Tourney Moving players in a MTT (help) (1 Viewer)

[Doghouse]

Just looking for what the accepted practice is for balancing tables in a MTT. So if you have 3 tables of 9 players and 2 players are eliminated from one table so you have 7, 9, 9. How do you decide which table of 9 you pull the player from to balance the tables?

 

[CraigT78]

I use TD - so I just set the dealer buttons and it suggests a player to move based off the BB.

 

[Legend5555]

Randomly. Without software, flip a coin or roll a die.

 

[Doghouse]

I don't use Tournament Director. We move a player based always on position to the BB but I'm just not sure when you have 2 tables with the same number of players... how do you decide which table to move a player from.

 

[Doghouse]

Randomly. Without software, flip a coin or roll a die.

so it's just random? That makes sense I guess. I think I was over complicating it in my head thinking of MTT's with lots of tables but I guess the process would be the same. Thanks for your input.

 

[Legend5555]

so it's just random? That makes sense I guess.

There's no magic to it. Randomly decide the table, move a person such that their relative position to the button at the new table is as close to where it was at their old table.

 

[Josh Kifer]

There's no magic to it. Randomly decide the table, move a person such that their relative position to the button at the new table is as close to where it was at their old table.

This. If the SB goes out on the small table, grab the SB from the large table and move them. Just use the relative position.

 

[BGinGA]

Actually, it's not random. Tables have (or should have) a breakdown order, and that order is used to identify the heavy table (if more than one) from which players will move.

The player next facing the big blind should be moved to the light table into the vacant seat which soonest will be the big blind.

 

[aaronroch]

We always used ‘Method 1’ here:

https://hpt.homepokerinfo.com/moving_players.htm

 

[Doghouse]

Actually, it's not random. Tables have (or should have) a breakdown order, and that order is used to identify the heavy table (if more than one) from which players will move.

The player next facing the big blind should be moved to the light table into the vacant seat which soonest will be the big blind.

Ok so if you have 5 tables and table 1 is going to be your final table... you would pull from table 5 first if it were your heavy table? Then 4, 3, 2 once enough players were eliminated?

 

[Legend5555]

Actually, it's not random. Tables have (or should have) a breakdown order, and that order is used to identify the heavy table (if more than one) from which players will move.

The player next facing the big blind should be moved to the light table into the vacant seat which soonest will be the big blind.

But in the absence of having a defined breakdown order or software, random works just as well. This is a home tournament after all, not some 10+ table casino tournament.

When I ran large field bar tournaments, I had a defined breakdown order that I used. And I did move the person as you say. I just don't think it's the only way it can be done.

 

[Doghouse]

We always used ‘Method 1’ here:

https://hpt.homepokerinfo.com/moving_players.htm

I'd love to have a look at this link but my work has it blocked for some reason...
I'll have to wait until I get home I guess.

 

[BGinGA]

But in the absence of having a defined breakdown order or software, random works just as well. This is a home tournament after all, not some 10+ table casino tournament.

When I ran large field bar tournaments, I had a defined breakdown order that I used. And I did move the person as you say. I just don't think it's the only way it can be done.

Lots of ways it *can* be done. Only one way in compliance with the commonly accepted rules (TDA).

 

[BGinGA]

Ok so if you have 5 tables and table 1 is going to be your final table... you would pull from table 5 first if it were your heavy table? Then 4, 3, 2 once enough players were eliminated?

If needing to move a player when you have more than one equally heavy table to draw players from, choose the table among them that is scheduled to break first.

 

[Legend5555]

Lots of ways it *can* be done. Only one way in compliance with the commonly accepted rules (TDA).

Again, this is just a home tournament. As long as the process is fair, I think you can do it however you like.

Moving someone from the same position to the closest relative position at the other table is probably slightly more fair than the "next BB" move under there's circumstances. In larger fields, the time spent between gathering chips and moving to the new table could be something significant and cause another hand to go by. In a home tournament with 3 tables, that's highly unlikely.

I'm not saying going by the TDA rules is wrong, just that in home game poker, being a rules stickler about this exact thing isn't really necessary.

 

[Mr Winberg]

Actually, it's not random. Tables have (or should have) a breakdown order, and that order is used to identify the heavy table (if more than one) from which players will move.

The player next facing the big blind should be moved to the light table into the vacant seat which soonest will be the big blind.

This is exactly how I do it. It has the added benefit of knowing which table will turn into the cash table, so you can have the second best table for cash. I have my home made poker table as the table that never breaks (the final table) and the best table topper on the table that is scheduled to break first (and turns into the cash table).

Moving the next big blind to the seat which will soonest be the BB is the most convenient way IMO. Even if it was not TDA compliant, I would still use that method.

And I also do this:

If needing to move a player when you have more than one equally heavy table to draw players from, choose the table among them that is scheduled to break first.

And before anyone else posts something juvenile:

Spoiler

 

[Doghouse]

Thanks for all your input folks. I think I know where to go from here. I only have 3 tables on the go for now but having a predetermined break down order seems to be the best course of action to ensure the best cash table. Again... thanks for your input!

 

[DoubleEagle]

Actually, it's not random. Tables have (or should have) a breakdown order, and that order is used to identify the heavy table (if more than one) from which players will move.

The player next facing the big blind should be moved to the light table into the vacant seat which soonest will be the big blind.

^^^That^^^

But in the absence of having a defined breakdown order or software, random works just as well. This is a home tournament after all, not some 10+ table casino tournament.

How would it be "fair" to pay the big blind two times in row? This can be crippling in the later stages of a tourney.

