Treehouse House Rules – 08/2013

Current as of: 9/23/2014:

Here I record some clarifications and any “standard practices” I use as TD:

Break Order

We break from the green table to the red table to the blue table. Late arrivals sit at the table with the fewest players, with reverse break order priority (blue over red over green if there are multiple equally light tables).

Late Arrival Seat Selection
Generally I attempt to seat late arrivals at the big blind or earliest (worst) position possible. If it is easy to squeeze a new player into a seat exactly at the big blind I will do so; however, in my discretion as tournament director I will often just seat the new player at any open seat.

Late Entry in Shorthanded Tournament
Late entries are allowed up to (through) the first break. Sometimes in short-handed tournaments (or wild train wrecks) the tournament may get close to the money before the break. Late entry is always allowed if there are at least three more players than paid positions. Late entry is NEVER allowed “at the money bubble”. Late entry at “one away from money bubble” (in other words, 2 more players than paid position) is usually allowed, but this is at the Director’s discretion. It may be disallowed at that point if there are short stack players who object and the TD agrees they could be unfairly disadvantaged.

Balancing
When balancing tables (moving a player from one table to another) the next player to be big blind is taken and put into the worst open position (the seat that will get the big blind soonest). If you have posted your big blind but no cards have been dealt yet you are the player to move; obviously you take your blind back. If a hand is in progress then UTG will be the player moved. As TD I will usually delay balancing if a hand is in progress. I will almost never pause the clock during this wait. While it’s true that the shorthanded table is “losing time” during this wait, the difference between the two tables is a whopping one hand of poker. We’re not pausing the clock for that; if the heavy table is taking a long time realize that their players are also waiting just as long for their next hand as you are. In some cases at my discretion I might take a player from the heavy table even while a hand is in progress; however, technically the TD is never supposed to balance while the heavy table has an active hand because there is ALWAYS a possible bust out.

Note that, per TDA rules, an incoming balancing player can sit at ANY spot and will receive cards there, even on the button. The only time they will have to wait is if the only open spot is “in between” the button and the blinds and seating the player would cause someone to be the big blind twice.

If the reason your table is shorthanded is that the BB just busted out, the incoming (“balanced”) player sits in the busted-out seat and takes the BB. This is explicitly explained in [2013] TDA Rule 10(A). The BB stays in the same physical seat twice, and UTG from the previous bust-out hand will be UTG again. There is still a dead small blind in this situation, it’s just that the dead small blind has no “seat”.

I try not to create new seats during the balancing process. When I come to your table and ask where the open seats were, this is why I’m asking – in balancing the tables I’m trying not to insert a player between two players who have always been next to each other. There’s no particular reason for this other than it most closely approximates what would happen if we had permanently assigned seats (“you are at table 17 seat 8”). Admittedly, in the heat of battle it doesn’t always happen right and sometimes a player gets seated in a “new” seat in contradiction to what my stated preference/policy is. That’s poker.

I try to keep the tables within 1 player of each other, but at my discretion as TD I may instruct the short table to keep going for a few hands. Usually this is done only when there are enough players (e.g., 9 vs. 7 isn’t such a big problem) and especially when it seems likely that someone might bust out on the heavy table this hand or next. The position of the blinds on the light table also enters into this decision because if the blinds are moving through existing players with no open seat among them then a few hands can be played without changing how the blinds will progress through the existing players and the potential incoming player. In such cases letting you play a few hands is to your advantage – you get more hands in while the clock is still moving vs sitting there staring at the wall waiting for an incoming player. Overall my goal is to strike a balance between keeping everything perfectly even vs the disruption of moving people. As with everything else in poker in the long run all this variance balances out.

Redraw for 2-to-3 Expansion
I rarely do this, but in cases where we decide to expand to 3 tables from 2 because of too many late arrivals I will do it “whatever way makes sense at the time”. Typically I do a “zippered TDA balancing” – I’ll take the BB from one table, then the BB from the other, then UTG/UTG, then UTG+1/UTG+1 etc and seat them in that order at the new table (so that the two BB players fill the first two seats, the two UTG players fill the next two seats, and so forth). Depending on the circumstances I retain discretion to do something completely different from this procedure – whatever gets the job done quickest. If I remember to do it right, the new table will draw for button rather than just setting it in seat 1. As with all things in poker, good and bad luck in the outcome of such a process all balances out in the long run.

Usually, rather than expanding to a third table to accommodate late arrivals, I will make them wait for a bustout to create open spots. Perhaps this will encourage you to come on time in the future 🙂 … I may seat us 11 handed at break if there are still late arrivals needing a seat.

As with the final table, if we have three tables we will redraw for two-table seating at 18, not 20.

Reminder about deals for Points
There is no deal-making for points. If you decide to chop a tournament you have three choices:

Points awarded strictly based on chip stacks. This is what happens if any remaining player, or the TD, objects to any other choice.
Alternatively, and only if everyone involved agrees (and the TD does not object), the remaining players may choose to divide the (remaining) points evenly. This option is available even if the money is not evenly divided. If any single remaining player objects to this, points will go by chip stacks.
You may be allowed to flip for finish order. Stack sizes and blinds will determine whether this is allowed, entirely at TD discretion.

