Short Buys and Poker Associations

While playing in a $30-$60 hold'em game recently, I witnessed something that got me thinking. Why do poker rooms allow short buys?

I had been in the game for about three hours, and there had been lots of movement in the game, with players moving to other tables and new players coming and going. At one point, a local player (I will call him "Shortie") who grinds it out by playing tight poker sat down in the No. 1 seat. He played for about two hours on his initial $500 buy-in and then went broke. He pulled out $200 and placed it on the table. The $200 lasted about 20 minutes before he went broke again. He then pulled out $300 and placed it on the table. This particular poker room allows one short buy, so I said something to the dealer. The dealer had just pushed into the game and was not aware that Shortie had already made a short buy. After confirming it with the other players, the dealer told Shortie that he would have to buy in for the full minimum buy-in, $500. The player took out $500 and continued to play. Within 15 minutes, Shortie had only about $200 in front of him, and he had not played a single hand. I knew that he had put a few hundred back into his pocket, but I couldn't prove it, so I didn't say anything. A new dealer pushed into the game, and Shortie went broke again and tried to make another short buy. I waited a few minutes to see if anyone else would say anything, but no one did. So, I informed the dealer that he had already made one short buy. The dealer asked him if that was true, and, of course, he said, "No." At that point, a few other players chimed in and said he had. The player then left the table.

I left the room a few hours later, and on my way out, I noticed that Shortie was in another $30-$60 hold'em game with a short stack. I watched for about 10 minutes as he went broke and made a short buy.

Short buys should not be allowed, it's that simple. I imagine the reason they are allowed is so that players don't have to leave a game if they don't have the minimum buy-in. By allowing a short buy, poker rooms are asking for problems, because there really is no way to control a player who continuously tries to take shots by moving tables or attempting short buys when new dealers come into a game. By not allowing short buys, players will know that they have to buy in for the minimum, and that if they don't have a full buy-in in their pocket, they had better get it on the table before they go broke.

Moving on to a different subject, my colleague Roy Cooke recently wrote a very thoughtful column about the need for a poker association. This idea is actually something I have thought about over the years, but never had enough energy to put much more into it. Roy detailed the reasons an association is needed and how it should be set up. After reading his column, I was made aware that there is already an association in the works that pretty much follows exactly what Roy had described. It's the U.S. Poker Association, and it will work, but only if players support it 100 percent and help to make it grow. No association is successful without the industry's support, and I recommend that all players, dealers, and others associated with poker make an attempt to put their support behind this association. Although it is in the preliminary stages of development, the association already has its goals defined and has laid them out on its website, www.foruspa.org. Poker is growing like no one ever imagined, and an association is the logical next step to bringing the industry together and ensuring that there is uniformity in rules and that the voices of everyone involved are heard.