Ring game and rules about seating

[Luca P.]

Hi everybody,
I'm sorry I'm away from this beautiful forum, but I'm having heavy health deseases and I can't be here all the time I would.
Anyway, 2 days ago I ran into this problem.
We were running two ring tables, stakes 0.50 - 1$
A player declared that after 10 turns he would have left the table.
And he did what he said, after 10 turns he moved from the table and went to change his stack into cash.
He was + (I don't remeber how much, but he was in a good rush that day)
After 5 minutes he asked me to seat again, I said yes, and he changed again his 100$.
People at the table claimed he had to seat with the same amount of money when he left because now there are less money at the table...

I said that it's not the way I should rule it since it's common sense that a guy sitting on a table has to be treatedas a new guy who wants to play.
How can you rule this?

[Stuart Murray]

hi there,

rules for ring games are different from tournament, but I can confirm if a player left and then returned to a ring game he would have to return with what he left with (providing he was + when he left) any cash games i've been involved in running require a player who is + to give notice of their impending departure from the table - they can't just get up and leave, also I would restrict their ability to move tables when they are up.

If they are - however they can get up when they want, and return as they want.

Regards
Stuart

[Luca P.]

thank you Stuart.
so you are saying that if for example he gave notice of his impending departure (as he did) then he left the table with 210$, if he would return to that table he must exchange again 210$?

[JasperToo]

yes, that is how it usually works.  Generally, if a player leaves a ring game and wants to be reseated within an hour (probably an arbitrary time, but whatever) then they are expected to buy back with what they left with.  If they had fewer chips than the minimum buyin they would have to buy up.  Or they could buy up to whatever the max buy in is if they aren't over that when they left.

That's the way we do the cash games played after our league tourney's and our local card rooms do that as well. 

It prevents a player from "potting out".  In other words, if a player didn't have to bring the same money back he could get up with his profit, sit out for a bit and then come back to the table with a minimum buy in and not have to risk his profit.  Plus it doesn't give the players a chance to get their chips back from the guy as when he just stayed at the table.

[Luca P.]

oh thank you JasperToo , so next time i will tell them they have to seat with the amount of money the had left the table previously with.
Thank you all boys, now let's back to fight against these problems I'm having to be read you again and help you as possible as I can

[chet]

In my opinion and just to add to what has already been provided:

Each of your examples assumes there is NO LIST.  If there is a list of players waiting to be seated, then this person would have to add his/her name to the bottom of the list.  When their turn comes up, they can be seated at any table for the applicable limit and the minimum buy-in would be the minimum for that level game.  It makes no difference if this player was + or - when he/she left the prior table.

Hope this helps!!

[AleaLeedsCardRoom]

In my opinion whether they were up or down doesn't matter, if they left with more than the table minimum and returned within a set time (1 hour by RRoP) they have to bring back what they left with or more.

[Nick C]

I will agree with most of what is explained by Jasper and AleaLeeds. It does matter. Allowing players to cash out and then play in the same game with less money violates Table Stakes Rules. Players moving to a different game, with a different limit would exclude them from re-entering with the same amount. The one hour timetable is what I have been most familiar with.