Ya that's why I confirm 9x in the last few days, and still even a hour out I had a cancellation. So, with your setup p* software randomly pulls people off to join the late guys. Maybe use seating chips and randomly draw enough seats to make it even and then they go to that seat on other table?
Tourney Best or easiest way to break tables (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Mr Winberg
- Start date
bigdonkey
Straight
I think the concern is what to do when unannounced players show up after the tournament has started. I wouldn't start two tables with 5 and 4 if I'm not expecting anyone else to show up.
He is though, he's expecting 11-13 but always has cancelled peeps
bigdonkey
Straight
Okay, so I'll ask the question, as I've often wondered but haven't had to deal with it yet. If you expect only 9, start with 9, and 20 minutes in 3 more people show up, how do you reseat the players at 2 tables? I don't want to turn away friends, so telling them they are too late to play is not an option.
@BGinGA to the bat-phone.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Mr Winberg
Full House
I'd also like to hear people's thoughts on this. I use a table size of 8, so if we're 16 players or 24 players and someone shows up unexpectedly, I'm not sure how to handle it.
I personally have a "group text" with my regs. I confirm a week out, then days before, then day before. If you don't respond with "I'm in" you don't get a seat. This isn't a casino, your players should respect you as a host and tell you. They can sit and watch until the cash game starts.
May sound harsh but I see it as the only logical thing that can happen.
May sound harsh but I see it as the only logical thing that can happen.
OP
OP
Mr Winberg
Full House
I have a different approach. I have space for 32 players but there have never been more than 25, it's usually around 18-22. Therefore I have the luxury of not needing to be strict. If you show up before the first break you get a stack. Most show up early anyway to get the on-time bonus.
If we were 24 and someone shows up a few levels in, 6 people would have to move. I'd probably draw two positions per table and move them. BB twice in a row? Then sucks to be you!
Another approach might be to move the 2 worst positions from each table, then no one posts twice in a row.
Other ideas?
DeeVee8
Straight
For my games, I follow this rule: play 8, squeeze 9 and split 10. The minimum number of players I want at a table is 6. And yes, 11 is the worst number of players...evah.
Whoever is about to be the next big blind moves when I need to balance tables.
Sprinsd
Flush
To clarify, I should have 9 to start with 2-3 showing up within the first 2 levels for sure.
DeeVee8
Straight
You could clarify when everyone draws that seats 7, 8 and 9 will move if a new table forms. You could do this before the tourney even starts and save some time.
We do ^this^, for accomodating any (rare) unexpected arrivals *prior* to start time. And everybody who has previously confirmed that they are coming has a reserved seat until first break (their random seat selection will be made for them if not present by starting time).
But we don't allow late registration. So if somebody just shows up late with no prior notice or rsvp? Sorry, pal -- your rudeness and inconsideration isn't going to inconvenience everybody else. Meaning that this happens:
Lots of valid reasons that might make somebody late, or even require a last-minute game time play decision. But zero reasons to say absolutely nothing beforehand, and expect accommodation when you arrive late with no prior notice.
Exactly, we always have people running late, and I have their chips for them on table ready to go. They have already told me they would play.
I hope it is okay to revive this old thread. I just read through it and learned a ton, thanks to the experienced hands here.
I know the original post was about breaking tables. But the conversation moved on to how to handle late players and what to do if late players necessitate adding another table. So on those topics...
For the couple, casual single-table tournaments I organized, the rule was if you showed up late you had to wait till the next break to buy-in. I scheduled short breaks every hour, with the second break a longer one (to accommodate a color up). You had 2 chances to enter late (the first break and the second break/color up). So, if you timed it badly, you had to sit and watch for up to an hour before you could play. Which, although not terrible because there was food and drink and lively conversation, served as a consequence for showing up late. Main benefit to me was I did not have to worry about transactions while game play was going - the break was a calm moment to manage it.
Re-entry was allowed for someone who bust out early but they had to wait till the next break to re-enter (just as if they were a new person showing up late). I did not do rebuys.
I did not face the scenario of a late player forcing a second table, but...imagining if it did happen...since the new players are joining at the break, I would use the break to ask players to redraw and then seat them at the two tables. I could extend the break a few minutes if needed to do the redraw, give players time to find their new seats, and move their stacks.
For a casual home tournament, how does this strike folks? Is this acceptable or is waiting for the break to deal with new entries/re-entries bad tournament management?
I know the original post was about breaking tables. But the conversation moved on to how to handle late players and what to do if late players necessitate adding another table. So on those topics...
For the couple, casual single-table tournaments I organized, the rule was if you showed up late you had to wait till the next break to buy-in. I scheduled short breaks every hour, with the second break a longer one (to accommodate a color up). You had 2 chances to enter late (the first break and the second break/color up). So, if you timed it badly, you had to sit and watch for up to an hour before you could play. Which, although not terrible because there was food and drink and lively conversation, served as a consequence for showing up late. Main benefit to me was I did not have to worry about transactions while game play was going - the break was a calm moment to manage it.
Re-entry was allowed for someone who bust out early but they had to wait till the next break to re-enter (just as if they were a new person showing up late). I did not do rebuys.
I did not face the scenario of a late player forcing a second table, but...imagining if it did happen...since the new players are joining at the break, I would use the break to ask players to redraw and then seat them at the two tables. I could extend the break a few minutes if needed to do the redraw, give players time to find their new seats, and move their stacks.
For a casual home tournament, how does this strike folks? Is this acceptable or is waiting for the break to deal with new entries/re-entries bad tournament management?
I think it is a reasonable approach. Easier on the host (fewer in-game interruptions), built-in incentive for on-time arrival, and cooler protection by way of re-entries (and auto-limited to two maximum per player).
