Hi Guys,

We had a big controvercy arise at a $1/$2 NL Holdem game. Basically, the issue is over whether the same seat can be big blind twice in the same orbit.

Here is more detail:

Seat 1 has the button, seat 2 is small blind, seat 3 is empty and seat 4 is big blind. All other seats at the table are filled. As a result of the hand, seat 4 who was rhe big blind gets stacked. This person keeps the seat and goes to the ATM cashier to rebuy. In the meantime, a new person sits down at the previously empty seat 3. The button now moves to seat 2.

Here is the dilemma, the dealer decides that instead of having seat 3 buy the button, they can just be one big blind. This leads to the following scenario, next hand, seat 4 comes back with a new stack. The button remains in seat 2, seat 3 is now the small blind and seat 4 gets the big blind again with his new stack.

Did the dealer make the correct decision? Any feedback is very welcome.

Thank you!

Seat 3 can buy the button or wait 2 hands (seat 2 is button, seat 3 is new player, seat 5 is big blind... seat 4 is the dead small blind).

Next hand, Seat 3 is the dead button (or live if he bought the button in previous hand), seat 5 is the small blind, seat 6 is the big blind. Seat 4 waits one hand and is dealt in for $1 (dead) as he missed the small blind but kept the seat locked up. The dead $1 may be room-dependent though.

Thank you!

New player can post 1 big blind, but on the next hand the button should be on seat 3 with but he has to post the small blind on it. Seat 4 returns to also pay small blind and seat 5 post big blind. Next hand, button moves to seat 4 and the blinds are back to normal.

If the room uses the dead button rule then the dealer is correct. If the room uses the forward moving button rule than the dealer is not correct.

Using the dead button rule, then even if the new player did not show up, seat one was going to have the button for more than one hand.

If new player doesn't show up, button stays on 1 and seat 5 posts BB. Since you were going to have that happen anyway when new player shows up he can be the BB instead of seat 5.

If you are using forward moving button rule than see Jdiamonds post.

This is the forward moving button rule which I belive is most common and the best way to do it for cash games.

I'm going to assume that the room in question does not use a forward moving button rule...

I disagree. Seat one would not get the button twice as it would have to move to seat 2 which was occupied.
The dealer still did it wrong. The way I understand a dead button is that any new player can assume any position except for a spot between the button and small blind. So in the OP's case the button should have gone to seat 2 and the new player in seat 3 would be the small blind and seat 5 would be the big blind. Next hand when seat 4 returns, seat 3 would be the button and seat 4 the small blind so seat 3 would have to wait a hand to come back in.

^ that is how tournaments work using a dead button anyway. If for some reason in a cash game with a dead button you won't let the new player assume the small blind then that player would need to wait a hand to join.

Correct I should have said seat 2 would be getting the button the twice (I was thinking in my head of the situation where the SB player busts out).

On the first hand seat 2 has button and there is one Big blind no small blind. on the next hand seat 2 would be getting the button a second hand.

same player can never be big blind twice in one orbit, ever, in life

Except for in the large number of poker rooms which use the dead button rule ... ever in life.....

I'm a fan of the dead button, to avoid multiple blinds in a row. But sadly, I am not poker rule emperor and different places have different rules.

House/Room Rules trump all. Both versions are fair, in that advantages are random. When blinds bust (or leave/return) non-standard actions occur.

IMHO, it's easier to have everyone post a BB, followed by a SB each orbit. When not possible (buying button or missed blind), they may post both at once (dead SB), wait a hand (or more) and occasionally, the same player gets the button advantage more than others.

Was playing at a casino and one seat posted a straddle multiple hands in row. Players before him were walking, returned to the table and waited for their BB. Seat 4 was BB, Seats 5 & 6 had missed blinds (walkers) and Seat 7 straddled. Next hand, Seat 5 is BB, 6 waits and 7 straddles again. Next hand Seat 6 is BB, and yup, Seat 7 straddles a 3rd time in a row.

As someone is fond of saying, NL is a game of stacks, not blinds. Don't get too worked up over an extra buck here and there.

I agree in that I prefer the Dead Button rule. I think some people exaggerate the benefit of getting the button two hands in a row. Not that there isn't an advantage to it. But the second hand the player gets the button, they would have been the cutoff anyway...... its not like they are getting the button in place of their UTG hand.

I think the advantage of posting a blind on or behind the button, on a hand with extra blinds (as occurs in the case of the forward moving button) is a bit more of an advantage which is why I prefer the dead button rule.

However its pretty close so I wouldn't be upset about it either way and in some situations the forward moving button rule is necessary (my experience playing with that rule was in a room that had a button drop ... so obviously one player couldn't get the button twice in a row).

Huh? I think we're talking about different rules or something. I've played a lot with both and I've never seen what you seem to be saying. AFAIK with the DBR, now 2 is the button, 3 is waiting to come in, 4 (who rebought after his BB hand) is the SB, and 5 is the BB.

But technically, in either room you could have the BB twice in an orbit by posting anywhere from UTG to the CO, to come into [or back into] the game. That's not what was referred to, I don't think.

No opinion which is a greater advantage, but you're correct that neither rule addresses that situation perfectly.

I have no idea whats the matter with me ...... I just completely misread what he said ..... I thought he was reiterating the claim that you can;t be the Button twice ...... I really think the alzheimers is starting to kick in. Time to get a rocking chair.

I play in a casino quite often with a moving button. If a player gets up on the button, then the button moves to the next player. The button has to post one dollar and and the small blind has to post two dollars and the big blind has to post two dollars (this in a 1-2 no limit game). I understand the theory for not being able to have the button two hands in a row. However, I do not like being the button and having to post any amount of money. Sometimes players are friends and will get up to go eat or go to the bathroom together and that makes the blinds come around a lot quicker. A lot of smokers do the same thing. They get up on their button. So do players that are calling it quits for the night. The good thing about seeing people get up for a break on their button lets me know instantly that they have no concept of position. They basically are holding a neon sign over their heads saying FISH!. So either way, I guess it works out in the end.

Aside from personal taste, you probably have it exactly backwards. I'd post all my blinds on the button if I could get away with it. Where would you prefer to have forced money in front of you? When your hands are worth less or when your hands are worth more?

The answer, of course, is room dependent, but I'm always a supporter of simply moving the big blind forward and then figuring out where the heck everything else is.

Being the big blind twice in a row is moronic.

Sure enough, the day I wrote that, I ended up having a round where I got to post the big blind on the button, which doesn't happen often. The two players to the right of me got up in what would have been my natural BB. I was one of three big blinds on that button hand. I then posted the SB the next hand in the CO, along with the button and natural SB and the new BB.