The feed says "Seminole Hard Rock - Day 1 (11.30.14)?

Good luck, Michael!

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using 2+2 Forums

This is the 2nd game

Good luck, Mike!

Wow this is a pretty solid lineup. How did you get the chance to play in this?

Better question Why would you want to, there must be a softer game somewhere?

Wow, just logged in Mike, and saw you take down a nice hand, congrats and good luck after the dinner break

Lord_Strife with the big stack.

All I can say is LOL at how good I ran tonight

Chance to run good on TV = lifetime of awesome, IMO.

Just curious if you guys are instructed to not tip or if you tip as usual on TV. Feel free to tell me it's none of my business if you like.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using 2+2 Forums

It was one of my first questions obviously... We did a "time flop" where the loser of that have each dealer on the first hand of each down $50, most bigger pots someone gave an extra $25 chip or two

Here is one for the alltime douchebag list:

I get to a $1 $2 table to push in. The dealer is sitting there the full board is out. Button is in the 1 seat. Seat 2 has called an all in bet from Seat 7.

Nothing is happening. Nobody is showing cards, the dealer is ppointing at the guy in the 2 seat and he is refusing to show his cards. He wants the floor called because he isn;t supposed to show first (he happens to be correct).

He sees me and starts making his case to me. I tell him I'm not a floor and not making any decision. The floor gets there and rules that seat 7 must show first (my ruling would be to send them both to another room so they can be someone elses PITA).
Hand gets completed and as the dealer is gathering in the cards the guy in Seat 2 says to the dealer

"When I tell you something I am right and you are wrong."

Eventually during the my down the guys buddy sitting next to him tells him that was the rudest thing I ever saw at a card table.

I found myself in a weird situation and wasn't sure how to handle this. I'm wondering what the consensus is.

Button on seat 8, seat 9 is sb, seat 10 is absent, seat 1 is the bb. Also, seat 2 is vacant. The hand plays out with seat 1 going all in and losing, and he leaves.

After the hand, I move the button to seat 9, a new player comes to seat 2, and the player in seat 9 opts to move to the now vacant seat 1. Also, seat 10 returns and wants to buy the button.

What's the best way to handle this? Keep in mind that we don't have the system in place that I've seen described whereby everyone can catch up all at once (I think you call it the moving button?) which I've never seen in use.

Hand 1: button in empty 9. 10 buys 1 can get dealt in. 2 can post or wait

Hand 2: button in 10. Big blind in the 2. One not dealt in

Hand 3: button in 10. Small blind in the 2, big in the 3. Seat one not dealt in.

Hand 4: button in the 2, normal blinds in 3/4. Seat 1 assumes his natural position in cutoff where he should have been in hand 1.

Or lock up the 1, tell him to go back to the 9, and he moves for hand 4 getting all his hands

I see a couple of ways to go with this. One is 9 seat moves to 1 and sits out or he waits to move. 10 buys button and seat 2 can post a BB or sit out (if he sits outs seat 3 posts...)(yes you have 2 big blinds this hand)

Next hand button moves to the 10 seat and you have your blinds as normal.

The other option is to do the same thing, but no hand with 2 BBs but 10 seat ends up with the button twice.


Or the best option is to lock up the table and tell them you just aren't going to deal with this.

Two big blinds in a hand isn't an option in my room. Neither is leaving the button in the 10 seat for 2 hands in a row.

I asked a supervisor his opinion during a break and like his solution.

Button goes to the 1 seat, seat 2 is a dead small, 3 is the big, and 10 can post for the missed blinds.

Head exploding right here because either you have come up with an insane solution or you are using words in a weird manner.

So if I interpret this to mean what it means if these words mean what I think they mean you have a new player in seat 2 being allowed to enter the game in the SB but you are making his blind dead. This would be absurd.

So I have to assume that you think "dead small" means something other than post the blind as a dead blind. You probably are using it to mean there is no SB (I hate when people call this a "Dead Blind"). If in fact you mean it should be posted dead ... why?

I have two issues with this solution. The most minor objection is that you are allowing the player in seat 9 to move seats and deny the player in seat 10 the chance to buy the button. While I don't terribly care if the player misses his chance to buy the button ... it doesn't seem fair to me for the player to lose the opportunity simply because the player in seat 9 wants a seat change.

My bigger objection to this is that where do you put the button the next hand? Seat 2 can't come in on the button so he doesn't get it. Seat three hasn;t posted a small blind yet so he doesn't get it ..... and according to you a player can't get the button two hands in row in your room ..... so now what (I suspect the answer is that you are now realizing that the button can stay in the seat for two hands)

(So if as I suspect you would allow the button to stay in seat 1 for two hands .... why can't we let it sit in seat 10 for 2 hands?) .

Also you say that two big blinds is not an option in your room .... you would allow the player in seat 10 to post his blinds behind the button .... isn't that a hand with two big blinds? I know that saying two big blinds brings up the idea of the forward moving button ...... but in this particular instance it is more like having a single big blind and a player posting his missed blinds (actually that is exactly what it is). In a forward moving button rule scenario there wouldn't be a dead small blind posted and the next hand would have a small blind posted on the button which is not happening here.

Wow .... I can't believe I actually wrote that.

The solution offered by the supervisor was discussed after the fact. I wasn't going to stop the game and call the floor for this - particularly when nobody at the table was complaining.

This is the solution that I actually did come up with:

Hand 1: Button in seat 9, with no player sitting there. Seat 10 posts $7 and buys the button. Seat 1 and 2 sit out the hand.

Hand 2: Button in seat 10. Seat 1 and 2 sit out the hand. Seat 3 is the big blind.

Hand 3: Button in seat 1. Seat 3 is the small blind. Seat 4 is the big blind. Seat 1 and 2 sit out the hand.

Hand 4: Button in seat 3. The entire table is dealt in the hand.

And the whole time this is going on I'm thinking to myself that there has to be a better way to handle this....

Well my original response was going to be have seat 9 Deal Off. Then seat 10 would have posted 1 BB. The button would have froze and seat 9 would have had the button twice. Then seat 9 moves to seat one a few hands later. But then you said this:

And then...

...you go ahead and give seat 8 the button twice and seat 10 the button twice right after that. So you're saying your room sees no problem with allowing the player to have the advantage of being last to act twice, as long as the button isn't directly in front of them. Makes perfect sense!

No wonder you couldn't figure it out in a logical manner, your room rules aren't logical imo.

This is essentially a combination of my proposals. But instead of the Nine seat waiting to move you are having him move and then take the button in a weird way. (note that the eight seat gets the button twice in this scenario .... not that I have an issue with that ... just pointing out it is happening).

Personally I think it makes more sense for the nine seat to take his button in the nine seat and wait for the button to pass the 1 seat before moving simply to allow him to play in more hands.

Actually I think he is saying the player in seat 1 is getting the button after sitting out two hands. This would be very unusual .... but in this case I don't find it horrible because the player gave up playing his button in the nine seat. I don;t like the precedent of player moving onto the button .... but if you were ever going to allow it .... this would be the time.

Seems like the most logical. Either that or he moves and sits out til it passes.

Forward moving button FTW

Why can't the button stay in 9, 9 moves to 1, 10 buys button, 1 and new guy in 2 both get dealt in and post sb and bb, respectively next hand?

You mean you think that's what he meant to write?

Obviously letting seat 9 play a few more hands prior to moving is the best scenario, my main point was that he said his room doesn't allow getting the button twice, yet his solution effectively did just that...twice.