Button movement in Party Sit and Gos

[aces961]

Has anyone ever had the button literally move backward on party, meaning seat 5 was the button on hand 1, seat 6 was previously eliminated so it moved to seat 7 for the next hand. Seat 7 was eliminated on that hand and the button moved back to seat 5. There were 6+ players in all of these hands. I've contacted party support about this and will post their response when I get it.

[bugstud]

that seems very odd

[Apathy]

post those hand histories

[aces961]

***** Hand History for Game 1840527343 *****
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 10984971) - Sun Apr 03 20:48:24 EDT 2005
Table Table 14451 (Real Money) -- Seat 5 is the button
Total number of players : 8
Seat 1: BoiledOver (885)
Seat 2: rlgetchips (1425)
Seat 3: XLhomestead (1150)
Seat 4: Jcardshark11 (2510)
Seat 5: Braindead9 (1610)
Seat 7: renjer5 (925)
Seat 8: LkyJeremiah (380)
Seat 9: MittRomney (1115)
renjer5 posts small blind (100)
LkyJeremiah posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
MittRomney folds.
BoiledOver raises (885) to 885
BoiledOver is all-In.
rlgetchips folds.
XLhomestead folds.
Jcardshark11 folds.
Braindead9 folds.
renjer5 folds.
LkyJeremiah calls (180)
LkyJeremiah is all-In.
Creating Main Pot with $860 with LkyJeremiah
Creating Side Pot 1 with $505 with BoiledOver
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 7c, Qs, Ts ]
** Dealing Turn ** : [ 6c ]
** Dealing River ** : [ 4c ]
** Summary **
Main Pot: 860 | Side Pot 1: 505
Board: [ 7c Qs Ts 6c 4c ]
BoiledOver balance 1365, bet 885, collected 1365, net +480 [ Kh Qc ] [ a pair of queens -- Kh,Qc,Qs,Ts,7c ]
rlgetchips balance 1425, didn't bet (folded)
XLhomestead balance 1150, didn't bet (folded)
Jcardshark11 balance 2510, didn't bet (folded)
Braindead9 balance 1610, didn't bet (folded)
renjer5 balance 825, lost 100 (folded)
LkyJeremiah balance 0, lost 380 [ Ac 4h ] [ a pair of fours -- Ac,Qs,Ts,4h,4c ]
MittRomney balance 1115, didn't bet (folded)

***** Hand History for Game 1840529412 *****
LkyJeremiah finished in eighth place.
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 10984971) - Sun Apr 03 20:48:47 EDT 2005
Table Table 14451 (Real Money) -- Seat 7 is the button
Total number of players : 7
Seat 1: BoiledOver (1365)
Seat 2: rlgetchips (1425)
Seat 3: XLhomestead (1150)
Seat 4: Jcardshark11 (2510)
Seat 5: Braindead9 (1610)
Seat 7: renjer5 (825)
Seat 9: MittRomney (1115)
MittRomney posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
BoiledOver folds.
rlgetchips folds.
XLhomestead folds.
Jcardshark11 folds.
Braindead9 folds.
renjer5 raises (825) to 825
renjer5 is all-In.
MittRomney calls (625)
Creating Main Pot with $1650 with renjer5
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 6d, 7d, 6c ]
** Dealing Turn ** : [ Jc ]
** Dealing River ** : [ 4s ]
** Summary **
Main Pot: 1650 |
Board: [ 6d 7d 6c Jc 4s ]
BoiledOver balance 1365, didn't bet (folded)
rlgetchips balance 1425, didn't bet (folded)
XLhomestead balance 1150, didn't bet (folded)
Jcardshark11 balance 2510, didn't bet (folded)
Braindead9 balance 1610, didn't bet (folded)
renjer5 balance 0, lost 825 [ 7h 8h ] [ two pairs, sevens and sixes -- Jc,7h,7d,6d,6c ]
MittRomney balance 1940, bet 825, collected 1650, net +825 [ Td Jd ] [ two pairs, jacks and sixes -- Jd,Jc,Td,6d,6c ]

