Big Blind Ante Rules

3/18/2022 admin

Nothing seems to confuse new Texas hold 'em players more than the blinds. Let's sort it out.

Big Blind Ante Rules
Big Blind Ante Rules Tda
Wsop Big Blind Ante Rules
Big Blind Rule
How Does Big Blind Ante Work

I used to play stud and draw poker with neighbors. I don't still play, but like to read about poker strategy. Would you please explain how the big blind and little blind work in hold 'em? I'm sure many of us who read LuckyDog have no idea. — Dale H., Kankakee, Ill.

In regards to payouts, if two players are all-in at same table and one is in the Big Blind, (a) the Big Blind gets credit for ante first, (b) the player out of the big blind gets full credit for ante, and (c) the ante is considered dead in the pot. Dealers, staff, and players alike have universally claimed how much easier and more efficient it is.

$150 Buy-In – 12:15pm. 12,000 chips. No-Limit Texas Hold’Em. 12,000 chips. 20 minute levels. Registration opens day of tournament at 9am. Late Registration and Re-entries open until the end of the 6th level. $150 buy-in: $120 - prize pool, $20 - entry fee, $10 - Staff appreciation.
Blinds can not be made up between the big blind and the button. A new player must wait until the button passes. See Explanations, discussion #3, for more information on this rule.

Well, Dale, since I had the same question this month from John, a co-worker of mine in Moline, Ill., it's a good time to explain the blinds in hold 'em.

Think of the blinds as antes used to stimulate betting and initiate play. There's one key difference: Unlike stud and draw poker, in which every player must pay the same pre-determined ante before each deal, in hold 'em only the first two players to the left of the dealer position have to post a blind.

The dealer for each hand is designated by a round disk called a button. Except for the first betting round, the player with the dealer button gets to act last throughout the hand. On the first betting round, the two players in the blinds act after the button, then are first to act on remaining betting rounds.

The button moves clockwise one position for each new hand. That rotates the advantage of last action and assures that for every circuit of the button around the table, each player will pay the two blinds once. The little blind usually is half the amount of the big blind.

Here's an example:

You're in seat five of a nine-handed $4-$8 limit hold 'em cash game and the dealer button reaches seat three. That means you are in the big blind position and must put $4 in front of you before the cards are dealt. The player to your right in seat four must post the $2 small blind.

Two down cards are then dealt to each player, starting with the small blind. On the first betting round, action starts with the player to your left in seat six, a position called 'under the gun,' meaning first to act.

From the big blind, you are last to act before the flop. If no one has raised (to $8 in this case) when the action gets back around to you, you have two options — you can check, since you're already in for the $4 bet, or you can raise to $8. Don't fold. Even a lousy 7-2 offsuit can turn into quads on a perfect flop!

If someone raises before the action gets back to you pre-flop, you have three options: fold and forfeit your $4; call the additional $4, or re-raise by betting $8 more for a total of $12.

After the flop, the betting rotation changes. The player in the small blind on your right acts first for the rest of the hand, then you. If he has folded, you're first to act each round until the hand ends.

On the next hand, the button moves to seat four. Now you're in the small blind position and must post $2 before the deal. To stay in the hand, you must match the bet amount when it's your turn ($2 more if no one raises). Or you can fold, losing your $2 small blind.

On the next hand, you get the dealer button and can see your starting hands for free until it's time to post the blinds again.

We'll tackle playing strategies from the blind positions in a future column, Dale and John, but for now here are some other things to know:

— Some card rooms play hold 'em with a 'dead' button. That means the big blind is posted by the seated player due for it, and the small blind and button are positioned accordingly, whether or not players actually are seated there to receive a hand. This gives last-action advantage to a player on consecutive hands.

— If you miss paying one or both blinds, you must post the appropriate amount when you return or sit out until the big blind position advances to you. If you post mid-circuit, you still must pay the blinds when they reach you a few hands later in that round.

— When joining a game in progress, some card rooms require that you post the big blind amount if you want to be dealt in right away. You can choose to sit out until the big blind position reaches you normally, which is a good option because you can watch a few hands risk-free and get a feel for the table's action.

— In heads-up play using two blinds, the small blind is on the button. That player acts first before the flop and last on each subsequent betting round.

E-mail your poker questions and comments to [email protected] for use in future columns. To find out more about Russ Scott and read previous LuckyDog Poker columns, visit www.creators.com or www.luckydogpoker.com.

In an effort to speed up the game, poker tournaments are experimenting with a tweaked process for posting antes called the “Big Blind Ante.”

In Big Blind Ante games, instead of each player posting an ante at the beginning of a hand, the BB antes for the entire table.

So far, players overwhelmingly like the big blind ante format. Not only does it speed up the game, it also eliminates the need to keep small denomination chips in play past their usefulness.

