Another WSOB Update
- Thread starter KenSmith
- Start date
PhillyPhlash
New Member
Comment on the Mini-Controversy
A Thank You
I was at the WSOB qualifying events in the Las Vegas Hilton over January 23rd and 24th.
I participated and got within 3 hands of the WSOB.
I thank GSN and the WSOB and the Las Vegas Hilton folks for the opportunity to play. I enjoyed the format and the specific rules and the competition and the friendship.
Thanks ! ! !
An Observation
I recognize that GSN and the WSOB folks have the absolute right to determine who plays in their qualifiers, and for that matter who plays in the WSOB, by whatever means they choose. They don't have to have open qualifiers; they don't have to have invitational qualifiers; they don't have to have any qualifiers. They may choose whomever they wish by whatever manner they wish. PERIOD
Nonetheless, I find the "additional two qualifying tables" bothersome.
What is disturbing is the suspicion of secrecy, . . . the idea that something was going on behind the scenes which affected the selection process unfairly, . . . the idea that all players are equal, but some players are more equal than others.
I suggest once a contest organizer has decided to have open tournament competiton, he is best served by being absolutely upfront, forthright, open, and honest about the procedure. If after the competition even some players have the impression that favoritism was shown, . . . the organizers have lost something important, the perception that they are fair.
And clearly many players in this competition thought the single-winner-tables of open competitors on the 24th were the last chance tables for everyone. But they were not.
A Suggestion for the Future
If a contest organizer has, say, to determine who is to occupy the final 15 seats of a 40-player competition, here are 3 methods he may choose. I have taken the liberty to describe them as "Not-So-Good", "Better", "Best" based on the above observation.
__Not-So-Good
Offer open competition for 13 of the seats. Make no announcement about the remaining two seats; do not even make the existence of the final two seats public. Nonetheles, before the competition is done offer some select few the opportunity to compete for these two seats. After the open competition is complete, announce the select few who did not win and have an additional opportunity to win the two final seats. This creates distrust and a feeling among some that the fix was in all along. (As I had no knowledge of this process on the 24th I have no knowledge of the details. But whether it was, indeed, a mini-invititional tournament or that only a few competitors were invited onto a "wait list" does not change the perception of favoritism.)
__Better
If the organizer does have a preferred list of contestants whom they would like to see advance, offer open competion for 13 seats. And announce and conduct a mini-invitational tournament for the other two seats before the open competition. This grants the preferred contestants the intended additional opportunity. Such a mini-invitational might actually attract an audience of tournament players before they are scheduled to play. And the preferred contestants who win would free-up the seats they had purchased in the open competition to follow, creating some good will among the other players. But most importantly there would be no perception of underhanded behavior by the organizer.
__Best
Offer straightforward-with-no-surprises open competition for all 15 seats.
Final Word
Please reread A Thank You, above.
The above "Observation" and "Suggestion" are offered to improve tournament blackjack. Nothing more.
I am not angry. I have no grievance against the WSOB, GSN, or the LVH.
If an identical tournament opportunity were to arise again, I would enter again, . . .if they let me.
A Thank You
I was at the WSOB qualifying events in the Las Vegas Hilton over January 23rd and 24th.
I participated and got within 3 hands of the WSOB.
I thank GSN and the WSOB and the Las Vegas Hilton folks for the opportunity to play. I enjoyed the format and the specific rules and the competition and the friendship.
Thanks ! ! !
An Observation
I recognize that GSN and the WSOB folks have the absolute right to determine who plays in their qualifiers, and for that matter who plays in the WSOB, by whatever means they choose. They don't have to have open qualifiers; they don't have to have invitational qualifiers; they don't have to have any qualifiers. They may choose whomever they wish by whatever manner they wish. PERIOD
Nonetheless, I find the "additional two qualifying tables" bothersome.
What is disturbing is the suspicion of secrecy, . . . the idea that something was going on behind the scenes which affected the selection process unfairly, . . . the idea that all players are equal, but some players are more equal than others.
I suggest once a contest organizer has decided to have open tournament competiton, he is best served by being absolutely upfront, forthright, open, and honest about the procedure. If after the competition even some players have the impression that favoritism was shown, . . . the organizers have lost something important, the perception that they are fair.
And clearly many players in this competition thought the single-winner-tables of open competitors on the 24th were the last chance tables for everyone. But they were not.
