| This is a discussion on Unfair PS tournament rule within the online poker forums, in the General Poker section; Two of us were eliminated in the same hand in a Sit and Go. My set beat her pair. However she went out in 4th ... |
| | ||||||
![]() |
| |
|
#1 | ||||
| ||||
| Unfair PS tournament rule Two of us were eliminated in the same hand in a Sit and Go. My set beat her pair. However she went out in 4th place (ITM) and I was 5th (Bubbled). We were beat by a straight. She had 1600 in chips while I only had 1500. That's why she finished better. In my opinion this is not a good rule. I had the second-best hand. Heads-up I would have beat her. I'm sure y'all have experience with this and I'd love to hear your thoughts. |
| Play Texas Hold'em Online Poker | Unfair PS tournament rule | |
|
|
|
#4 | ||||
| ||||
| I don't think this is only a PokerStars rule...this is how payouts are made everywhere. |
|
#5 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
In this example there were 2 pots. One pot was between the 3 of you and one pot was between the other 2. The side pot is decided first, and you lose it. You are now eliminated. Then the player with the pair loses that hand and the rest of her chips to the straight. That means she's eliminated. That's the justification behind it and it's a standard rule in all tourneys, not just Pokerstars tourneys. |
|
#6 | ||||
| ||||
| Well, maybe is not standard for all sites, because 2 week ago in a 3 way all in happen this to me in fulltilt, was MTT, i have more chips and best hand than the other that also get kick out and i end in a place down, the other player ended in 8 and i ended in 9. So, maybe each site take his own policy. |
|
#7 | ||||
| ||||
| re: Unfair PS tournament rule poker Quote:
Yep totally standard tourney rule, everywhere. |
|
#8 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
|
|
#9 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
|
|
#11 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
To quote Zach because he is perfectly correct: "There's no such thing as 2nd place in a hand. You either have the best hand or a losing hand (this goes for each pot, so if there are side pots obviously multiple winning hands). In this example there were 2 pots. One pot was between the 3 of you and one pot was between the other 2. The side pot is decided first, and you lose it. You are now eliminated. Then the player with the pair loses that hand and the rest of her chips to the straight. That means she's eliminated. That's the justification behind it and it's a standard rule in all tourneys, not just Pokerstars tourneys." |
|
#13 | ||||
| ||||
| This has always confused me a bit. Can anyone break it down please? The hand winner had over 1600 chips to start with, or else the woman who went out 8th would still have some chips left, right? So who is the side pot between (it's betw the OP and the winner, right?) and for how much? Or are all 3 in the side pot, but she still has 100 chips left, which she THEN goes on to lose to the straight, thus going out after the OP? In other words, the side pot is 1500 each, the lowest stack's entirety? No, that makes no sense. I'm just not seeing the need for the side pot if the hand winner had you both covered. |
|
#14 | ||||
| ||||
| re: Unfair PS tournament rule poker With 3 players AI, unless 2+ players have equal chips, there will always be 2 pots. 1st pot has the maximum chips that the low stack may win and is contested between the low stack, middle stack and high stack. The 2nd pot is the additional chips that the middle stack may win and is contested between the middle stack and the high stack. Last edited by Jillychemung : 11th February 2009 at 4:42 PM. |
|
#15 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
|
|
#16 | ||||
| ||||
| Well the side pot is the one between MS & HS but for the purposes of finishing order it doesn't matter as both pots complete simultaneously and LS & MS both exit the tournament at the same time. Since they both exit at the same time one goes back to the start of the hand before ante's & blinds to determine who finishes higher. |
|
#17 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
Side pot: bigger 2 stacks Let's use an example: player A: 2000 chips Player B: 1000 chips Player C: 100 chips they get all-in preflop and players C and B are all-in Main pot: 300 chips (100 from each) Side pot: 1800 chips (900 from each of A and B) First the main pot is resolved. Player A wins that pot, player B loses 100 chips, as does player C. Player C now has no more chips left and loses. Now the side pot is resolved. Player A wins that pot, player B loses all 900 and now has no more chips left and loses. Since player C was eliminated before player B, player C is in a lower place than B. Note that at no time during this did it matter whether player A had B beat or not. Player A could have royal flush, C could have K-high straight flush, and player B could have J-high. The only thing that matters is the first place finisher in any pot, and at no point are B and C HU in a pot. |
|
#19 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
If only you had folded |
|
#20 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
|
|
#21 | ||||
| ||||
| re: Unfair PS tournament rule poker Quote:
Main pot: 4 players Side pot 1: 3 players Side pot 2: 2 players Then side pot 2 would be resolved first followed by side pot 1 followed finally by the main pot. And the online sites do it this way as well. http://www.homepokertourney.com/robe..._-_TOURNAMENTS http://www.homepokertourney.com/allin_examples.htm And it isn't about when a player was eliminated in the hand. The person that started the hand (at any table in the tournament even) with the most chips gets the higher finish. And it makes sense to do it that way as well. The shorter stack can never eliminate the larger stack on a single hand, so in the case where both short and middle are removed at the same time the extra credit is given to the middle stack that was eliminated by a larger stack but would never have been eliminated by the shorter stack. In fact, this rule isn't just about sidepots either. This is also why they have hand-for-hand play on the bubble. When you're on the bubble playing hand-for-hand and one person is eliminated at each of three different tables to bust the bubble, of those three the one that started with the fewest chips will be the bubble boy and the other two will cash. |
