Author Topic: Rule 6 seems unduly harsh IMO, can someone explain why it is done this way?  (Read 13279 times)

higavin

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 16
Quote
6.   Balancing Tables
In flop and mixed games when balancing tables, players will be moved from the big blind to the worst position, including taking a single big blind when available, even if that means the seat will have the big blind twice.  Worst position is never the small blind. The table from which a player is moved will be as specified by a predetermined procedure.   In stud-only games, players will be moved by position (the last seat to open up at the short table is the seat to be filled).  Play will halt on any table that is three or more players short.

While my room uses TDA rules, this one befuddles us.  

Instead of taking the BB, our TD takes the UTG player and moves him or her to the BB when balancing tables.  This preserves the player's position and lessens the impact of the move.  The player being moved is already at a disadvantage since they are now playing with up to 9 "new" players which they have no history on.  

Why would you specifically move the BB, why not the UTG player to the BB?  Yes, you may have to wait a few hands to accomplish this but it seems more fair to all concerned.

I'd really be interested in a Board Member response to this question.

When a table is broken, seats are assigned randomly and yes, players will sometimes post 2 blinds but that is far too complicated to avoid.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3358
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
higavin
 I like your way better, also. I do not work as many tournaments as I used to but, I remember that some hands would take so long to complete that by the time I got around to moving a player from one table to the new table, things changed drastically....so whit I would do was take a player one or two positions beyond the UTG, just in case. I've always felt that the rulings for missed buttons and moving players was more trouble than it was worth. That is why some jurisdictions don't use the "Nevada Button Rule," they use an Advancing Button Rule (too complicated for me to get into). Cash games are bad too, because we are always dealing with requested seat changes and I hate it when new players are allowed to sit out a few hands to let the button pass. When I ran the poker room in Irving New York, new players had to post the big blind if it was their turn, or they could give up the seat to the next player on the list. I understand what we are trying to accomplish but, any TD or florrperson that moves players knows how confusing it can become.

Thanks for listening.

Stuart Murray

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 645
Here is wsopmcgee's response to a similar question which is very comprehensive:

--------------------

Before there was a TDA, players were generally moved according to position at the table where the empty seat was in regards to the button (similar to moving players in stud). Meaning if the button was in seat 5 and the empty seat was in seat 3, then a player two spots off the button at the next table would be moved. At some events players were moved off the button to the best available position at the next table. Trouble is sometimes the best position was the BB or somewhere in the middle. Now that's not fair either.

A couple of reasons why they decided to do it they way it is done now:
It doesn't allow the floor person to move his buddy from a bad table draw to a good table
It doesn't allow a player to go from a good position (the button) to a worse position (the BB)
It does allow a player to go from the worst position (the BB) to no worse than the position they already had. Their position can only improve

I agree with you that it is somewhat of a disadvantage to be moved to a table and have to post a BB without knowing the other players and how they play. However, they also share the same disadvantage. They don't know how you play. Moreover, it's no different than being moved from a broken table.

-------------------

Remember you are taking the player who is BB next if a hand is already being played out, if the hole cards have not been dealt you take the current BB.  I like this system as it does not discriminate and remains random.  You would not take a player who had posted the BB and had already played the hand.  This way it ensures you are taking the player from the worst position for the imposing hand and giving them a seat at a new table that is not worse than where they have came from but can only improve (for example they might go from next BB to being on the button)

Regards
Stuart

higavin

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 16
Here is wsopmcgee's response to a similar question which is very comprehensive:

--------------------

Before there was a TDA, players were generally moved according to position at the table where the empty seat was in regards to the button (similar to moving players in stud). Meaning if the button was in seat 5 and the empty seat was in seat 3, then a player two spots off the button at the next table would be moved. At some events players were moved off the button to the best available position at the next table. Trouble is sometimes the best position was the BB or somewhere in the middle. Now that's not fair either.

A couple of reasons why they decided to do it they way it is done now:
It doesn't allow the floor person to move his buddy from a bad table draw to a good table
It doesn't allow a player to go from a good position (the button) to a worse position (the BB)
It does allow a player to go from the worst position (the BB) to no worse than the position they already had. Their position can only improve

I agree with you that it is somewhat of a disadvantage to be moved to a table and have to post a BB without knowing the other players and how they play. However, they also share the same disadvantage. They don't know how you play. Moreover, it's no different than being moved from a broken table.

-------------------

Remember you are taking the player who is BB next if a hand is already being played out, if the hole cards have not been dealt you take the current BB.  I like this system as it does not discriminate and remains random.  You would not take a player who had posted the BB and had already played the hand.  This way it ensures you are taking the player from the worst position for the imposing hand and giving them a seat at a new table that is not worse than where they have came from but can only improve (for example they might go from next BB to being on the button)Regards
Stuart


Actually, the last part which I quoted is not what the rules says.  See below and the sction I bolded.

6.   Balancing Tables
In flop and mixed games when balancing tables, players will be moved from the big blind to the worst position, including taking a single big blind when available, even if that means the seat will have the big blind twice.   Worst position is never the small blind. The table from which a player is moved will be as specified by a predetermined procedure.   In stud-only games, players will be moved by position (the last seat to open up at the short table is the seat to be filled).  Play will halt on any table that is three or more players short.


What you have described Stuart is waht our TD does now.  The rule is different and I'm looking for a reason for that difference.

