Live MTT ruling. Blinds misposted.

I don't know the "correct" ruling. As you say, that hand is done and gone and should not be reversed. My ruling would be you are the button in seat 3, seat 4 has to post the BB and BBA, and seat 5 is the SB. Hand after that, seat 4 is the button and posts a SB, seat 5 posts nothing, and seat 6 posts the BB and BBA. After that, all is back to normal. And all of you get a KITN for not paying attention.

Couldn't find anything in the rules covering this specific situation. The only thing I could find was about disputing the reading of the hand before or the pot from the hand before, and it seems that he spoke up in time to meet those obligations.

What I might do as TD is give seat 5 the bb+bb ante from seat 4's stack, since he was supposed to forfeit that amount anyway. Yes he will essentially be paying an extra BB ante when you do the math, but that's kind of his fault for not paying attention, and this allows the game to go through as smoothly as possible.

I kind of like greg's idea but it would mean I would have to sit there as the floor and make sure the dealer executes my instructions properly, which when the dealer made such a big mess up I'm not sure I trust them to do it.

Why not? This is an unusual situation that isn't clearly covered in the rules. I don't think it's the best solution but it doesn't seem like the worst either.

IMO - Button in seat 3, seat 4 posts the SB and the BB + BBA for seat 5. In the end, everybody pays the appropriate amount just is a non-standard order.

+1 to a KITN to everybody. Yes, dealer error first and foremost, but there were 6-8 other people at the table that could and should have pointed this out.

I've never seen this before and have never seen any official rule covering it. This is going to come down to the TD making a call, which could be anything from making 5 post BB+Ante again, having 4 give 5 an ante from their stack, or having seat 4 buy the button like it's a cash game.

I would probably lean towards having 5 post again and making 4 the SB. This is in line with the more common situations where it's realized too late that the button didn't move and someone paid BB twice or the button was moved twice and someone skipped the BB. I've always seen this be ignored and the button keeps moving normally. Too late to fix, pay attention next time.

I think nobody can take away seat 3's right to the button, simply the next in turn. Maybe we could just pull out both blinds from seat 4 and let seat 5 play for free, representing BB.

Assuming Seat 4 has not returned .. the first thing I thought of was using Seat 4's chips to 'post' Seat 5's (2nd) BB/Ante and also posting Seat 4's SB with Seat 3 on his natural B.

This is the least messy and allows the Floor to walk away. Yes, Seat 5 is on a bit of a BB Freeroll, but any consequences of that Freeroll really occurred in the previous hand when they should've been UTG .. not last to act PF. All the should've/could've are gone since the hand is complete. GL

PS .. Please, Please introduce a comment suggesting that Seat 5 was angling in the 1st hand .. lol ..

Define "normally". Did Seat 5 fold pre flop? Get more into the hand than that? Is Seat.4 back now?

My ruling would be a BB must be taken from seat 4 and given to the player who just won the pot because he should have been required to post his BB. Seat 4 would have to give the BB ante for the next hand (because Seat 5 had mistakenly posted it the hand before). Seat 4 would have to post the SB. Seat 5 would have to post his BB (but not the ante again) and would be the SB the following hand.

Seat 5 essentially limped blind in the prior hand and played the hand. Whether there was a raise and he folded or he got to see a flop, he played the hand and he could have won chips as a result. He shouldn't have been forced to post the BB ante so he should get that back (by making Seat 4 post it this hand).

Unless of course the dealer did not deal cards to Seat 4 in which case it was a misdeal and all bets must be returned.

Can’t have a misdeal on a hand that’s over

You can have a correction until the next hand has started to be dealt. If I was the Floor here and we were deciding who the BB is then I would allow for a correction on the prior hand.

You may be right because the BB wasn't actually there, but if the BB had been there even with significant action, when it was their turn to bet pre-flop I believe it would be declared a misdeal assuming they spoke up.

If the ruling were that the hand was allowable I would still require Seat 4's BB and BB ante to be contributed to the pot (and Seat 5 would receive back his BB ante he posted).

The rules say no misdeals if there's significant action; which after the hand is over there's clearly been significant action. I could see a floor maaaaaybe trying to Rule 1 it in the alternative situation where the "should have been BB" is there pre-flop depending on action, but who knows...

I was curious as to what happeneed during the hand, because I feel like the whole "refunding BB and BB ante" might be different based on what Seat 5 did during the hand, but after thinking some more; giving Seat 5 the BB ante from Seat 4 seems fine no matter what.

Zero chance we are taking chips from a stack after the hand is over, especially if they didn't have a live hand on the street the hand ended on. As per Rule, we don't go back and correct betting/chip discrepancies once we start the next street, much less the next hand. We should not be 'adding' to a pushed pot.

How can we say a Player 'called' blind and yet allow them to post an Ante? Calling is one thing, but posting dead chips is quite different IMO. Are we charging them the BB because it's not correctable anymore? Dealers send mis-posted BB back to Players all the time .. we're not going to start telling them that it's a dark limp. If Seat 5 had called dark then why did we give them an option PF?

We do need to leave how the action occurred and who won the pot out of our decision. GL