Tourney Ruling question: dead SB inadvertantly skipped (1 Viewer)

[WedgeRock]

Six players left in a tournament, 4 paid. Blinds are excessive. 4 players have less than average stack -- not a chip and a chair, but shortish -- while two players are healthy and above average stack.

Hand 1: Player X is the BB and busts. We are now on the money bubble. I know it should have been a dead small blind the next hand, but that didn't happen, and no one noticed. Here's what did happen:

Hand 2: Player A - dealer
(Player X)
Player B - posts SB
Player C - posts BB
Player D - folds
Player E - raises, folds around. Player E takes down the blinds.

Hand 3: the button moves to the dead spot, but Player C picks up a deck to deal. Player E halts action and says it's a dead button, Player A should deal again. Hands are reconstructed, and it's determined that in Hand 2, Player C (mistakenly) posted the BB and told Player B to post the small, which he did. It is agreed that the action in Hand 2 can't be un-done, but Player E (who is one of the two above average stacks) argues that the dead button should deal because that is where action should have been but also because he wants Player B and Player C (both below average stack) to pay the oppressive blinds. Player B says he just posted the SB and doesn't want to post it again. Player A, C and D do not voice an opinion.

Floor is called.

Does Hand 2 action stand?

Where is the deal and who are the blinds for Hand 3?

 

[Rhodeman77]

I would say dead button and dead SB since it was paid the previous hand.

then the following hand all blinds and button will be correct again.

action from the last hand doesn’t change.

 

[LotsOfChips]

B & C posted the blinds in good faith (albeit incorrectly), action proceeded without correction from the dealer (or anyone else, including Player E). Action cannot be undone (unless Player E returns the blinds and the hand is declared null and void). There is no way that players should be forced to post blinds twice (although it happens sometimes when being moved from a table if the TD doesn't use good reseating methods).

If it does proceed to C being SB and D as BB, then B missed paying a BB, which is somewhat unfair to everyone else.

Best resolution - take SB and BB from Hand 2 out of Player E's stack, return them to Players B & C, and replay Hand 2 with X as a dead SB, B as BB.

Edit: Next best resolution (as per @Rhodeman77 and @ChaosRock), for Hand 3 X is dead button, B posts BB, C does not post a blind, and then hand 4 is B as Dealer, C as SB, D as BB

Edit: Next Third best resolution - DB goes to B, C is SB, D is BB.

Worst outcome - B & C have to pay twice, in which case E should be careful in the parking lot after the game.

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

B & C posted the blinds in good faith (albeit incorrectly), action proceeded without correction from the dealer (or anyone else, including Player E). Action cannot be undone (unless Player E returns the blinds and the hand is declared null and void). There is no way that players should be forced to post blinds twice (although it happens sometimes when being moved from a table if the TD doesn't use good reseating methods).

If it does proceed to C being SB and D as BB, then B missed paying a BB, which is somewhat unfair to everyone else.

Best resolution - take SB and BB from Hand 2 out of Player E's stack, return them to Players B & C, and replay Hand 2 with X as a dead SB, B as BB.

Next best resolution - DB goes to B, C is SB, D is BB.

Worst outcome - B & C have to pay twice, in which case E should be careful in the parking lot after the game.

Im thinking player E is an angle shooter. If he knew that quickly that it should be a dead button then I think he knew the hand before too but let them post anyway.

 

[CraigT78]

@BGinGA

Look forward to the ruling.

 

[LotsOfChips]

Im thinking player E is an angle shooter. If he knew that quickly that it should be a dead button then I think he knew the hand before too but let them post anyway.

I was going to say Douchebag, but edited my post.

 

[ChaosRock]

I would say dead button and dead SB since it was paid the previous hand.

then the following hand all blinds and button will be correct again.

action from the last hand doesn’t change.

This would be my ruling. ^ I.E. Player B posts big alone on hand 3.

Everyone paid what was owned and next hand is back to normal with Played B as the button.

 

[WedgeRock]

I would say dead button and dead SB since it was paid the previous hand

Player B skips his BB then? He should've posted the BB in Hand 2, not the SB. And Player C posts the BB in two consecutive hands?

Im thinking player E is an angle shooter. If he knew that quickly that it should be a dead button then I think he knew the hand before too but let them post anyway.

It's a friendly game that's been going for 12 years. Player E is definitely not an angle shooter. Did he verify blinds were correct before the cards were dealt? No. But Player A was the dealer. (And yes, every one at the table has a responsibility is a self-dealt game... No one else picked up on the dealer mistake/mis-posted blinds.)

I was going to say Douchebag, but edited my post.

He is a douchebag, but that is not relevant to the ruling, I don't think.