Stuart Murray

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 645
There was a discussion which I cannot find, but what was said during that thread is the same as what I have already posted.  Think of it as this.  You go to a table to move a player and it is at the start of new hand you take the Big Blind (Next big blind if a hand is in progress) When the hand that is currently being played out finishes the BB is now the SB.

There was communication that the wording was slightly misleading, but what your TD is currently doing is correct and as per TDA rules, I think it is just a case of this TDA rule being 'lost in translation' slightly.  The rule is meant for when the first riffle occurs to mark the new hand at which point you take the BB, I do feel it needs cleaning up somewhat however, as it is not clearly worded.

Regards
Stuart

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3358
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Stuart,

 It's hard to like a ruling or agree with it, when you don't understand it. If the "floor" has trouble with it, what can we expect from the players? When I have to read a rule over and over again before I can understand it, there is a problem. Like I said in my earlier post, to me, the easy or more practical move (like a player in UTG+2) and move them to the Big Blind or in line for the Big Blind in the next hand or two. Sometimes when multiple players are eliminated and we have to consolidate three tables down to two, or two down to one, we re-shuffle and high card gets the button. Somone is always going to squack about any move the TD makes. You can't satisfy everyone. It has been my experience that poker players accept the "luck of the draw" (re-draw for the button) better than a floorperson putting you in a worse position. Cash games are more practical, players can miss a hand or two when changing seats. Tournaments are tougher. I don't know what the answer is but, something has to change. Why not consider moving the player that had the button on the last hand and put him as far away from the BB as possible at the new table. This would give the new player a little time to adjust. Just thinking out loud.

« Last Edit: July 20, 2010, 05:42:38 PM by Nick C »

Stuart Murray

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 645
TBH I like it the way it is now, you take them from the impending worst position and their position can only be equal to or better than that which they already had, taking them from other positions means that their position could deteriorate.

Regards
Stuart

AleaLeedsCardRoom

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
I can see what both sides are saying, but TBH i agree with Styart on this one, I think the current way is the best.

Lewis

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3358
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Stuart and Lewis,
 I respect your opinion and I understand why you like it. What I'm trying to do is make the situation kind of cut and dry, so to speak, where the players know who has to be moved. In other words, I'm trying to make it firm, so the TD is not under any suspicion as far as moving a friend or favoring anyone. I'm happy with it the way it is, too. Just kicking around something new. What I really like is the fact that we are always trying to make it better. Thanks for the feedback.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3358
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
higavin and Stuart,
 I want to correct a mistake that I posted on this subject on my reply #5. I stated that I would take a player from a position like UTG or UTG+1 and move them to the button, that is not what I wanted to write. I wanted to move them to the big blind (not the button), or in line for the big blind. I'm sorry for any confusion that I might have caused.

 * I WENT BACK AND CHANGED THE MISTAKE ON THE EARLIER POST.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2010, 05:47:35 PM by Nick C »

pineforest

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Maybe the confusion is the wording?  It says the seat could have the BB twice not a player.  For example their is a single BB in the 4 seat, the 2 and 3 seats are empty.  The player in the 4 seat busts out. it is ok to put a balance player back into the 4 seat and have him be a single BB.  It is kind of like the button stalls but it is actually moving to the empty seats.

higavin

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 16
Maybe the confusion is the wording?  It says the seat could have the BB twice not a player.  For example their is a single BB in the 4 seat, the 2 and 3 seats are empty.  The player in the 4 seat busts out. it is ok to put a balance player back into the 4 seat and have him be a single BB.  It is kind of like the button stalls but it is actually moving to the empty seats.

I think is exactly correct anf the reason I came to this forum today in order to offer the opinion.  I was reading the rules, l;ooking for anotehr one to quote on 2+2 and suddenly I saw the error. Seat does not mean player.

The TD is doing oit the way it should be.  Taking one player from the BB and putting trhem into the BB, not twice, just the same seat they would have had if they reamined at the their original table.


Brian Vickers

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 454
  • Poker Manager
To summarize, yes you are taking the UTG of the current hand/player who would be the BB next hand and moving them into the BB of the new table (or worst position if BB seat is not available)

So the intent of the rule is is to read more like this:

"In flop and mixed games when balancing tables, the player who is about to be the big blind at a fuller table will be moved to the worst position at a shorter handed table.  This may cause a single big blind at the new table, and in some cases the big blind will be posted from the same seat (but not player) that it was just posted from.  Worst position is never the small blind. The table from which a player is moved will be as specified by a predetermined procedure.   In stud-only games, players will be moved by position (the last seat to open up at the short table is the seat to be filled).  Play will halt on any table that is three or more players short."

Goodpokerjody

  • TDA Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6
There really is no need to reword this rule.  It's good as stated.  It seems to me we're talking about a TD who is moving players while there is still action, which shouldn't be happening.  If the cards are out and the TD takes the player who just folded from the BB position, that is a misinterpretation of this rule.  The proper procedure for a TD balancing tables it to wait for the hand to end then take the person who is in the BB position to the other table.  If the player just paid the BB that means that player is now in the SB position.  The player who was UTG on the hand that just ended is now the BB and needs to move in order to balance tables.  There's nothing harsh about that.  If anything that player could get a better position. 
Additionally, getting to know players at a new table takes more than two or three hands.  Putting a player in a seat that gives that player a hand or two before posting a blind doesn't make any difference in that player's ability to know those players.  This rule is the best way that could be worked out for this situation and makes the most sense.  If there is anything unfair about it, which I don't believe there is, it is equally unfair to everyone.  Players who play regularly in tournaments will benefit from this procedure as much as they will be at a disadvantage.