***** Hand History for Game 1840531713 *****
renjer5 finished in seventh place.
200/400 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 10984971) - Sun Apr 03 20:49:12 EDT 2005
Table Table 14451 (Real Money) -- Seat 5 is the button
Total number of players : 6
Seat 1: BoiledOver (1365)
Seat 2: rlgetchips (1425)
Seat 3: XLhomestead (1150)
Seat 4: Jcardshark11 (2510)
Seat 5: Braindead9 (1610)
Seat 9: MittRomney (1940)
MittRomney posts small blind (100)
BoiledOver posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
rlgetchips folds.
XLhomestead raises (1100) to 1100
Jcardshark11 folds.
Braindead9 folds.
MittRomney folds.
BoiledOver folds.
** Summary **
Main Pot: 1400
BoiledOver balance 1165, lost 200 (folded)
rlgetchips balance 1425, didn't bet (folded)
XLhomestead balance 1450, bet 1100, collected 1400, net +300
Jcardshark11 balance 2510, didn't bet (folded)
Braindead9 balance 1610, didn't bet (folded)
MittRomney balance 1840, lost 100 (folded)


My first email to them

I have attached three consecutive hands from a sit and go I recently played, the hands occured in the order they are attached the top one first. You will notice that the game has over 6 players and on the first and third of the consecutive hands seat 5 is the button. An occurance like this is inexcusable and you need to act immediatly to correct this flaw in your tourney software or it may cause me to stop playing at your site completely. I would ask that the buy-ins of each player involved who was left when this occured be refunded either in cash or bonus, something like this compromises the fairness of the tournament in allowing the player who recieved the button twice an unfair positional edge in more hands than is his share.


The reply:

Dear (Player)

Thank you for contacting us.

Players inherit any obligations (taking the Blinds) or receive any
benefits (getting the button) when transferred as a result of their table
breaking down in a multi table tournament. However in a single table
tournament, if the player gets eliminated in that hand, where the button
had to move to that particular player, then the player who had the
button would receive the button again so that the player who has to post the
small blind can post his blinds.

Players are dealt in the next hand after a transfer (unless they are
moved into the small blind position). Players are informed when they are
transferred (and when others are transferred to their table).

In transferring players from one table to another to keep tables
balanced, we try to be "as fair as possible" to players to maintain the same
distance from the blind after the transfer.

If you have any questions or suggestions, please do not hesitate to
contact our Customer Care Department at any time. We are here 24/7 to
assist you via email.

Thank you for choosing us as your online gaming site!

Shalini
Poker Customer Care

My reply to that:

Hello,
As this was a single table tournament I am
responding to the portion of your response concerning
those. The situation you describe is if the player who
would be the button the next hand is eliminated. Then
the button would stay in the same place for two
consecutive hands. While I may disagree with this and
would not do it in a tourney I was running, I
understand a large number of places do and believe it
is a valid way of handling the situation.
This is not what occured in this situation. What
happened there is in the 2nd hand I sent the player
who was the button was eliminated, instead of the
button moving to the next player at the table in the
correct direction, it literally moved backward a seat.
This is completely illogical and I can't see a
reasonalbe explanation for why it should be allowed to
occur.
As I provide your site with 150-200 dollars in
revenue a day I would hope in the future you could
actually take the time to read my complaints and
actually figure out what they are, I don't attempt to
waste your time with complaints that I don't believe
are warrented and I would appreciate it if you
wouldn't waste my time with responses that indicate
you haven't taken the time to actually read my email
completely.



I am still awaiting a reply for that 5 hours later.



If they don't actually do anything for me in my next email I have the following quote from their rules on the website
"Texas Hold’em uses what is called a “dealer button” (a small disc) to indicate the theoretical dealer of each hand. After each hand is completed, the dealer button moves clockwise to the next active player. This player will be considered “the dealer” for that hand. In this way each player has equal opportunities to be in early, middle and late position."

[aces961]

So here is the latest reply

Dear Player,

Thank you for contacting us.