A Suggestion for the Future
If a contest organizer has, say, to determine who is to occupy the final 15 seats of a 40-player competition, here are 3 methods he may choose. I have taken the liberty to describe them as "Not-So-Good", "Better", "Best" based on the above observation.
__Not-So-Good
Offer open competition for 13 of the seats. Make no announcement about the remaining two seats; do not even make the existence of the final two seats public. Nonetheles, before the competition is done offer some select few the opportunity to compete for these two seats. After the open competition is complete, announce the select few who did not win and have an additional opportunity to win the two final seats. This creates distrust and a feeling among some that the fix was in all along. (As I had no knowledge of this process on the 24th I have no knowledge of the details. But whether it was, indeed, a mini-invititional tournament or that only a few competitors were invited onto a "wait list" does not change the perception of favoritism.)
__Better
If the organizer does have a preferred list of contestants whom they would like to see advance, offer open competion for 13 seats. And announce and conduct a mini-invitational tournament for the other two seats before the open competition. This grants the preferred contestants the intended additional opportunity. Such a mini-invitational might actually attract an audience of tournament players before they are scheduled to play. And the preferred contestants who win would free-up the seats they had purchased in the open competition to follow, creating some good will among the other players. But most importantly there would be no perception of underhanded behavior by the organizer.
__Best
Offer straightforward-with-no-surprises open competition for all 15 seats.
Final Word
Please reread A Thank You, above.
The above "Observation" and "Suggestion" are offered to improve tournament blackjack. Nothing more.
I am not angry. I have no grievance against the WSOB, GSN, or the LVH.
If an identical tournament opportunity were to arise again, I would enter again, . . .if they let me.
Its silly to think anyone is complaining about more and better events in any BJ tournament...
I pointed out that certain players, faces receive extra chances into what is promoted as a true championship game when in fact by giving only select players extra chances they devalue the show...it truely becomes a game show about BJ...nothing more.
Certainly WSOBJ could keep the same 20 faces and play fake games over and over and not open it up...but by keeping it so select you create only false champions....nothing real about it at all... you dont think people will catch on to that after a while??? And that format will remain interesting why???
Give the man some honest comment so he can tune the format to something that is popular and real. Those that think watching the same 20 faces in a set up match will somehow create an attraction to the format and the game are deceiving yourselves...
Would you play events where certain players are allowed rebuys while other players are not? Would your chance to win be affected by that? Who would the odds favor?
I understrand some positive comments here are simply made as a desire to be invited into the next set up game...thats fine. But after you win...please dont be writting books and promoting yourself as Champion...unless you intend to list it as fiction.
The show will become popular with true champions...not made up, set up champions.
This game is like watching the Harlem Globttrotters exhibition games...talanted people, good fun,etc...but I dont wanna watch it all the time. And I would never watch it if they tried to pass it off as a true Championship game...
So far there has been 0 (zero) championship Black Jack tournaments played on TV....they have all been made for tv game shows...I think poker did it the other way around....first have legitimate games and create champions then maybe later have a select stars show....
Im not concerned about fair...its about being real that will win an audience and make the game legit....
A true Champion (or a legitimate star) does not need nor should they receive extra chances into the big game...
In the old days they use to feed the answers to "special" players on certain TV game shows...they wanted to control the production and help a popular player..that is until the public found out about it...the fraud eventially destroyed the game show...
I dont see how this trick can be good for the game...the fact that there was an entry fee is meaningless...it cheapens the game and gives certain players extra chances over the real players who didnt receive the extra chances...
Maybe certain players should get 2 power chips each game??? Or would that be ok too?? Hey maybe they could charge $2,500 for the extra power chip...
Just saying I think its best to keep it real man....Fair not fake will best serve the game.
I pointed out that certain players, faces receive extra chances into what is promoted as a true championship game when in fact by giving only select players extra chances they devalue the show...it truely becomes a game show about BJ...nothing more.
Certainly WSOBJ could keep the same 20 faces and play fake games over and over and not open it up...but by keeping it so select you create only false champions....nothing real about it at all... you dont think people will catch on to that after a while??? And that format will remain interesting why???
Give the man some honest comment so he can tune the format to something that is popular and real. Those that think watching the same 20 faces in a set up match will somehow create an attraction to the format and the game are deceiving yourselves...