One Reply to “Treehouse House Rules – 08/2013”

Neil says:

August 17, 2011 at 12:12 pm
Current as of: 9/23/2014:

Here I record some clarifications and any “standard practices” I use as TD:

Break Order

We break from the green table to the red table to the blue table. Late arrivals sit at the table with the fewest players, with reverse break order priority (blue over red over green if there are multiple equally light tables).

Late Arrival Seat Selection
Generally I attempt to seat late arrivals at the big blind or earliest (worst) position possible. If it is easy to squeeze a new player into a seat exactly at the big blind I will do so; however, in my discretion as tournament director I will often just seat the new player at any open seat.

Late Entry in Shorthanded Tournament
Late entries are allowed up to (through) the first break. Sometimes in short-handed tournaments (or wild train wrecks) the tournament may get close to the money before the break. Late entry is always allowed if there are at least three more players than paid positions. Late entry is NEVER allowed “at the money bubble”. Late entry at “one away from money bubble” (in other words, 2 more players than paid position) is usually allowed, but this is at the Director’s discretion. It may be disallowed at that point if there are short stack players who object and the TD agrees they could be unfairly disadvantaged.

Balancing
When balancing tables (moving a player from one table to another) the next player to be big blind is taken and put into the worst open position (the seat that will get the big blind soonest). If you have posted your big blind but no cards have been dealt yet you are the player to move; obviously you take your blind back. If a hand is in progress then UTG will be the player moved. As TD I will usually delay balancing if a hand is in progress. I will almost never pause the clock during this wait. While it’s true that the shorthanded table is “losing time” during this wait, the difference between the two tables is a whopping one hand of poker. We’re not pausing the clock for that; if the heavy table is taking a long time realize that their players are also waiting just as long for their next hand as you are. In some cases at my discretion I might take a player from the heavy table even while a hand is in progress; however, technically the TD is never supposed to balance while the heavy table has an active hand because there is ALWAYS a possible bust out.

Note that, per TDA rules, an incoming balancing player can sit at ANY spot and will receive cards there, even on the button. The only time they will have to wait is if the only open spot is “in between” the button and the blinds and seating the player would cause someone to be the big blind twice.

If the reason your table is shorthanded is that the BB just busted out, the incoming (“balanced”) player sits in the busted-out seat and takes the BB. This is explicitly explained in [2013] TDA Rule 10(A). The BB stays in the same physical seat twice, and UTG from the previous bust-out hand will be UTG again. There is still a dead small blind in this situation, it’s just that the dead small blind has no “seat”.

I try not to create new seats during the balancing process. When I come to your table and ask where the open seats were, this is why I’m asking – in balancing the tables I’m trying not to insert a player between two players who have always been next to each other. There’s no particular reason for this other than it most closely approximates what would happen if we had permanently assigned seats (“you are at table 17 seat 8”). Admittedly, in the heat of battle it doesn’t always happen right and sometimes a player gets seated in a “new” seat in contradiction to what my stated preference/policy is. That’s poker.

I try to keep the tables within 1 player of each other, but at my discretion as TD I may instruct the short table to keep going for a few hands. Usually this is done only when there are enough players (e.g., 9 vs. 7 isn’t such a big problem) and especially when it seems likely that someone might bust out on the heavy table this hand or next. The position of the blinds on the light table also enters into this decision because if the blinds are moving through existing players with no open seat among them then a few hands can be played without changing how the blinds will progress through the existing players and the potential incoming player. In such cases letting you play a few hands is to your advantage – you get more hands in while the clock is still moving vs sitting there staring at the wall waiting for an incoming player. Overall my goal is to strike a balance between keeping everything perfectly even vs the disruption of moving people. As with everything else in poker in the long run all this variance balances out.

Redraw for 2-to-3 Expansion
I rarely do this, but in cases where we decide to expand to 3 tables from 2 because of too many late arrivals I will do it “whatever way makes sense at the time”. Typically I do a “zippered TDA balancing” – I’ll take the BB from one table, then the BB from the other, then UTG/UTG, then UTG+1/UTG+1 etc and seat them in that order at the new table (so that the two BB players fill the first two seats, the two UTG players fill the next two seats, and so forth). Depending on the circumstances I retain discretion to do something completely different from this procedure – whatever gets the job done quickest. If I remember to do it right, the new table will draw for button rather than just setting it in seat 1. As with all things in poker, good and bad luck in the outcome of such a process all balances out in the long run.

Usually, rather than expanding to a third table to accommodate late arrivals, I will make them wait for a bustout to create open spots. Perhaps this will encourage you to come on time in the future 🙂 … I may seat us 11 handed at break if there are still late arrivals needing a seat.

As with the final table, if we have three tables we will redraw for two-table seating at 18, not 20.

Reminder about deals for Points
There is no deal-making for points. If you decide to chop a tournament you have three choices:
- Points awarded strictly based on chip stacks. This is what happens if any remaining player, or the TD, objects to any other choice.
- Alternatively, and only if everyone involved agrees (and the TD does not object), the remaining players may choose to divide the (remaining) points evenly. This option is available even if the money is not evenly divided. If any single remaining player objects to this, points will go by chip stacks.
- You may be allowed to flip for finish order. Stack sizes and blinds will determine whether this is allowed, entirely at TD discretion.

One Reply to “Treehouse House Rules – 08/2013”

Leave a Reply Cancel reply