With regards to your email we would like to inform you that in hand
number 1840529412 seat 7 is the button, seat 9 posts the big blind and
there is no small blind. In this hand renjer5 ie seat 7 is eliminated. In
the next hand seat 9 should have been the small blind and the person
next to him should be the big blind. This is exactly what happened. The
button again does not move and should have remained with the player on
seat 7. However since there is no player on seat 7 the button was
represented by the player on seat 5 instead of being on the empty seat 7. It
did not skip seat 9.

If you have any questions or suggestions, please do not hesitate to
contact our Customer Care Department at any time. We are here 24/7 to
assist you via email.

Thank you for choosing us as your online gaming site!

Ameenddin
Poker Customer Care


So I've replied to this by giving them countless situations where the big blind goes out one hand, there is a single big blind the next hand who is the button the hand after that and pays no small blind. I've also quoted the rule page and explained that according to them the next active player to the left of the button in hand 2 should recieve the button in hand 3. We'll see what they say to that.

[Insty]

Are you saying that it is correct to have people skip paying the blinds because the button position takes priority?

[aces961]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying that it is correct to have people skip paying the blinds because the button position takes priority?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, I'm not the one saying that, party is the one saying that with how they handle the much more common situation where the big blind is eliminated and no one is eliminated in the next hand. Anyone who has ever played a sit and go has seen the following happen:
In hand 1:seat 1 is the button, 2 sb, 3 bb and seat 3 is eliminated
In hand 2 then Seat 2 is the button, seat 4 is the bb
In hand 3 seat 4 is the button, 5 sb, 6 bb.

This usally happens at least once per sit and go and you can clearly see party places priority on the button moving here. Clearly in the example I gave above if they treat it as such can you think of any rational reason why if on hand 2 the button was eliminated that player 1 instead of 4 should have the next button, I certainly can't.

[Paul2432]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying that it is correct to have people skip paying the blinds because the button position takes priority?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, I'm not the one saying that, party is the one saying that with how they handle the much more common situation where the big blind is eliminated and no one is eliminated in the next hand. Anyone who has ever played a sit and go has seen the following happen:
In hand 1:seat 1 is the button, 2 sb, 3 bb and seat 3 is eliminated
In hand 2 then Seat 2 is the button, seat 4 is the bb
In hand 3 seat 4 is the button, 5 sb, 6 bb.

This usally happens at least once per sit and go and you can clearly see party places priority on the button moving here. Clearly in the example I gave above if they treat it as such can you think of any rational reason why if on hand 2 the button was eliminated that player 1 instead of 4 should have the next button, I certainly can't.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have not studied Party's rulebook, but this situation is a "dead button" that occurs routinely in B&M.

Paul

[aces961]

[ QUOTE ]
I have not studied Party's rulebook, but this situation is a "dead button" that occurs routinely in B&M.

Paul

[/ QUOTE ]

What occured here is party using the dead button rule on a hand where the button went out not the small blind. I have never seen a casino institute a dead button rule when the button goes out, why would they.

[dfscott]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have not studied Party's rulebook, but this situation is a "dead button" that occurs routinely in B&M.

Paul

[/ QUOTE ]

What occured here is party using the dead button rule on a hand where the button went out not the small blind. I have never seen a casino institute a dead button rule when the button goes out, why would they.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, the way they did it was right. It's the two busts in a row that makes this strange. The wierdness is caused by the fact that even through party uses the Dead Button Rule, they don't have any way to allow an empty seat to have the button, so they just back it up until they find a player that's still in, which is effectively the same thing.

Here's what happened:

Hand 1:
Seat 5 is button
Seat 7 is SB (seat 6 apparently busted previously)
Seat 8 is BB
Hand Result: Seat 8 busts out.

Hand 2:
Button moves from seat 5 to seat 7
There is no SB since the BB busted last hand
Seat 9 is now the BB
Now, the Button busts out.

Hand 3:
Button moves from seat 7 to seat 8, but seat 8 is gone. If seat 7 hadn't busted last hand, he would get the button again, but since he's not there, it "backs up" to seat 5.
Seat 9 posts SB and Seat 1 posts BB as normal.

They way party handles it makes it a little confusing, but I'm pretty sure that this was kosher.