Would you play events where certain players are allowed rebuys while other players are not? Would your chance to win be affected by that? Who would the odds favor?
I understrand some positive comments here are simply made as a desire to be invited into the next set up game...thats fine. But after you win...please dont be writting books and promoting yourself as Champion...unless you intend to list it as fiction.
The show will become popular with true champions...not made up, set up champions.
This game is like watching the Harlem Globttrotters exhibition games...talanted people, good fun,etc...but I dont wanna watch it all the time. And I would never watch it if they tried to pass it off as a true Championship game...
So far there has been 0 (zero) championship Black Jack tournaments played on TV....they have all been made for tv game shows...I think poker did it the other way around....first have legitimate games and create champions then maybe later have a select stars show....
Im not concerned about fair...its about being real that will win an audience and make the game legit....
A true Champion (or a legitimate star) does not need nor should they receive extra chances into the big game...
In the old days they use to feed the answers to "special" players on certain TV game shows...they wanted to control the production and help a popular player..that is until the public found out about it...the fraud eventially destroyed the game show...
I dont see how this trick can be good for the game...the fact that there was an entry fee is meaningless...it cheapens the game and gives certain players extra chances over the real players who didnt receive the extra chances...
Maybe certain players should get 2 power chips each game??? Or would that be ok too?? Hey maybe they could charge $2,500 for the extra power chip...
Just saying I think its best to keep it real man....Fair not fake will best serve the game.
RKuczek
Member
good comments Rando
Poker became popular because it exposed the general public to real, open, tournaments, with no gimmicks - just good straight poker - and let the game sell itself - so now we have every casino in the world running poker tournaments every week -
we have two indian casinos in Yuma - both run regular poker tourneys (at least weekly) - with prize pools up to $50,000 - for tbj we get one tournament at one casino each month - prize pool $5,000
WSOB and UBT aren't in the model of WSOP - the WSOP did not 'make poker exciting' by throwing in 'secret raises' or using jokers and wild cards or allowing players to change their cards in one hand per table or having 'forced all-in' hands or other silly gimmicks, nor did they limit competition to a small number of self promoting 'name' players. If you see Phil Helmuth at the final table of the WSOP almost every year - its because he won his way there through a field of thousands -
the WSOB is just a game show using an easy format (one advance out of five) mini-tournament - with people invited because they figure to draw as tv personalities - some of the invitees aren't very good players - more 'celebrity' players than competitive
winning or even making a final table in any tbj event is tough - there is a very big luck factor - much more so than in poker - but you put anyone into enough tourneys - they'll eventually make a final table - even win -
a lot of the self proclaimed 'pros' in tbj simply lucked out in a big tourney - got a final table and have been promoting themselves as 'pros' to get WSOB/UBT seats, tourney invites, etc. -
but lets be realistic - WSOBJ and UBT aren't about tournament bj - they are about making money for the promoters - GSN wants entertaining game shows - so uses a gimmicked up tbj format - and they invite colorful characters and pretty girls to play- the UBT promoters are trying to convince casinos to buy into their 'new style' bj tournaments - by using silly gimmicks and hiring 'name' players - mostly poker players and self promoting self-proclaimed pros - to shill for them - in the hopes that their 'made-for-tv' carnival game takes off - and they can rake in royalties
what will make tbj popular is not carnival made-for-tv games with 'colorful characters' who don't really know how to play - it's what made poker popular - a combination of honest open events - at all buy-in levels - spead throughout many casinos - where one can play a small event for a modest buy-in, up to a major event that costs thousands - and pays out accordingly - like poker tournaments - these need to be raked events and a profit center for the casino -
UBT and WSOBJ aren't it - and they will not make tbj popular and challenge poker - and winning these invite only events doesn't establish one as a tbj 'pro' anymore than winning a Laughlin mini does - in fact - winning a Laughlin mini is probably considerably harder than winning the WSOBJ or a UBT event - tougher format and better players on average at a Laughlin mini -
if tbj has a real future - it is when tourneys such as the ones Rick is trying to put together happen - if Rick's tourneys can convince more casinos to offer more open tbj events at different buy-in levels - and draw in enough players to encourage a few casinos to offer big money open events - then tbj might become more popular and we might get the type and range of tourneys we want -