This would be my ruling. ^ I.E. Player B posts big alone on hand 3.

So in Hand 3, dead button deals (out of Player X's spot), dead small, and Player posts big alone? Then in Hand 4, Player B deals, Player C is SB and Player D is BB? That actually works out pretty well.

Also note, however, in Hand 2, Player E won SB + BB. He should've only won the big, because the SB should've been dead. Player B should've lost a BB not just a SB. And Player C shouldn't have lost anything (assuming he would've folded as first to act).

 

[ChaosRock]

.

 

[ChaosRock]

No @WedgeRock , Player B posts BB alone on hand 3. (Oh, I see you mentioned that later on your posts)

Yes, hand 2 was wrong but it’s behind us. We gotta correct the blind amounts per round most importantly imo.

 

[LotsOfChips]

I would say dead button and dead SB since it was paid the previous hand.

then the following hand all blinds and button will be correct again.

action from the last hand doesn’t change.

This would be my ruling. ^ I.E. Player B posts big alone on hand 3.

Everyone paid what was owned and next hand is back to normal with Played B as the button.

Not sure I understand this. Are you saying that X is dead button, B posts BB, C does not post a blind, and then hand 4 is B as Dealer, C as SB, D as BB? If so, that seems like an equitable solution. My initial interpretation of @Rhodeman77's post was that X was dead button, B was dead SB and C ended up paying BB twice (not fair)

 

[ChaosRock]

Not sure I understand this. Are you saying that X is dead button, B posts BB, C does not post a blind, and then hand 4 is B as Dealer, C as SB, D as BB? If so, that seems like an equitable solution.

Correct.

 

[LotsOfChips]

He is a douchebag, but that is not relevant to the ruling, I don't think.

Funniest post of the day so far!!!

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

Player B skips his BB then? He should've posted the BB in Hand 2, not the SB. And Player C posts the BB in two consecutive hands?



It's a friendly game that's been going for 12 years. Player E is definitely not an angle shooter. Did he verify blinds were correct before the cards were dealt? No. But Player A was the dealer. (And yes, every one at the table has a responsibility is a self-dealt game... No one else picked up on the dealer mistake/mis-posted blinds.)



He is a douchebag, but that is not relevant to the ruling, I don't think.




So in Hand 3, dead button deals (out of Player X's spot), dead small, and Player posts big alone? Then in Hand 4, Player B deals, Player C is SB and Player D is BB? That actually works out pretty well.

Also note, however, in Hand 2, Player E won SB + BB. He should've only won the big, because the SB should've been dead. Player B should've lost a BB not just a SB. And Player C shouldn't have lost anything (assuming he would've folded as first to act).

Gotcha. So a kick in the nuts for Player A for being the dealer and missing it and player E for calling it late.

 

[CrazyEddie]

Hand 2 was closed with action and without objection. It stands.

Hand 2 should have been
A - Button
X - Small Blind (dead, not paid)
B - Big Blind

And then Hand 3 would have been
X - Button (dead, not dealt a hand)
B - Small Blind
C - Big Blind

Since in effect, Hand 2 was dealt as if it were Hand 3, then Hand 3 should be dealt as if it were Hand 2. The button is on A, the small blind is not paid, and B pays the big blind.

Then Hand 4 would be dealt the way it would have been if Hands 2 and 3 had been dealt correctly. The button moves to B, C pays the small blind, and D pays the big blind.

Since Hand 2 was dealt the way Hand 3 should have been, dealing Hand 3 the way Hand 2 should have been is the simplest way to ensure that for each orbit of the button, each player pays each of the two blinds once and has one opportunity to have the button.

 

[Mr Winberg]

Do I understand correctly that hand 2 played as hand 3 should have played? If so, in a friendly home game I would play the next hand (hand 3) as hand 2 should've played (A as dealer and B as BB), and then hand 4 back to normal with B as dealer. This is what @Rhodeman77 and @ChaosRock suggested, right?

Even if it might not be in accordance to the rules (I'm eagerly awaiting what @BGinGA has to say) I think it's the fairest.

My second choice would be to consider "the real hand 2" as skipped and go directly to 4. I would never play "another hand 3", i.e. with B and C posting blinds again. Doesn't seem fair.

 

[Mr Winberg]

Player E (who is one of the two above average stacks) argues that the dead button should deal because that is where action should have been

I would tell player E that as the TD, my interpretation of the situation is not that we accidentally got hand 2 wrong, it is that we accidentally skipped hand 2 and instead played hand 3. If he (it's always a "he" in these situations, isn't it?) argues against playing hand 2 next, I'd say "Fine! After 3 comes 4! B, please deal!". Especially since:

He is a douchebag

And regarding...

but that is not relevant to the ruling

Hey, I'm only human!

