Joining a new tourney table and sitting between the button and the blinds

[dik9]

The blinds have been at a disadvantage and are ineffect waiting for the button, to get their advantage back. Someone joining the table (on the button), not only has the advantage of the button going all round the table before he has to post, but an additional advantage of being the last to speak without posting any blind. I see where you are coming from, it's just TD's opinions on who gets what advantage where and trying to minimise it. that decides what rules you go by. My personal opinion is that the positional advantage is too great to come in on the button.

[mikkyT]

Thats the luck of the draw when a table is broken up or a player moved. You are placed into the seat which gives you the least advantage. Its less of an advantage than the same person keeping the button twice. The lesser of the two evils would be to give the new player the button, at least the advantage is moving in clockwork rotation as it should be (or, as is correct, skipping directly over the new player, but in this case that was not possible), whereas if it stays where it is, the other player gets an advantage twice.

[dik9]

This is just a house rule and different places have different rules, just putting my point across without trying to rile anyone. Matt is quite correct a uniformity of rules is definately required.

Article 10

3/ Moving into a seat with the dealer button or the blind. A player who moves into a seat which is due to post the big blind must receive a hand immediately in the big blind. A player who moves into a seat which is due to post the small blind must wait until the button has passed him. A player who moves into a seat which is due to have the button shall wait until the button has passed, before recieving cards.

(or, as is correct, skipping directly over the new player, but in this case that was not possible)

 It is possible if they miss being dealt in.

Karabiner, what have you started!!!!

[tikay]

Sadly, despite all the affirmitave & authoratiive Posts, there is NO right & wrong, until, as Matt rightly says, we have uniformity of Rules.

If you REALLY wanna have a debate about the advantage one can or can not gain by "position" when you move tables, you should have watched the fun at Gala Notts, where, until recently, they moved the lowest chips when balancing tables - & if that was not bad enough, they also allowed those moving tables to sit WHERE THEY WANT on their assigned tables. The latter was especially fun when a table broke, &, say, Big Dave Smith & old Taffy were both assigned the same table. The hustling & bustling & jostlng, as they played the musical chairs scenario "who can grab the best seat first" was a feature of the Comps there, and many was the drink knocked over & chairs upended as this scenario was enacted time after time. But fair play to them, they've since corrected this anamoly which, even in a world where all Casino have their own rules, was something of a jaw-dropper.

It was a testament to Rob that he was, meticulously, working his way through all these anamolies.

[londonpokergirl]

matt u owe me a brandy        new deck lol

[Karabiner]

Sadly, despite all the affirmitave & authoratiive Posts, there is NO right & wrong, until, as Matt rightly says, we have uniformity of Rules.

If you REALLY wanna have a debate about the advantage one can or can not gain by "position" when you move tables, you should have watched the fun at Gala Notts, where, until recently, they moved the lowest chips when balancing tables - & if that was not bad enough, they also allowed those moving tables to sit WHERE THEY WANT on their assigned tables. The latter was especially fun when a table broke, &, say, Big Dave Smith & old Taffy were both assigned the same table. The hustling & bustling & jostlng, as they played the musical chairs scenario "who can grab the best seat first" was a feature of the Comps there, and many was the drink knocked over & chairs upended as this scenario was enacted time after time. But fair play to them, they've since corrected this anamoly which, even in a world where all Casino have their own rules, was something of a jaw-dropper.

It was a testament to Rob that he was, meticulously, working his way through all these anamolies.

They still do move the lowest chips Tikay, that's why all three players jumped in between the button and the BB.

[matt674]

matt u owe me a brandy        new deck lol

so long as its not vodka and red bull - i'd need to win the next blonde bash to afford that bill!!!!

[tikay]

Sadly, despite all the affirmitave & authoratiive Posts, there is NO right & wrong, until, as Matt rightly says, we have uniformity of Rules.

If you REALLY wanna have a debate about the advantage one can or can not gain by "position" when you move tables, you should have watched the fun at Gala Notts, where, until recently, they moved the lowest chips when balancing tables - & if that was not bad enough, they also allowed those moving tables to sit WHERE THEY WANT on their assigned tables. The latter was especially fun when a table broke, &, say, Big Dave Smith & old Taffy were both assigned the same table. The hustling & bustling & jostlng, as they played the musical chairs scenario "who can grab the best seat first" was a feature of the Comps there, and many was the drink knocked over & chairs upended as this scenario was enacted time after time. But fair play to them, they've since corrected this anamoly which, even in a world where all Casino have their own rules, was something of a jaw-dropper.

It was a testament to Rob that he was, meticulously, working his way through all these anamolies.

They still do move the lowest chips Tikay, that's why all three players jumped in between the button and the BB.

...and thery can sit ANYWHERE THEY WANT on their assigned table?..........

[Karabiner]

Well that's what they seemed to be doing last night.