Poker became popular because it exposed the general public to real, open, tournaments, with no gimmicks - just good straight poker - and let the game sell itself - so now we have every casino in the world running poker tournaments every week -
we have two indian casinos in Yuma - both run regular poker tourneys (at least weekly) - with prize pools up to $50,000 - for tbj we get one tournament at one casino each month - prize pool $5,000
WSOB and UBT aren't in the model of WSOP - the WSOP did not 'make poker exciting' by throwing in 'secret raises' or using jokers and wild cards or allowing players to change their cards in one hand per table or having 'forced all-in' hands or other silly gimmicks, nor did they limit competition to a small number of self promoting 'name' players. If you see Phil Helmuth at the final table of the WSOP almost every year - its because he won his way there through a field of thousands -
the WSOB is just a game show using an easy format (one advance out of five) mini-tournament - with people invited because they figure to draw as tv personalities - some of the invitees aren't very good players - more 'celebrity' players than competitive
winning or even making a final table in any tbj event is tough - there is a very big luck factor - much more so than in poker - but you put anyone into enough tourneys - they'll eventually make a final table - even win -
a lot of the self proclaimed 'pros' in tbj simply lucked out in a big tourney - got a final table and have been promoting themselves as 'pros' to get WSOB/UBT seats, tourney invites, etc. -
but lets be realistic - WSOBJ and UBT aren't about tournament bj - they are about making money for the promoters - GSN wants entertaining game shows - so uses a gimmicked up tbj format - and they invite colorful characters and pretty girls to play- the UBT promoters are trying to convince casinos to buy into their 'new style' bj tournaments - by using silly gimmicks and hiring 'name' players - mostly poker players and self promoting self-proclaimed pros - to shill for them - in the hopes that their 'made-for-tv' carnival game takes off - and they can rake in royalties
what will make tbj popular is not carnival made-for-tv games with 'colorful characters' who don't really know how to play - it's what made poker popular - a combination of honest open events - at all buy-in levels - spead throughout many casinos - where one can play a small event for a modest buy-in, up to a major event that costs thousands - and pays out accordingly - like poker tournaments - these need to be raked events and a profit center for the casino -
UBT and WSOBJ aren't it - and they will not make tbj popular and challenge poker - and winning these invite only events doesn't establish one as a tbj 'pro' anymore than winning a Laughlin mini does - in fact - winning a Laughlin mini is probably considerably harder than winning the WSOBJ or a UBT event - tougher format and better players on average at a Laughlin mini -
if tbj has a real future - it is when tourneys such as the ones Rick is trying to put together happen - if Rick's tourneys can convince more casinos to offer more open tbj events at different buy-in levels - and draw in enough players to encourage a few casinos to offer big money open events - then tbj might become more popular and we might get the type and range of tourneys we want -
Another Observation
Poker was pretty popular before it hit TV. It had people willing to watch from the start. TV, as history has shown, then catapulted this interest to unimagined levels.
BJ is going about it backward. BJ shows are trying to create interest by gimmicks and making it a "game show" rather than reality. The general public realizes that it's a choreographed "game show" and may watch it for "entertainment" only. Then they shut off the TV and say to themselves "I'm not interested in trying that any more than I'm willing to try to get on 'The Wheel of Fortune' ".
What I'm trying to say is somehow the interest in BJ tournaments at B&M casinos must be raised first then evolve into TV shows without gimmicks. How do you do this? I have no clue!!!
Poker was pretty popular before it hit TV. It had people willing to watch from the start. TV, as history has shown, then catapulted this interest to unimagined levels.
BJ is going about it backward. BJ shows are trying to create interest by gimmicks and making it a "game show" rather than reality. The general public realizes that it's a choreographed "game show" and may watch it for "entertainment" only. Then they shut off the TV and say to themselves "I'm not interested in trying that any more than I'm willing to try to get on 'The Wheel of Fortune' ".
What I'm trying to say is somehow the interest in BJ tournaments at B&M casinos must be raised first then evolve into TV shows without gimmicks. How do you do this? I have no clue!!!
Creating interest in TV blackjack tournaments
I watch televised poker tournaments because TV blackjack tournaments are not plentiful, and I want to learn how to make money playing poker. Seeing the players hole cards gives me some insight in their thinking as I watch the hands play out. I have also started watching the players faces and body language more than trying to keep track of their cards. There is usually a lot of speculation by the moderators (so called experts) as to what the players are thinking as they play their hands.