I usually use software to balance and break tables.
There should always be a semi even number of players on each table playing to maintain fairness.
Last tournament when we went from 3 to 2 tables I clicked the wrong button and re-drew the seats completely. Worst part is that I actually liked it, shuffle up players after 3 hours of play and as we are a friendly tournament it means you play with more people. I'm thinking about having this a standard in my three table tournaments.
There should always be a semi even number of players on each table playing to maintain fairness.
Last tournament when we went from 3 to 2 tables I clicked the wrong button and re-drew the seats completely. Worst part is that I actually liked it, shuffle up players after 3 hours of play and as we are a friendly tournament it means you play with more people. I'm thinking about having this a standard in my three table tournaments.
WedgeRock
Royal Flush
Sucks to bust with 100xBB and have to re-enter with 60xBB, though.
If I have to wait 40min to re-enter Im leaving
WedgeRock
Royal Flush
Pfft. I've waited longer for a cash game to start...
ekricket
Royal Flush
“Shrugs” I’d just go to the bathroom and get caught up on PCF
This is true. Play better?
Seriously though, that's the only downside I can see. Not an issue to me for the late entries, but getting coolered and getting a short-stack replacement would be less than optimal. Can always choose to not re-enter, however.
JustinInMN
4 of a Kind
I've been thinking about this for a couple years now, and I have been working on this concept that I like about adding a table by predetermining the seats that will move to open a new table and moving as few players as possible and avoiding at all costs any sort of complete redraw. In practice I have only used this method once. (When I ended up with 12 bodies on a night I had 10 rsvp's and didn't want to take the time to figure it out.) There is a second case earlier this year in which I SHOULD have used this method, but was expecting such a big crowd, I made the mistake of building both tables 1 and 2 from the opening of registration and unfortunately the 10th player didn't arrive until about 15 minutes after the planned start, even though this tournament would eventually see 17 bodies and 26 entries, IIRC.
Bottom line, I don't believe I have shared this method with PCF as yet, but I guess today is the day.
Players 1-10 arrive. All players draw a seat to table 1.
Player 11 arrives. Players in even seats (except 10) 2, 4, 6, and 8 on Table 1 automatically move to their corresponding seats on table 2. Player 11 draws among the odd seats on table 2. Result is 6 of the 10 players remain on table 1, 5 players on table 2.
Players 12-18 arrive. (going with 9max from this point onward because because my table 2 is smaller, will never support 10 and really shouldn't support 9 either), player 12 will draw a seat on table 2, then the other players will draw to alternating tables.
So I guess the concept is to predetermine the order of moving players to build new tables moving as few players as possible, instead of relying on a slow redraw process (even using software). If I were to extend this to a 3rd Table.
Player 19 arrives, Players in seats 1-3, 1-9, 2-1, 2-5, 2-7 take their corresponding seats on table 3*, 19th player draws among the even seats on table 3. Results: Table 1: 7 players, table 2: 6 players, table 3: 6 players.
*Math rule: Fill the odd seats on table 3 using odd multiples of 3 from Table 1 and odd non-multiples of 3 from table 2
Players 20-27. Each player draws among the open seats on the table with the fewest players. If multiple tables have the same number, then they draw to the lowest numbered table. Meaning this order. Table 2, Table 3, Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, Table 1, Table 2, Table 3.
And for good measure, not that I could ever see hosting 4 tables but...
Player 28 arrives.
Players in seats 1-4, 1-8, 2-3, 2-9, 3-2, 3-6 take their corresponding seats on Table 4**. 28th player draws from the remaining seats on Table 4. Results: 4 tables of 7.
** Math rule: Fill the even seats on Table 4 by using multiples of 4 from table 1, even non-multiples of 4 from table 3, and fill two of the odd seats from table 2 using odd multiples of 3. Seats 1,5,7 available on table 4 for the 28th player to draw.
Players 29-36
Each player draws among the open seats on the table with the fewest players. If multiple tables have the same number of "fewest players", then the new player draws to the lowest numbered table. Meaning this order. Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, Table 4, Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, Table 4.
Alternatively, you could make this "double blind" as well. Have a player draw a table token first among the tables that "need" a player and then a seat token for that table.
However you do it, this sort of method ensures you build tables evenly, while moving as few players as possible and ensuring you only move a player once for this purpose after the initial draw. (You will also notice seat 1-1 is never moved if as I do, you reserve that as a seat of host privilege, for banking and chip management for example.)
Last edited:
I guess you could have a mandatory re-entry chip everyone buys and if they bust out they can slide it across the table and get a fresh stack. And those that choose to not use it turn it in at end to get their money back. Less disruptive than trying to deal with cash in the moment. But has its own complications. Late arrivals still have to wait till break.
This is true. Play better?
Seriously though, that's the only downside I can see. Not an issue to me for the late entries, but getting coolered and getting a short-stack replacement would be less than optimal. Can always choose to not re-enter, however.
Yes, but I also kind of like that it slows people down. None of us are serious players and I do not want anyone losing a lot of money. So having time to consider the re-entry, especially as the value of that re-entry drops with each minute, and then being limited to a max of 2 re-entries makes it so no one is likely to lose more than they (or their spouse) expected.
We were/are a close group of friends who genuinely like hanging out with each other and play non gambling games more than poker. It is not uncommon for someone to show up just to hang out with no intention of actually playing.
In fact (except for one person who clearly was not enjoying himself) all players at the tournaments I hosted stayed to the final showdown and helped clean up after. The first players to bust out mixed drinks for others, volunteered to deal, and generally gave the chip leader a hard time.
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account and join our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
Similar threads