But not everything is peachy keen with the new structure.

A debate over what comes first, the ante or the blind bets players are required to post at the start of each hand, has overtaken Poker Twitter.

The debate almost exclusively involves high-stakes poker players and tournament directors, with the two sides arguing player preference vs. fairness.

The two sides of the debate

Poker players are focused on what players would prefer, citing the disappointment an extremely short-stacked player would feel if they were only capable of winning their chips back (the antes) in an all-in situation.

Tournament directors are more interested in changing the long-established norm of antes being posted before the blinds, and whether or not doing the opposite is “fair” to everyone.

The conversation is mainly centered around a situation where a player is extremely short-stacked, and the two radically different outcomes that ante-first or big-blind-first create:

Ante 1st scenario. pic.twitter.com/scZaRLqDnm

— Willie Elliot (@Willie_Hmmm) March 18, 2018

BB 1st scenario. pic.twitter.com/sGpW0ZJHaL

— Willie Elliot (@Willie_Hmmm) March 18, 2018

Considering the infrequency and insignificance of the scenario, it may seem trivial. However, there is an important component to this conversation most people are overlooking: game integrity.

Game integrity

In the BB ante format, the big blind is posting the antes for the entire table. That means that each player at the table owes that player a single ante, and the debt is paid when they are in the big blind and pay the antes for the table.

Steve Badger did a good job explaining one scenario where game integrity could be compromised if the ante is considered before the big blind on Twitter:

And it’s not simply a potential issue in unlikely end-of-game scenarios.

Imagine the same all-in situation only it’s the first-hand of a nine-handed single-table-tournament, where each player starts with 100 chips, and there is a two-chip small blind, a four-chip big blind, and a one-chip ante.

On the first hand, each player should have an equal number of chips, but that’s not the case. The big blind is short eight chips that have been “lent” to the other players at the table. In an all-in situation, the big blind is unduly penalized, since they can’t win any other player’s entire stack.

Further, if the BB is eliminated they would never have an opportunity to recoup the chips they are still owed.

If the BB calls an all-in their effective stack is 91 chips (4 chips from the blind and 87 remaining in their stack). On the flip side, the other players are playing a stack of 100 chips. The under-the-gun player can win 102 chips — the 15 chips in the pot plus 87 chips from their opponent — leaving the losing player with nine chips.

Now fast forward a few hands. Suppose the losing player was the small blind and is now the big blind. In an ante-first scenario they would first have to obligate their debts to the other players and would only be able to win the nine chips they ante. In the BB-first scenario they would be eligible to win the blinds, four chips from any player who calls, and the partial five-chip ante they posted.

Ante-first with three callers: All-in player wins 9 chips.
BB-first with three callers: All-in player wins 23 chips.

Yes, this is great for the short-stack, but how should the original BB feel about this player that should have been eliminated now sitting on 23 chips and only partially paying their antes? In practice this player shorting the antes means they managed to avoid paying antes for four of the ninee hands that were played.

In no other part of the casino would this be allowed to happen. If you can’t cover the main bet on a table game you’re not allowed to put money on the jackpot bet.

Considering the lending component and the possibility of unfairness, I don’t know if big blind before ante would stand up to regulatory scrutiny, and if a gaming commission really wanted to be a stickler, the lending element of the BB ante format could also be disallowed – although I doubt a gaming commission would go that far.

The problem with fixing problems

What was implemented as a way to speed up the ante process has somehow turned into a debate over what’s more friendly for recreational players.

The big blind before antes side isn’t making the case from a game mechanic standpoint, in fact, the only logic for it is that it makes the short-stacked player feel better, hence it’s believed to be player-friendly and good for the game.

That may be true, and this issue may be inconsequential enough to not matter from a game integrity standpoint (although I’m not convinced it is), but that doesn’t make the “we don’t want a player to feel bad” argument a good one.

It seems to me they shouldn’t be given any extra advantage just because they can’t afford to pay what they are due to the pot.

— Willie Elliot (@Willie_Hmmm) March 18, 2018

Key takeaway #1

Even if “big blind first” is the best practice for players, it might not pass muster with gaming commissions, and we need to consider all of the different scenarios where a player may be able to game the system in some way.

Eliminating the requirement that new players post a blind or wait for the blind would also be “player-friendly,” but that rule is in place for a reason – people have found ways to take advantage of it and/or it’s simply unfair to the other players.

Key takeaway #2

In the grand scheme of things, none of this will likely matter. It looks like the BB ante structure is here to stay, and tournament directors and players will eventually hash out the chicken or the egg part of it with consideration given to player-friendliness and game fairness.

But to pretend this is just a matter of preference is wrong. There is a legitimate game integrity and fairness concern.