I am disappointed in TV Blackjack tournaments because there is seldom any discussion by the voice over moderators as to what the players are thinking except in computing bets to correlate and not be low BR on elimination hands. And, the players spend more energy trying to not be low BR instead of playing basic strategy and beating the dealer. I realize the elimination format drives their thinking.
For me the TV blackjack tournaments would be more interesting (dare I say this?) if different card counting methods were discussed and a running count was displayed as each hand was dealt. For instance the moderator could say, "Using the XXXXXX card counting method the count is +23 and approximately 2 decks are left in the shoe. There are only 3 players. This would be a good time for large bets. Lets see how much these players bet on this hand." The show would start with a short discussion of the counting/betting/basic strategy system being featured. A different system could be featured at each tournament. Different authors or experts in counting or "playing/betting systems" could sit with the moderator and comment on applying their ideas to the game in progress. This would give the general public some insight on how to approach the game at least in tournaments.
One last personal observation: Elimination Blackjack as shown on TV has too many "cute" features such as way too many secret bet options. The game has little in common with live blackjack played in most casinos and with the small tournaments I have played in.
I watch televised poker tournaments because TV blackjack tournaments are not plentiful, and I want to learn how to make money playing poker. Seeing the players hole cards gives me some insight in their thinking as I watch the hands play out. I have also started watching the players faces and body language more than trying to keep track of their cards. There is usually a lot of speculation by the moderators (so called experts) as to what the players are thinking as they play their hands.
I am disappointed in TV Blackjack tournaments because there is seldom any discussion by the voice over moderators as to what the players are thinking except in computing bets to correlate and not be low BR on elimination hands. And, the players spend more energy trying to not be low BR instead of playing basic strategy and beating the dealer. I realize the elimination format drives their thinking.
For me the TV blackjack tournaments would be more interesting (dare I say this?) if different card counting methods were discussed and a running count was displayed as each hand was dealt. For instance the moderator could say, "Using the XXXXXX card counting method the count is +23 and approximately 2 decks are left in the shoe. There are only 3 players. This would be a good time for large bets. Lets see how much these players bet on this hand." The show would start with a short discussion of the counting/betting/basic strategy system being featured. A different system could be featured at each tournament. Different authors or experts in counting or "playing/betting systems" could sit with the moderator and comment on applying their ideas to the game in progress. This would give the general public some insight on how to approach the game at least in tournaments.
One last personal observation: Elimination Blackjack as shown on TV has too many "cute" features such as way too many secret bet options. The game has little in common with live blackjack played in most casinos and with the small tournaments I have played in.
AceDonovan
Member
Actually if they used the WSOBJ or UBT method... Tiger Woods would have never got a chance to play....they would still be holding "qualifying" special matches featuring Jack Nicklas and Arnold Palmer...over and over and over...
I watched WSOP 2005 last night...they listed to number of entrants in last 10 years ...it was amazing...it started at like 50 guys entering...then 100 then 200 then 350 then 1000 then 5000 ...my number are way off but that was the gest of it.
So it wasnt all that popular...it really took off in the last ten years....they also mentioned Moneymakers victory as a watershed moment.
I dont know what exactly needs changed either ....but something does....certainly UBT is doing the most to put this stuff into the public eye....the damn internet ban crap really put a dampner on the planed fire they had started...
WSOBJ has done little ...in fact I think they went backwards this year...I will say that last year i thought they were on the right track....more games held at different locations around the country but then this year that fell way off...and while they held the open event...they did it last minute and it was great but then they faked it up with the boobs and boobs additional invatational event.
Its spot on I think that the show isnt attracting folks to the game any more than Jeopardy attracts many people to play that show... It needs to come from the casino events, interent events, etc...let demand drive the show...
I will say that UBT is trying to create a popular game...they are hitting interent, and B&M's and hopefully in time more casinos will sign on...
WSOBJ could do the same with Rick type tournaments that feed the big show....then you may start the fire that gets peoples attention...
GSN is a quite limited market...its not in a basic satalite package I know that...not sure where the cable companies put it...no matter though...too small a market...same with the odd time slot on CBS for UBT...right after infomercials and right before obsecure sporting events...
Repeats!!!...espn...repeats....A&E...repeats...espn2 repeats....why make such a high production cost wise show and then not have enough money to show it often enough to capture a market?