 

[WedgeRock]

Do I understand correctly that hand 2 played as hand 3 should have played?

Practically speaking, yes (in that Player A dealt instead of Player X being a dead button (and Player A dealing)).

Hand 2 should have been:
Player A: dealer
Player X: dead SB (no cards)
Player B: BB
Player C: first to act

Hand 3 should have been:
Player X: dead dealer (no cards)
Player B: SB
Player C: BB
Player D: first to act

Hand 2 actually was:
Player A: dealer
Player X: (spot completely ignored after elimination)
Player B: SB
Player C: BB
Player D: first to act

I'll give some chance for others to respond (has anyone tagged @BGinGA yet?) then post the floor's ruling.

(Oh, I see you mentioned that later on your posts)

I posted prematurely and had to go back and edit... You were correct in the first place, FYI.

 

[WedgeRock]

I would tell player E that as the TD, my interpretation of the situation is not that we accidentally got hand 2 wrong, it is that we accidentally skipped hand 2 and instead played hand 3. If he (it's always a "he" in these situations, isn't it?) argues against playing hand 2 next, I'd say "Fine! After 3 comes 4! B, please deal!"

FWIW, Player E stated his case, floor rules, and Player E accepted the ruling but voiced why he thought it was wrong.

IMO, this ruling is not something to leave the game over and stop attending. The floor ruled impartially and did what he thought was right, he was not biased toward or against any player.

Although it's a friendly tournament, we still want to get rulings correct.

 

[ekricket]

Nobody gets out of the big blind and nobody pays it twice. Figure it out from there.

 

[BGinGA]

Play cash.

 

[warma]

Play cash.

I’ll bite.

What are you suggesting happens in a cash game?

 

[tabletalker7]

At the rate we are figuring out the proper ruling, the 4 people left in this 4 prize paying tournament will agree to a chop before we get it right ................... is that the end goal of this?

 

[BGinGA]

Six players left in a tournament, 4 paid. Blinds are excessive. 4 players have less than average stack -- not a chip and a chair, but shortish -- while two players are healthy and above average stack.

Hand 1: Player X is the BB and busts. We are now on the money bubble. I know it should have been a dead small blind the next hand, but that didn't happen, and no one noticed. Here's what did happen:

Hand 2: Player A - dealer
(Player X)
Player B - posts SB
Player C - posts BB
Player D - folds
Player E - raises, folds around. Player E takes down the blinds.

Hand 3: the button moves to the dead spot, but Player C picks up a deck to deal. Player E halts action and says it's a dead button, Player A should deal again. Hands are reconstructed, and it's determined that in Hand 2, Player C (mistakenly) posted the BB and told Player B to post the small, which he did. It is agreed that the action in Hand 2 can't be un-done, but Player E (who is one of the two above average stacks) argues that the dead button should deal because that is where action should have been but also because he wants Player B and Player C (both below average stack) to pay the oppressive blinds. Player B says he just posted the SB and doesn't want to post it again. Player A, C and D do not voice an opinion.

Floor is called.

Does Hand 2 action stand?

Where is the deal and who are the blinds for Hand 3?

Hand 2 action is complete and cannot be reversed.

Since the posted blinds were posted in error on Hand 2, the next two hands will correct it:

Hand 3:
Dead Button - player X
Big Blind - player B
Action on player C

Hand 4:
Button - player B
Small Blind - player C
Big Blind - player D
Action on player E

Player B ends up posting both blinds over the course of two hands (#2 and #3), just in reverse order. And player C posts both blinds, just not on consecutive hands (#2 and #4, instead of #3 and #4). Play continues normally with Hand 5.


Side note:
Alternately, you can have player C post his small blind on Hand 3 (acting last pre-flop) and then have him skip posting the SB on Hand 4 (essentially deferring the dead small blind from Hand 2 to Hand 4), but I think the first solution is much cleaner.

The advantage of the alternate choice is that Player C doesn't get to skip posting a blind on Hand 3 (which is minor advantage, but one that I think is already offset since he erroneously posted a blind on Hand 2 before it was required).

 

[LotsOfChips]

I’ll bite.

What are you suggesting happens in a cash game?

Probably the same, but the blinds aren't likely to be so punitive.

 

[JustinInMN]

I would say dead button and dead SB since it was paid the previous hand.

then the following hand all blinds and button will be correct again.

action from the last hand doesn’t change.

Correct. The player due to deal will deal twice anyway. It should have been the solo big hand first then SB, BB.

But since SB, BB was posted first and no one called it before significant action, it stands. Make the correction next hand. Thankfully no one due for a blind was eliminated.

@BGinGA

Look forward to the ruling.

