blonde poker forum

bit of advice please - i have had contradicting info so far
what is the correct or generally agreed ruling on player movent when playing live
last night at our game we had 16 starters on two tables , all was going well until one table was reduced to 4 and the other table had 7(2 knocked out in 1 hand on 4 table)
obviously we needed to move a man from the 7 seater - the way we didi it was deal a card and the SB ended up moving - Who should it have been ?
when we moved him no one really knew where to put him
he had just had BB so we couldent put him there , if we put him in sb then the sb on the table got away with it , if we put him before the sb  then he got away with it , after discussion we agreed to put him in the immediate small blind and then play with 2 sb`s , although i know it was wrong it seemed the fairest way at the time and a decision was neded
advice please

it's sometimes done shortest chiops moves, but in a big multi I dislike that because you're moving a shoirt stacked player to a table where, because of eliminated players, the avge stack is higher. you can get a seat of death syndrome build up if this happens a few times, every time a player arrives they end up having to move all in to try and catch up. moving the next player to post the BB is my prefered way of doing it. when they arrive at the table you can either stick them in the seat where the BB should be placed next hand, you can make them post a BB out of turn like online cash games when you've been sitting out, or you can allow them to simply start playing straight away and not post their BB until their turn.
how do our nuimerous card room managers here do it?

most places i've been to move the BB and put him in the first available seat in front of the BB on the new table, this means that he will pay the big blind as soon as poss after just avoiding it.
Incidentally if a player is moved into the small blind or button he isn't allowed to play that hand.
Other casinos will move the shortstack but i feel this is not as fair as moving the BB,
Ian

Whilst playing in the Orleans casino in Vegas, one rule which stuck in my mind was exactly what you are talking about, balancing of tables.The way they did it ,to me seems the easiest and fairest of all.

They would see what the position of the open seat was after the button, i.e  4 places to the left of button,
then go to the table with the xtra player on, and take the guy who was 4 places left of the button
and seat him in exactly the same place on the short handed table, so there would be no advantage or disaadvantage to the moved player. 

To move the bb blind in to the first avalible seat in front of the bb on the other table is the fairest way, that how we do it in all grosvenors   

because it was a move to a 4 seater table the BB should of moved and moved to the nearest postion to the bb on the other table ie if the button was on seat 1 the sb in seat 3 then the player moving should be moved to the first available seat after seat 3

The Orleans way does seem easy and, now you mention it, obvious too.

I know it, IFM and mr Versace - all fair ways to do it.  I too played in the orleans and agree that this is the best way of coping with the situation.

Grosvenor Cardiff take the BB, BUT they put him to the right of the dealer (ie waits the longest for BB). This does not seem right to me but there you go.

thx all for replys - just one problem
last night the player eliminated was on SB so when we move the sb from other table if we put him in the old sb seat he then misses his sb and becomes button - is this fair?(this is actually what we did but made him pay a sb as well)
having given further thought , what i beleive i should have done was move the BB and place him in the bb spot on other table the expected BB on that table has one more hand then and that is the only advantage - however this would mean placing him in a seat that isnt vacant - does that sound fair

So the now available seat would become the button?. If so you move the player who is about to become the button on the other table to his same position on the short handed table.
That way there is no advantage or disadvantage to the player moving,it may mean the shorthanded table has to wait 1 hand if the other table is in the middle of a hand.

i think that is bang on mate - cheers , why didnt i think of that  ???

carl, and what a pleasure it is not to have to call you mandy, why didn't you move a player when you lost the guy before? i.e. how did you end up with a 7-4 split, why wasn't it 6-5. I'd have been moaning loudly (no surprise there then).

2 knocked out on 1 hand as stated in orginal post

Ah, many apologies. Good job I don't make a living editing.