Hell Im extremely interested in these shows....and I end up missing most of them...whats that tell ya? Im mildly interested in Poker....yet I see and watch it all the time...I watched 1995 WSOP last night...1/30/2007.
Im seeing new names every day at the nightly games ot UB/Bet21...its a very positive sign...it didnt happen overnight for poker and it wont for this...Im just wondering if poker will fall off now w/o as much internet action???
If that happens where will that leave BJ?
I watched WSOP 2005 last night...they listed to number of entrants in last 10 years ...it was amazing...it started at like 50 guys entering...then 100 then 200 then 350 then 1000 then 5000 ...my number are way off but that was the gest of it.
So it wasnt all that popular...it really took off in the last ten years....they also mentioned Moneymakers victory as a watershed moment.
I dont know what exactly needs changed either ....but something does....certainly UBT is doing the most to put this stuff into the public eye....the damn internet ban crap really put a dampner on the planed fire they had started...
WSOBJ has done little ...in fact I think they went backwards this year...I will say that last year i thought they were on the right track....more games held at different locations around the country but then this year that fell way off...and while they held the open event...they did it last minute and it was great but then they faked it up with the boobs and boobs additional invatational event.
Its spot on I think that the show isnt attracting folks to the game any more than Jeopardy attracts many people to play that show... It needs to come from the casino events, interent events, etc...let demand drive the show...
I will say that UBT is trying to create a popular game...they are hitting interent, and B&M's and hopefully in time more casinos will sign on...
WSOBJ could do the same with Rick type tournaments that feed the big show....then you may start the fire that gets peoples attention...
GSN is a quite limited market...its not in a basic satalite package I know that...not sure where the cable companies put it...no matter though...too small a market...same with the odd time slot on CBS for UBT...right after infomercials and right before obsecure sporting events...
Repeats!!!...espn...repeats....A&E...repeats...espn2 repeats....why make such a high production cost wise show and then not have enough money to show it often enough to capture a market?
Hell Im extremely interested in these shows....and I end up missing most of them...whats that tell ya? Im mildly interested in Poker....yet I see and watch it all the time...I watched 1995 WSOP last night...1/30/2007.
Im seeing new names every day at the nightly games ot UB/Bet21...its a very positive sign...it didnt happen overnight for poker and it wont for this...Im just wondering if poker will fall off now w/o as much internet action???
If that happens where will that leave BJ?
Last edited:
Barney Stone
New Member
Lou
Or Joe, the games in Laughlin arent exactly like you find in the land of Wong. The players arent ploppies but use aggressive play. So it is common if not expected to find players shooting higher. So, even if the play isnt the elite you are accustomed to it can be hard. I think it is rude of you to accuse people of drinking and doing drugs. I know RK and he is sober until the very end when we belly u to the bar to drown our sorry arses after too many rebuys and a semi final plop out.
texasscout
New Member
Results of WSOB
So, who were the Top 10 finalist or so in the WSOB?
So, who were the Top 10 finalist or so in the WSOB?
No results can be posted until after the shows air on the GSN network.
