In simpler terms then RRoP; A player may not be the BB twice (two hands in succession).
And more accurately:
A player may not be the BB twice (two hands in succession) and the BB is never the button.
However, this doesn't cover the situation where:
Scenario #1
- Alice is Button.
- Bob is SB.
- Carl is BB.
- Dave is UTG.
- Eric is UTG+1.
- Fran is UTG+2.
Alice, Bob, Carl, and Dave bust out, leaving Eric and Fran heads-up. Now, you need the more complete rules.
The Button and SB moves to Fran as she was the BB most recently. Eric is BB, is dealt first, and acts last pre-flop. As always, the Button acts last post-flop. And, acts first when heads-up pre-flop.
So:
- Most recent BB becomes Button and SB
- The other player becomes BB
- The new BB is dealt first and acts last pre-flop
- The new Button is dealt last and acts first pre-flop
This is also why I think
TDA Rule #34 needs improvement. It says:
Starting heads-up play, the button may need to be adjusted to ensure no player has the big blind twice in a row.I prefer the RRoP wording.
Scenario #2
- Alice is Button.
- Bob is SB.
- Carl is BB.
The confusion stems from the fact that the Button usually moves forward to the next player. In the above, the Button would typically move to Bob. However, when Alice busts out leaving Bob and Carl heads-up, the Button cannot move to Bob as that would make Carl BB twice.
So, which wording is more clear?
The button may need to be adjusted to ensure no player has the big blind twice in a row. — or —
The button goes to the player who paid the BB most recently.Reconsider the first scenario above where Fran becomes the Button. It had nothing to do with ensuring that no player has the BB twice in a row.
Ignore the following bug in SMF: [/list][/list][/list][/list][/list]