[Guma]

I run a once a month poker league. I am only able to seat 30 players for a tournament. This month a husband a wife have asked me if they can share a seat. Meaning he plays a round then she plays a round. Not helping each other when one is playing.

Here are some details...
1. They both want to play but replied too late and only have a seat for one.
2. They are going on vacation next week and want to save money - Buyin is $60
3. They are both dead money - I have only seen him cash once in a tournament in the 3 years I have played with him and never seen her cash.

My take - I am usually a softy for things like this but I run my tournaments and league very professionally and fairly strict and do not want to sway from that. Everyone that plays in my tournamets knows exactly what to expect when they show up to play. Don't get me wrong I am no dictator, but very adament on what happens in my poker room. With money involved I feel it has to be done this way to make it fair for everyone involved. In my head I think I have already decided to not let this happen even if it means he bails from the tournament and I have to fill an empty seat before Sat evening.

I just want to hear a few other opinions before I reply to his email.

[imthatguy]

That sounds beyond lame, and puts everyone else at a disadvantage.

[Big Mike]

I'm not sure it puts anyone at a disadvantage, but I don't think I'd allow that.
It would only be an advantage if it were a very long tourney, and fatigue could be a factor.

Quick Edit:

Actually, now I realize the advantage they could have, of playing different styles, making it tougher for others to read that seat's play.
Countering that would be their own disadvantage of missing out on rounds of reads/observation of the other opponents. But perhaps they wouldn't be doing that anyway.

[OutOfCrown]

I would never allow this. It changes the game. You would have a chipstack that is being played by a player who can change gears quite drastically every round.

It's not immediately clear to me who this puts at advantage/disadvantage, but it definitely changes the dynamics of the game.

Tournament entries, like spouses, should not be shared.

[Harlequin011]

not a chance.

I feel for them, as friends. But you've only got one seat.

It sets a precedent too.

If BW and I got in on that deal it would be ugly for the tourney. Shes good a building a stack and I play annoying big stack bully when I've got chips. And once you offer it to one couple you'd need to offer it to everyone.

Sorry, but there has to be a sacrifice here.

[Irish Se7en]

I wouldn't allow it if I was you. One can play and the other can be a railbird if that's allowed. It seems from your post that you run a professional type game more than a home style game. The other players probably expect nothing but a well run game and a situation like this may detract from it.

GL


Irish

[Buzzerbeater]

I see three options.

1)Tell them that one of them can't play.
2)Stick the other one at another table 11 handed and then balance after the first knockout.
3)Let one of them play as an alternate and give them the first empty seat (maybe within the first couple of rounds.

[Guma]

So far everyone has commented on exacty what I was already thinking. I don't want to ruin the integrity of my tournaments nor do I want to set any kind of precedence where I show any leniency in the rules.

Thanks!

[Hopin2Steal]

I would have no issue with it but:
1. My games are way more lax. Likely because
a. There's never more than 10 people
b. The buy-in is low
c. The tourney is not set-up to be professional.

However, what you said makes perfect sense. Have one play and the other play in the side cash game when people bust out.

[Guma]

Well I sent him a very polite email and come to find out he completely understood. He is still going to donate his money and she will watch from rail and join the cash game when it gets started.

All is well at the Tarheel Poker Club!