RKuczek
Member
Lou, this is where I explain to you why Laughlin minis are tougher than the WSOBJ
do the math -
Avi: first round: one of 6 advance; semifinal:1 of 5 advance; Odds of reaching final table: 1 of 30
Edgewater: First round: 2 of 7 advance; semifinal: 1 of 7 advance; odds of reaching final table: 1 of 24.5
WSOBJ: first round: 1 of 5 advance; second round: 2 of 5 advance; odds of reaching final table: 1 of 12.5
Quality of play: do you really think Paul Haas is a great player? What about the other qualifier tournament entries? I think they were great examples that luck can win you a tournament even if you have no or limited skills. You certainly didn't think the invited highrollers were great players, did you? how about the invited 'pros'?, you did notice that some of these even weren't all that good, didn't you? - yes there were some quality players - I missed one of the episodes (the first) - so I would identify Kami Lis and Rock & Roll Darryl as good players - and while I didn't see Hollywood play, or Ken E - I'll credit them as being solid players - so - that's 4 out of 40 - not exactly an awesome field -
The Laughlin minis not only have a tougher format - but a lot of those players play every day - and some are quite skilled - mixed with the tourists, for sure, but the over all average quality of play there (we are talking average player here - not comparing the best of the best) - is certainly as good as the average player on this years WSOBJ was - if not better
and face it - a lot of the 'name' players - aren't as deserving of their 'fame' as they would like to think - anyone can win a tournament - we all know that - making a final table in a big tourney, even winning it - does not mean you are a good player - even though some players seem to be able to promote themselves forever off of one final table - or one good finish in an easy tv mini like the WSOBJ - I really have no problem with this - if they can pull it off - but - lets not mistake self promotion for playing skills -
even a history of several good final tables doesn't necessarily mean great skill - put anyone into 500 tourneys - they'll get to the final table a few times -
too many self-proclaimed pros have a skill set that is pretty much limited to Wong betting in the early hands - followed by chunk out the chips and trust to dumb luck at the end - and yes this can be productive over the very long run - because you will win more than the average player - but it is not 'skilled play' - it is reading a book and counting on the lack of skill of your opponents - do the math
1 of 6 advance; 2 players with no sense ploppy out quick, now 1 of 4 advance - you just established a 50% 'edge' - that, for too many, is the totality of their 'game' - especially so for just about all of the UBT pokerploppies - how many times online have we seen them do the 'min bet, min bet, min bet, min bet, 1/3BR, all-in, ploppied out' thing - over and over and over and over again - that is not skilled play -
there are some truely skilled players out there - but the WSOBJ is not the pinnacle of tbj competition - nor are the UBT competitions - where most of the players are unskilled pokerploppies and you have a closed field of maybe 60-70 players right now - and didn't the field in Aruba contain about 100 poker players freerolled in? -
you may be right that I am no expert on strong play - though I would argue that - but I can certainly recognize weak play, carnival game gimmicks, and easy formats when I see them -
do the math -
Avi: first round: one of 6 advance; semifinal:1 of 5 advance; Odds of reaching final table: 1 of 30
Edgewater: First round: 2 of 7 advance; semifinal: 1 of 7 advance; odds of reaching final table: 1 of 24.5
WSOBJ: first round: 1 of 5 advance; second round: 2 of 5 advance; odds of reaching final table: 1 of 12.5
Quality of play: do you really think Paul Haas is a great player? What about the other qualifier tournament entries? I think they were great examples that luck can win you a tournament even if you have no or limited skills. You certainly didn't think the invited highrollers were great players, did you? how about the invited 'pros'?, you did notice that some of these even weren't all that good, didn't you? - yes there were some quality players - I missed one of the episodes (the first) - so I would identify Kami Lis and Rock & Roll Darryl as good players - and while I didn't see Hollywood play, or Ken E - I'll credit them as being solid players - so - that's 4 out of 40 - not exactly an awesome field -
The Laughlin minis not only have a tougher format - but a lot of those players play every day - and some are quite skilled - mixed with the tourists, for sure, but the over all average quality of play there (we are talking average player here - not comparing the best of the best) - is certainly as good as the average player on this years WSOBJ was - if not better
and face it - a lot of the 'name' players - aren't as deserving of their 'fame' as they would like to think - anyone can win a tournament - we all know that - making a final table in a big tourney, even winning it - does not mean you are a good player - even though some players seem to be able to promote themselves forever off of one final table - or one good finish in an easy tv mini like the WSOBJ - I really have no problem with this - if they can pull it off - but - lets not mistake self promotion for playing skills -
even a history of several good final tables doesn't necessarily mean great skill - put anyone into 500 tourneys - they'll get to the final table a few times -
too many self-proclaimed pros have a skill set that is pretty much limited to Wong betting in the early hands - followed by chunk out the chips and trust to dumb luck at the end - and yes this can be productive over the very long run - because you will win more than the average player - but it is not 'skilled play' - it is reading a book and counting on the lack of skill of your opponents - do the math
1 of 6 advance; 2 players with no sense ploppy out quick, now 1 of 4 advance - you just established a 50% 'edge' - that, for too many, is the totality of their 'game' - especially so for just about all of the UBT pokerploppies - how many times online have we seen them do the 'min bet, min bet, min bet, min bet, 1/3BR, all-in, ploppied out' thing - over and over and over and over again - that is not skilled play -
there are some truely skilled players out there - but the WSOBJ is not the pinnacle of tbj competition - nor are the UBT competitions - where most of the players are unskilled pokerploppies and you have a closed field of maybe 60-70 players right now - and didn't the field in Aruba contain about 100 poker players freerolled in? -
you may be right that I am no expert on strong play - though I would argue that - but I can certainly recognize weak play, carnival game gimmicks, and easy formats when I see them -
I agree that most any area that hosts regular weekly tournaments likely has a stronger field in every-day tournaments than the WSOB. This year, like last, the quality of play is pretty disappointing on most tables.
