So what would happen if said person had 3/4 of the chips in play?
I’m assuming something came up (emergency) not that it was just getting late.
Appropriate blind amounts are taken from the empty seat stack when button passes (chips removed from play)
Really with the "true run?"
Sigh....Dealing cards to an absent stack and blinding in an absent stack are two distinct issues, IMO.
I think @Forty4's point is that if you skip the absent player, you change the after the first card that would've gone to that player. For someone who doesn't subscribe to the "random is random" theory, that makes a difference.
I wouldn’t call it a rabbit hole. It’s a healthy discussion. At the end of the day you can run your game however you please and that’s fine, it’s your choice. I am more curious as to how and where the line gets drawn?Sigh....
I'm not going down this rabbit hole again.
It would be more of the “there’s a disturbance in the force” although I’m sure in some movie there is a line about the natural order of things being effected (maybe Jurassic Park)I was looking for a "Come to the Dark Side" gif or video to respond with...
But LOL at this clip... he forgot he was lip syncing at 0:38...
No different than picking up the stack except the player could potentially cash. IMO, it's not worth the hassle leaving them in the game per your methodology. If they must leave, they are out.We handle emergency departures as follows:
It's the fairest way to handle it -- no remaining players gain any advantage, and the vacant seat player is not penalized (and gains no advantage).
- Empty seat stack remains on the table
- Empty seat is not dealt cards
- Appropriate blind amounts are taken from the empty seat stack when button passes (chips removed from play)
- Empty seat is awarded prize $$ and/or points based on finishing position
- Any money chop agreement involving the absent player stack must be based on ICM
It's no different than if the absent player folded every hand, except that no remaining players gain an unfair advantage based on their seating position relative to the absent player.
Well, in the OP's scenario, there are essentially two basic choices:I wouldn’t call it a rabbit hole. It’s a healthy discussion. At the end of the day you can run your game however you please and that’s fine, it’s your choice. I am more curious as to how and where the line gets drawn?
I don't create issues @BGinGA , I'm a problem solver. Ban the player. Problem solved.....Well, in the OP's scenario, there are essentially two basic choices:
I don't think the first choice is fair to the player (pending circumstances), and I don't think the second choice is equally fair to the remaining players.
- remove the stack from play
- leave the stack and blind out the player
But allowing the stack to remain and blinding it off in such a fashion that the equity of the remaining players is not affected, I think is the most fair approach for all of the players.
Regarding the card order, if there are six players remaining, six hands are dealt. Same would be true if the absent player stack is removed.
You are certainly entitled to disagree, but again, I think you are attempting to create a problem where none really exists. You been taking lessons from @Josh Kifer?