 

[Legend5555]

^^^That^^^



How would it be "fair" to pay the big blind two times in row? This can be crippling in the later stages of a tourney.

You obviously didn't read my entire answer earlier.

 

[Mr Winberg]

How would it be "fair" to pay the big blind two times in row? This can be crippling in the later stages of a tourney.

Legend has it that @Legend5555 was referring to the breakdown order of the tables.

 

[Doghouse]

When we move a player, we move them from the position they are in on their current table into the same position on the new table... so if utg+1 goes out on the short table... we would move whoever is going to be utg+1 in the next hand from the heavy table to the eliminated players seat.

 

[BGinGA]

Legend has it that @Legend5555 was referring to the breakdown order of the tables.

Actually, he was referring to using random selection to pick the heavy table from which to move a player to the light table.

I might not agree, but I can read (and comprehend).

 

[Mr Winberg]

I might not agree, but I can read (and comprehend).

In your first language, yes?

 

[BGinGA]

I'm 'Murican -- there IS only one language. USA USA

 

[DoubleEagle]

You obviously didn't read my entire answer earlier.

My bad. I thought this was about moving the player.

So yes, I do just like @BGinGA said, our tables are numbered and we announce the bust order at the beginning. It is always highest to lowest numbered table.

 

[blackshirts5115]

Actually, it's not random. Tables have (or should have) a breakdown order, and that order is used to identify the heavy table (if more than one) from which players will move.

The player next facing the big blind should be moved to the light table into the vacant seat which soonest will be the big blind.

Hey BG. Old thread but it was the best one I could find related to my question.

It seems table changes pay no mind to stack sizes. But isn’t it unfair to move the big stack at one table to another?

I’m about to host my first 3 table tournament with 21 players. T10,000. If two players from Table A get bounced before anyone else, then we move the big stack (say 22k chips) from Table B over to A, Table A suddenly has 92k chips compared to only 48k at Table B. Doesn’t that give a big advantage to Table A players as they can build a bigger stack prior to merging?

Similar situation when merging down to two tables, even if no table changes were made prior to it. What happens if the biggest stacks from Table C merge to Table A while the smallest merge to Table B? There could easily be 1.5x as many chips on A compared to B in that situation. Seems unfair.

I am allowing rebuys for the first 4-5 levels, so that’s going to create imbalance as well. It could either have an offsetting effect or it could worsen the imbalance.

 

[BGinGA]

Hey BG. Old thread but it was the best one I could find related to my question.

It seems table changes pay no mind to stack sizes. But isn’t it unfair to move the big stack at one table to another?

I’m about to host my first 3 table tournament with 21 players. T10,000. If two players from Table A get bounced before anyone else, then we move the big stack (say 22k chips) from Table B over to A, Table A suddenly has 92k chips compared to only 48k at Table B. Doesn’t that give a big advantage to Table A players as they can build a bigger stack prior to merging?

Similar situation when merging down to two tables, even if no table changes were made prior to it. What happens if the biggest stacks from Table C merge to Table A while the smallest merge to Table B? There could easily be 1.5x as many chips on A compared to B in that situation. Seems unfair.

I am allowing rebuys for the first 4-5 levels, so that’s going to create imbalance as well. It could either have an offsetting effect or it could worsen the imbalance.

Although it is possible that the largest stack is selected to be moved, it is statistically improbable, and regardless, totally random. Aside from the fact that more chips are at the newly-filled table, that is offset by 1) having no dominating stack at the now-shorter table, and 2) potentially having multiple large stacks at the other table. So it's certainly debatable which table's players -- if either -- have an advantage.

My personal opinion is that stack size (or the resulting table-chips counts) should have no bearing on table-balancing moves, and the commonly accepted tournament rules agree.

Standard tournament rules also call for a full random seating redraw when breaking down to three, two, and the final table.... with zero consideration for stack sizes. Some large home games do this, others do not.

 

[upNdown]

My personal opinion is that stack size (or the resulting table-chips counts) should have no bearing on table-balancing moves, and the commonly accepted tournament rules agree.

Yes. Situations sometimes happen that aren’t fair. That’s life; that’s poker.

Standard tournament rules also call for a full random seating redraw when breaking down to three, two, and the final table.... with zero consideration for stack sizes. Some large home games do this, others do not.

Yes, and I’ve been screwed into paying back to back big blind antes in those situations many times. See my above comment.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

I use TD - so I just set the dealer buttons and it suggests a player to move based off the BB.

How do you keep track of the dealer button as the game goes? Always found that an odd feature

 

[blackshirts5115]

Although it is possible that the largest stack is selected to be moved, it is statistically improbable, and regardless, totally random. Aside from the fact that more chips are at the newly-filled table, that is offset by 1) having no dominating stack at the now-shorter table, and 2) potentially having multiple large stacks at the other table. So it's certainly debatable which table's players -- if either -- have an advantage.

My personal opinion is that stack size (or the resulting table-chips counts) should have no bearing on table-balancing moves, and the commonly accepted tournament rules agree.

Standard tournament rules also call for a full random seating redraw when breaking down to three, two, and the final table.... with zero consideration for stack sizes. Some large home games do this, others do not.

Thanks for the reply. I was thinking about the potential benefit to the shorter table no longer having to deal with a big stack, so I’m glad to hear you say it without me prompting it.

I think I’ll do a redraw when we merge to two tables so people aren’t burdened with a good player to their left for the majority of the tournament. This is a field where half the players probably haven’t played since I hosted a year ago, a quarter might dabble with poker a few times a year, and the remaining quarter are solid players. Seating draws will play a big role in the outcome.