I think @Rhodeman77 is correct, and more than experienced enough to make the right call here.

Player B skips his BB then? He should've posted the BB in Hand 2, not the SB. And Player C posts the BB in two consecutive hands?

No. Player B pays solo big in the correcting hand instead of in the original order when he would have paid it in the previous hand.

Even if it might not be in accordance to the rules (I'm eagerly awaiting what @BGinGA has to say) I think it's the fairest.

I mean, I get BG is our most celebrated poster, and I am sure he will have something brilliant to say, but there are several experienced hosts on PCF capable of making this ruling.

Well let's see what tournament expertise he drops.

Play cash.

Hey that's my line. But correct .

Hand 2 action is complete and cannot be reversed.

Since the posted blinds were posted in error on Hand 2, the next two hands will correct it:

Hand 3:
Dead Button - player X
Big Blind - player B
Action on player C

Hand 4:
Button - player B
Small Blind - player C
Big Blind - player D
Action on player E

Player B ends up posting both blinds over the course of two hands (#2 and #3), just in reverse order. And player C posts both blinds, just not on consecutive hands (#2 and #4, instead of #3 and #4). Play continues normally with Hand 5.

What do you know, the right answer.

 

[WedgeRock]

I think that @Rhodeman77 (even tho I didn't understand his solution at first) and @ChaosRock got it right, as confirmed by @BGinGA: Play Hand 3 as Hand 2 was supposed to play, proceed directly to Hand 4.

Player A was a non-PCFer (Pete from @ChaosRock's game)
Player B was @SuckoutKing
Player C was @detroitdad
Player D was @Azcat
Player E was @WedgeRock (aka douchebag)

Also, FWIW, no one was angry with the situation. Everyone just expressed what they thought was fair, given the mistake in Hand 2. I said I wanted @SuckoutKing to post the BB because he didn't have many chips and I wanted him whittled down and eliminated, but I wasn't personally attacking Bob...I just wanted to be one step closer to what I came there to do: win the tournament.

Floor ruled that we were ignoring the missed hand and proceeding. Player B (@SuckoutKing) is the dealer, Player C (@detroitdad) is the SB and Player D (@Azcat) is the BB.

When I asked why we were letting Player B (@SuckoutKing) miss his BB, the floor's rationale was the I was at the table too and could have corrected the error before it occured. That's pretty shitty rationale and fails to protect the integrity of the game, IMO (we are all friends, tho, and no one is losing a friendship over a $40 tournament).

Thanks for all that worked through the problem. I'll be better prepared if this situation ever comes up again.

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

I think that @Rhodeman77 (even tho I didn't understand his solution at first) and @ChaosRock got it right, as confirmed by @BGinGA: Play Hand 3 as Hand 2 was supposed to play, proceed directly to Hand 4.

Player A was a non-PCFer (Pete from @ChaosRock's game)
Player B was @SuckoutKing
Player C was @detroitdad
Player D was @Azcat
Player E was @WedgeRock (aka douchebag)

Also, FWIW, no one was angry with the situation. Everyone just expressed what they thought was fair, given the mistake in Hand 2. I said I wanted @SuckoutKing to post the BB because he didn't have many chips and I wanted him whittled down and eliminated, but I wasn't personally attacking Bob...I just wanted to be one step closer to what I came there to do: win the tournament.

Floor ruled that we were ignoring the missed hand and proceeding. Player B (@SuckoutKing) is the dealer, Player C (@detroitdad) is the SB and Player D (@Azcat) is the BB.

When I asked why we were letting Player B (@SuckoutKing) miss his BB, the floor's rationale was the I was at the table too and could have corrected the error before it occured. That's pretty shitty rationale and fails to protect the integrity of the game, IMO (we are all friends, tho, and no one is losing a friendship over a $40 tournament).

Thanks for all that worked through the problem. I'll be better prepared if this situation ever comes up again.

Sorry I called you an angle shooting douchebag.

 

[BGinGA]

If the shoe fits.....

 

[JustinInMN]

Floor ruled that we were ignoring the missed hand and proceeding. Player B (@SuckoutKing) is the dealer, Player C (@detroitdad) is the SB and Player D (@Azcat) is the BB.

Who is the "floor" in a self dealt game?

Also there is one justification I could think of for this ruling and that is if there is any uncertainty about what just happened.

That said, based on the original description, you reconstructed the pot, it was a raise it take it so you should have high confidence in the reconstruction, and the floor should have applied the ruling presented here.

Note to everyone in this thread: I had a deja vu feeling, went back in the search, and sure enough, we had this discussion 2 years ago .

(And we came to the same conclusion, yay consistency!)

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/how-would-you-rule-it.35452