards have already been riffled ('the hand begins with the first riffle' provision is typically only applied when determining which blinds to post as levels advance).  As long as you handle the situation in this way firmly and consistently, eventually your players will become more educated (and hopefully stop whining about not wanting to move).

With respect to waiting for a hand to complete or not before balancing, personally, I do generally wait for the hand to be over before balancing the tables.  If I have a table of 7 from which I want to move one player to a table of 5 players, I will observe the hand and wait until the hand is done before confirming that a balance is required.  If the table of 7 goes down to 6, then I don't have to do anything and neither table is disrupted.  I've never had a complaint of the type that you mention, but if I did, I would have simply said that I needed to confirm that the tables did indeed need to be balanced before moving players. 

One exception to this is when the tables are very out of balance (e.g. more than 3 players difference);  e.g. If I plan to move a player from a table of 8 to a table with 5 players.  In that case, I would move the next BB right away, to get the tables to 7-6.  Even if the former table happens to lose a player (or even two), the tables will still remain balanced. 

Title: Re: Exact timing of transferring a player during table-balancing
Post by: phrox on June 26, 2012, 02:07:33 PM
Thanks guys for your ideas! I needed people from your place to shed me some light on this matter. You know we are still babies here in this opposite part of the globe and oftentimes hesitant of what we are doing. Glad i have this site to make a research and gather opinions from more experienced people. Thanks
Title: Re: Exact timing of transferring a player during table-balancing
Post by: diz475 on June 27, 2012, 01:45:04 PM
k-lo is spot on what i was going to say here

if i have the option i will watch the hands play on two tables and move a player from the first to finish (i know your supposed to move from the next in the breaking order but it gets them balanced as soon as posible)