|
You are here: Home › Poker Articles & Features › You are the Tournament Director Series 3 › Articles › Leave the Chips in Play or Not?
You are the Tournament Director Series 3: Leave the Chips in Play or Not?
This one was e-mailed in by Adam who works as a card room supervisor in his local card room.
Hi there, I have a question and I was hoping you would be able to help/give opinion. I work as a card room supervisor and just recently during a tournament we had a player leave with chips still in play. I ruled that the chips stay in play and just get ante'd away as they had been paid for through other players, as well as the player in question's, rebuys. However, my manager told me I was wrong because it gives that table an unfair advantage as there would be an extra ante in every pot so it would encourage blind stealing. In previous clubs that I have worked, the chips always stay in play. After a very long argument, he still stuck by his decision. Any advice you could give would be greatly appreciated.
Would your decision be any different if you knew 100% that the player wasn’t returning? If you didn’t know would any length of time change your decision?
 Matt Savage:
Leave the chips in play, the player can always return and I do not know how you could be 100% clear that the player would not return. I know of a player that was arrested and still made his way back to the tournament. The player paid for his buy-in and should be anted away.
 Thomas Kremser:
If I don’t know if the player returns, I would leave the chips in play. If I do know that the player does not return I will remove the chips from play because it gives an advantage to this table. Especially it creates a situation on this table where the players to the right of the missing player have a big advantage to steal the blinds and for players to the left of the missing player have a big disadvantage. Definitely it changes the play because there is nobody who defends the chips.
 Dave Lamb:
Situations regarding absent players:
1) The player just disappears - continue blinding him off, he paid for the stack and we have no right to assume he will not return.
2) The player declares he will not be back - count the chips, pick them up and apprise the remaining players of the withdrawal.
3) The player is disqualified - bad behaviour or repeated penalties cause the ejection and we know this player will not be allowed to return (count, pick up, and inform).
When in doubt the chips should continue being blinded off.
 Jeff Leigh:
We used to take a players chips out of play in the above described scenario, however we no longer do so as it cannot be proved that there is ANY real advantage in the players chips being ante’d away. It could quite rightly be argued that if you had 1 or more players away from the table either all at the same time or at different times that this could be an advantage to the remaining players to try to “steal” Blinds, but it is risk most players will take regardless. Taking a player’s chips out of play could actually penalise that table unfairly. We wouldn’t have an extra ante in every pot as that player’s ante/s/ blinds would only go in at his turn and not every hand.
 Jack Effel:
No. Regardless of knowing whether the player was coming back, his/her chips stay in play in case the player changes their mind and chooses to return and complete the competition. Additionally, the abandoned chips are in play on the table whether or not the player is there, because the chips were purchased legitimately, and they are part of the total chips in play. The only time chips are removed from play is when a player is disqualified for an infraction, or chips were colored up or unsold during an event.
 Thomas Lamatsch:
The chips stay in play and will be blinded out, because the seat was paid and it belongs to the player how he is playing his stack. We never know, if the player changes his mind and coming back to the tournament. Only, if I disqualify a player I would take his chips out of the tournament.
The Mob Verdict
Matt, Jack and Thomas L. leave the chips in play with only a disqualification being enough to get the chips picked up whereas Thomas K. and Dave leave them in play if they are unsure whether the player will return and remove them if they know that the player is not returning.
We certainly agree that if a player disappears without saying anything or if there is any doubt whatsoever as to whether or not he should return the chips must stay in play.
However if the player states that they are not going to return we can see an argument for a TD taking the chips out of play. There are varying arguments for and against how an unplayed stack affects the other players at the table. There is the argument that the players to the left or right of the stack have an advantage or disadvantage and there is the argument that if the chips are removed the players on the table are unable to get their hands on those chips and the chip distribution is unnaturally changed. However, all players have an equal chance of being on a table where a player gets up; it’s the luck of the draw like so many other things in poker. Therefore we don't feel that it is necessary to be overly concerned about marginal advantages that may arise in this situation. Indeed you could argue that dealing with undefended blinds was just one more tournament poker skill.
The most important thing is clarity and consistency and if a card room follows Thomas K. and Dave’s lead we wouldn’t have a problem with that. However if it was our card room we would use the rule that Matt, Jack and Thomas L favour leaving the chips to either blind out or the player to eventually return.
The most important thing though is Dave’s wisdom in that ‘When in doubt the chips should continue being blinded off.’
Click here to coment on this article
|