|
#22 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
It's probably the most important thing I got drilled into me when I was learning to deal. Do it any other way, and pots start getting given to the wrong people. Quote:
Last edited by OzExorcist : 12th February 2009 at 3:27 AM. Reason: added splitting last place bit |
|
#23 | ||||
| ||||
| This sounds like it went down by the book, I am fascinated by the Aussie Millions split pot deal though. I would like to know if they are just weird in Australia or if it was simply them not tracking stacks across multiple tables... |
|
#24 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
|
|
#25 | ||||
| ||||
| That is a good question. Do they actually tally the stack size of all the players at each table when they go out? I just don't see how they could logistically handle all the tables at once. I have not participated in a large live tournament so I would be interested to see how they do it. |
|
#26 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
Okay, so I think I get it now. The hand winner had over 1600 chips to start. He beat the pair with 1600 chips first. But that fact was of no consequence as far as her finishing next. All that mattered was that the 1500 chip OP finished in the same hand. And thanks JD: "The shorter stack can never eliminate the larger stack on a single hand, so in the case where both short and middle are removed at the same time the extra credit is given to the middle stack that was eliminated by a larger stack but would never have been eliminated by the shorter stack." That's what I thought. I was just trying to envision the scenario in the OP. If the hand winner had just 500 chips before the hand, what would happen? He'd win the main pot of 1500 (500 from each of you), and the sidepot is just the OP (with 1500 and a set) & the other woman (with a pair) - the OP would have 1000 chips in the side pot and win 2000 (meaning just 1000 from the woman with the pair & 1600), and she'd be left with 100 chips. Is this correct? |
|
#27 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
Quote:
Mid stack (MS) = 1600 Small stack (SS) = 1500 Main pot contains 1500 chips from all three. SS is all in and can only win the main pot. Main Pot = 4500 chips Side pot contains MS's last 100 chips plus 100 more chips from BS. MS can possibly win both side pot and main pot. Side Pot = 200 chips. At showdown MS and BS determine side pot winner. Someone gets those $200 chips, then the mainpot winner is determined and someone then gets those $4500 chips. |
|
#28 | ||||
| ||||
| re: Unfair PS tournament rule poker Placing is Always by chip count when All In. I have never seen it done any differently. Sometimes this can work to your advantage if low stacked and you win the hand, or sitout to let someone else get eliminated. Hand strength doesn't matter, as you both Lost. As with any hand it does not matter who had the second highest hand, unless there is a side pot where you have More chips than another player. Anytime you have Less chips than any other player and Lose you just Lose, there is no Second best. Tournament payouts have always been based on chip count when multiple players are All In as far as I know. Good Luck and Good Games! Last edited by Jack Daniels : 12th February 2009 at 5:29 PM. Reason: consecutive posting |
|
#29 | ||||
| ||||
| FYP for the scenario I just gave. It will be the best way for me to be sure I understand it. So let's say..... Quote:
"Okay, so I think I get it now. The hand winner had over 1600 chips to start. He beat the pair with 1600 chips first (the sidepot). But that fact was of no consequence as far as her finishing next. All that mattered was that the 1500 chip OP finished in the same hand." Thanks again. Sorry for being so dense. |
|
#30 | |||||
| |||||
| Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#31 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
|
|
#32 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#33 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
|
|
#34 | ||||
| ||||
| Quote:
Basically I sort of justified the rule that way to myself and it makes perfect sense, basically because once the main pot is done the players with no chips left can not win any more side pots and thus if another player now goes bust in a side pot the player with no opportunity to put money in the side pot goes bust first. No matter which way you put it though it makes sense that the smallest chip stack is the one to go out first if two go out on the same hand. |
|
#35 | ||||
| ||||
| re: Unfair PS tournament rule poker Wow, Thanks for this head up. Probably something I should have known, but a good point. If they had more money than you it doesn't matter if it is one dollar or a thousand. They had more when you went out so you get the lower position. I will have to remember that towards the bubble and calling someone all-in. Again, thanks for that heads-up! |
| Similar Threads for: Unfair PS tournament rule > Texas Hold'em Poker | ||||
| Thread | Replies | Last Post | Forum | Thread Starter |
| Tournament Rule Question | 25 | 2nd February 2012 1:48 PM | Tournament Poker | dakota-xx |
| Start your own Private Tournament on Full Tilt | 13 | 19th April 2011 5:11 PM | Poker Rooms | sheesho |
| canot connect to FT | 13 | 18th January 2011 2:00 PM | Poker Rooms | telboy |
Number of Posts: 38
Number of Authors: 23