Combining Tables Policy

In tournament poker, as you near the money or approach a difference in the prize money payout, a procedure known as dealing "hand-for-hand" is utilized to ensure as much fairness as possible when more than one table is still in play. It means that players at all remaining tables will be dealt an equal number of hands until the next payout level and/or the final table is reached.

The primary reason for dealing hand for hand is to prevent stalling. Stalling is something that some players might do in an attempt to give themselves an edge in making it to the money. Stalling aggravates most players, as it slows down play, causes fewer hands to be played per level, and takes the fun out of the game.

Let me give you an example. Suppose a tournament paid nine places, 10 players remained, and there were five players at each table. If the players at table A were playing 10 hands an hour and the players at table B were playing 30-40 hands an hour, it is most likely that someone from table B would be eliminated quicker than someone from table A. The point is, a hand-for-hand policy is needed. Without it, the players at table A (the "stallers") would have a better chance of making it to the money than the players at table B.

At some tournaments, the hand-for-hand policy has not been used. Such was the case at a recent tournament. What happened there was that when play reached 10 players, rather than play with five players at each table and go hand-for-hand until someone was eliminated, all 10 players were moved to the final table.

Combining tables at 10 players and not going hand-for-hand seems like a bad idea to me for a number of reasons. In the $10,000 buy-in championship event, for example, only nine players were paid. Thus, in my mind, to make the money, you had to get to the final table. Under this "combining tables system," someone made the final table and did not get paid. A larger concern for me, however, is that the short stacks are rewarded by converting to a final table with 10 players.

Shorthanded poker brings forth the best players, in my opinion. Because more hands are played and more decisions are made when playing shorthanded, more skill is involved. To win a tournament, you need to demonstrate shorthanded skills. Why shouldn't players have to demonstrate these skills to get to the final table as well as at the final table?

Short stacks are rewarded when tables are combined because they can "hide" in a 10-handed game. It benefits them because the blinds don't come around very often. The combining tables system also creates more reason for the short stacks to stall when play reaches about 15 players. They know that if they can get to 10 players, the value of their short stacks increases substantially.

At this recent tournament, I was standing next to Mark Seif as they combined tables with 10 players left. I asked him what he thought about combining tables with 10 players remaining in a tournament. He said, "This is horrible. They are rewarding the short stacks and punishing the big stacks by doing this. Players should have to earn their way to the final table by playing shorthanded. It is the ultimate test of skill in poker."

To be fair, Mark is a very aggressive player, and playing shorthanded suits his style, so his answer didn't surprise me. So, to get a broader viewpoint and some insider input about combining tables, I called over two players who made it to the final table, Thor Hansen and T.J. Cloutier. They both agreed that doing this was not fair to the chip leaders and that it rewarded the short stacks. Let me add that Thor (a very solid player, but is not known for his aggressiveness, and was the second-lowest stack at the time) acknowledged that it was a policy that greatly benefited him and his style of play, but he still thought it was wrong and wasn't fair to the chip leaders.

The tournament director was Matt Savage. Matt, an excellent tournament director, apparently believes going hand-for-hand slows down play and disrupts the flow of the game. I believe play is expedited, not impeded, when a final table is established by playing five at one table and five at the other (rather than going to a 10-handed game). It is also fair, in that each table has the same number of players; thus, the blinds and antes are the same for everyone each round. And if delays seem to be a problem when going hand-for-hand, tournament directors can easily add a little more time on the clock.

It seems to me, and the players with whom I spoke, that this combining tables policy might be one to reconsider.

Take care.

Mike Sexton is the host of PartyPoker.com and a commentator on the World Poker Tour.