Table Balancing Works! - Or rather doesn't

The_Don90

While i respect this is supposed to be random, some common sense needs to be applied to table balancing with chips. Final 10 of an mtt, and attached is a picture of the largest and smallest stacks. 

This situation creates and awful dynamic in a tournament, on both tables. 

 

Tikay10

You cannot ever interfere with "random" when Table Balancing Don, you must know that from your TD days. It is what it is, some win, some lose.

Once you start "interfering" with random table balancing, it is a slippery slope. Imagine what the conspiracy theorists would say, too.....

Poker, in the short term, is often "unfair". It just is. But it cuts both ways, never forget that.   

The_Don90

In Response to Re: Table Balancing Works! - Or rather doesn't:

You cannot ever interfere with "random" when Table Balancing Don, you must know that from your TD days. It is what it is, some win, some lose. Once you start "interfering" with random table balancing, it is a slippery slope. Imagine what the conspiracy theorists would say, too..... Poker, in the short term, is often "unfair". It just is. But it cuts both ways, never forget that.    
Posted by Tikay10

Tikay while i fully respect this, and i have full standard, this one was one of the very few cases i feel need looking at. 

I know you cant see picture yet, but basically with 10 left the 5 shortest stacks where one one table, obviously that leaves 5 largest on the other. 

It created a horrid dynamic on both tables. 

Surely there would be a way to break that up (expessiually with 10/8 left) randomly and be fair. 

I'd also like to point out i am still in this mtt so not just complaining because i bust  

MattBates

Maybe look up the word random?

DOHHHHHHH

Mental Donald. 

You used to direct live tournaments, they must've been genuinely rigged if you were doing the draws. 

Slipwater

In Response to Re: Table Balancing Works! - Or rather doesn't:

Maybe look up the word random?
Posted by MattBates

This guy has a point.

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Table Balancing Works! - Or rather doesn't:

In Response to Re: Table Balancing Works! - Or rather doesn't : Tikay while i fully respect this, and i have full standard, this one was one of the very few cases i feel need looking at.  I know you cant see picture yet, but basically with 10 left the 5 shortest stacks where one one table, obviously that leaves 5 largest on the other.  It created a horrid dynamic on both tables.  Surely there would be a way to break that up (expessiually with 10/8 left) randomly and be fair.  I'd also like to point out i am still in this mtt so not just complaining because i bust  
Posted by The_Don90

I'm sorry Don, but not in a million years could that ever even be contemplated.

Random is random, & has to be exactly that.

Sometimes poker seems unfair, but it cuts both ways.

Good grief at the mere thought of messing with random table balancing. Once you start where do you stop? 

It's like saying K-K into A-A is unfair, let's change things so that never happens.

It's poker, & exactly the same Live & Online.

I'm astonished you want to interfere with the natural order of things.   

Slipwater

Don - you can't be both 'random' and step in to amend the positions.

You do know that, right?

CraigSG1

I dont believe table balancing is random regarding players, IMO it balances chip stacks. 

Slipwater

In Response to Re: Table Balancing Works! - Or rather doesn't:

I dont believe table balancing is random regarding players, IMO it balances chip stacks. 
Posted by CraigSG1

It doesn't do that either, Craig.

It is random.

The_Don90

I'll get my coat

Tbf Tikay when I did tournament director stuff it was pub games, small player pools and don't think I ever seen a situation like this, even as a player. 

DOHHHHHHH

In Response to Re: Table Balancing Works! - Or rather doesn't:

I'll get my coat Tbf Tikay when I did tournament director stuff it was pub games, small player pools and don't think I ever seen a situation like this, even as a player. 
Posted by The_Don90

Then either you didn't direct enough tournaments (bigger sample size, more likely to see it) or you weren't doing your job right!

Probably both. 

stuarty117

For tables to balance Correctly: -

Fold a A4 sheet of paper 4 to 5 times

Stick it under one leg

Give it a test, adjust if needed with another piece of paper on opposite leg.

BOOM, table is now balanced no need for randomness

susansue

In Response to Re: Table Balancing Works! - Or rather doesn't:

In Response to Re: Table Balancing Works! - Or rather doesn't : Then either you didn't direct enough tournaments (bigger sample size, more likely to see it) or you weren't doing your job right! Probably both. 
Posted by DOHHHHHHH

if only we could all be like mr life perfect doh lol !

FlyingDagg

Don I had the same situation a year or 2 ago. It was either 8 or 10 left with top 5 on one table (including me) and bottom 5 on other. We had 75% of the chips on our table. I asked the very same question thinking table balancing was supposed to balance the chipstacks.
 Tommy D posted a really good explanation of why it would work out like this. It made total sense even to a non Mathematician like me.

Slykllist

In Response to Re: Table Balancing Works! - Or rather doesn't:

Maybe look up the word random?
Posted by MattBates

This!

Tikay10

I drive home straight after the UKPC, which took 3 hours, & this thread kept niggling way in my mind, & I could not fathom why, but then the penny dropped.

How long has this Forum been going? 7 & a half years? Call it 2,500 days.

On average, I'd say, once a day someone posts on here "Sky poker is fixed, they rig the software" sorta thing.

A few weeks ago there was a new variation - an accusation of manual RNG intervention. (!)

I had this vision of a small army of little chaps up in Head Office, monitoring all the Tables to make sure the "right" guys won or lost. 

But this thread broke new ground - suggesting Sky Poker SHOULD rig the software!

Every day, something different, something new. Truly breathtaking stuff.

Not having a dig Don, honest, I just look at things in an obverse way sometimes to try & make sense of them, & this thread really piqued my interest. In this case, it was "OK, lets think through what was suggested, & see where it takes me".
 
As you were, carry on.   

robertod

surely the dynamic of the table doesn,t effect the up and down straight draw or otherwise the short stacks would all 4 bet with semi bluffs without being penalized for slowplaying rockets on a rainbow board with implied equity in a coinflip when its down to 6 players...

DoubleAAA

In Response to Re: Table Balancing Works! - Or rather doesn't:

Maybe look up the word random?
Posted by MattBates

extract from wiki regarding rngs:

Several computational methods for random number generation exist. Many fall short of the goal of true randomness — though they may meet, with varying success, some of the statistical tests for randomness intended to measure how unpredictable their results are (that is, to what degree their patterns are discernible). However, carefully designed cryptographically secure computationally based methods of generating random numbers do exist, such as those based on the Yarrow algorithm and the Fortuna (PRNG) and others.

So, is the table balancing done by 'true randomness? You maybe on to something here Don

hhyftrftdr

Don, why was the table situation an awful dynamic? Whilst it might not have been ideal, surely adjusting to your table is a pretty key element of poker?

Ice_Tiger

Whilst it is frustrating when the five biggest stacks are on one table, the alternative is to cheat the randomness. Once you accept that, you are on a slippery slope towards rigging poker. That is slope that the majority (including SKY Poker) don't want to go down.