MTT - Table Balancing

WHITEADDER

Hello all,

I have played on sky for some time now and it seems that when I am in a MTT tournament and doing well I seem to be 'balanced' on a new table with other big stacks!

On many occasions this week I have been doing well in a tournament, for example, 5/150 @ blinds 100/200. Then I knock someone out and end up on a table with stacks 1st, 2nd and 4th, so 4 out of 5 big stacks are on the same table?!?

Just wondering what table balancing actually means and also whether anyone else in the community has experienced similar circumstances.

I thought a ideal balanced table would be a few average stacks, followed by a couple above and a couple below average?

Please let me know.

Kind regards,

Adder

K0BAYASHl

Although I don't know the answer to your question. I do know that people say it's good to be on a table with more chips because it means you can win more.

MynaFrett

@WHITEADDER I know what you mean, it is very annoying when this happens. I think in online poker (or at least on Sky Poker) the balancing just refers to the redistribution of players to make the tables balanced in terms of numbers of players at each table. I think it is more or less a random redistribution and the number of chips an individual has or the total number of chips at any one table is not considered/recognised.

@K0BAYASHl spoken like a true cash game player In tournaments, and especially in Bounty Hunters, the more players you cover at your table the better and the fewer big stacks that can do real damage to your stack (or worse still, cover you and can knock you out) the better too. Being able to run over your table and not having to worry about clashing with other big stacks is a huge plus in tournaments- especially in the bounty hunting format that prevails on Sky. It's preferable to have a 60bb stack at a table with 5 other players who each have sub 20bb stacks than to have 60bb at another table which has 3 other 60bb+ stacks... even though the second table has far more chips in play.

MattBates

People think balanced means balanced in terms of stacks. All it means is balanced in terms of number of players at each table.

Tikay10

As @MattBates said, "table balancing" does not in any way refer to stack sizes, it's just keeping, as far as possible, the same number of players on each table.

Landing on a table full of big/small stacks, hotpots/roflers, players with 10/zero bounties is just the rub of the green, exactly the same as your starting table is rub of the green, you get good ones, bad ones & so-so ones.

I have no idea exactly how the algorithm that takes care of table balancing works, but I can guarantee that stack sizes is not in the equation.

PKRPar

I hate it when I get to a table and there are at least 3 green rings round player names. (my signal for a good player). I'm praying for a table switch and some red rings...

obiron

When I used to run amatuer pub tournaments the table balancing policy was that each table had been assigned a number. Tables were unbalanced when the table with the largest number of players had two more players than the table with the lowest number of players or when there were enough free slots to close a table and leave at least one free seat at each table (10 player tables).

UTG would go to the next table with a higher number (or table 1 if they were the highest number table) that needed balancing and take the first free seat closest to the BB, UTG+1 would then go to the 2nd highest table and take the first free seat.

Initial table allocations and seat numbers were random, and the reallocation to a new table was random by virtue of where the button was when the table was rebalanced.

I would hope that online rooms do somthing similar