However, I applaud GSN for opening up the field. Anyone who truly wanted to compete in this year's GSN event could pony up substantial cash for a real shot at competing. Yes, $1000 or $2500 is a lot of money for most players. But c'mon, we're talking about a shot at $500K. This is not penny ante poker around your kitchen table.
There were only 7 or so invited celebrities, plus 4 Hilton-provided players, plus last year's champ invited back. Everyone else won there way into the WSOB.
Anyone who is unhappy about the quality of play you're seeing on TV should get out there and support the qualifiers next year. Even so, the simple truth is that if you use an open qualifier system, you're not going to get the best players on TV. Luck is going to be the reason most players qualify.
The strongest fields I've seen in a long time were the super-satellites at the Hilton. Nearly every table was packed with talent.
However, I applaud GSN for opening up the field. Anyone who truly wanted to compete in this year's GSN event could pony up substantial cash for a real shot at competing. Yes, $1000 or $2500 is a lot of money for most players. But c'mon, we're talking about a shot at $500K. This is not penny ante poker around your kitchen table.
There were only 7 or so invited celebrities, plus 4 Hilton-provided players, plus last year's champ invited back. Everyone else won there way into the WSOB.
Anyone who is unhappy about the quality of play you're seeing on TV should get out there and support the qualifiers next year. Even so, the simple truth is that if you use an open qualifier system, you're not going to get the best players on TV. Luck is going to be the reason most players qualify.
The strongest fields I've seen in a long time were the super-satellites at the Hilton. Nearly every table was packed with talent.
marichal
Member
i do not want to slight anyones' play. for we are only as good as the day we win. yet i do have to agree with rkuczek. traveling to wa. state once a month to play in minis for a couple of weeks or so. i have came accross some very high caliber play on a nighty basis. these ladies and gentlemen play 7-10 live tourneys a week. there are no carnival games. just good old fashion blackjack tourneys. not to slight my friends in vegas that play the minis (to which i also play). the wa. state players can play with the best anywhere. having cut my teeth playing tourneys on global player casino, and playing in wa. and vegas, i believe that this has given myself a great education in the world of blackjack tourneys. still have a great deal to learn. yet, i enjoy the competion either ebj or regular blackjack style tourneys. do believe that ebj tourneys with the secert bets increase the luck factor. but since i am not the blackjack god, that make the rules. i will endure this format, and attempt to elevate my game.
Last edited:
RKuczek
Member
Ken, Marichal MY GOD! ARE YOU AGREEING WITH ME???
I am really not trying to put down the people who played on WSOBJ or the invited players - nor the fact that players get invited - nor degrading everyone who played in the WSOBJ - just - it really is a well playing mini - with some pretty average players - as well as a few good ones
I think if they are going to run a 'small' tourney - with 40 players - invite the proven players - I would not see a problem with a 'special event' where Ken Smith, Ken Einiger, Hollywood Dave, S. Yama, Phoenix Sam, etc. were the invitees - proven top level players - and pit them against each other for big money in a straight tbj event - fun to watch
or go the way of the WSOP - run off a tourney with 8,000 entries - open to everyone - and let all slug it out -
its the small 'mixed' event - where a few 'qualifiers' luck into it - and the invitees range from mediocre to very good - that I was not impressed with - and don't think really promotes tbj -
I know that this year they are running a lot of qualifiers - and imagine that the play in vegas was pretty competitive - with all the skilled players there - but that still doesn't have the massiveness of the WSOP -
know that we are a long way from a WSOP size event - but if we could somehow capture that 'feeling' - and get 2,000 players together for a game - wow -
and I do recognize that playing in a major, big money tourney means you can run into a Ken Smith or S. Yama - or such - and that is a level of competition that you aren't likely to see in a podunk casino mini - but is the average player in such an event that much better than the experienced mini players in a place like Laughlin? - or Vegas? - I'll probably find out sometime this year - as I plan on playing at least a couple of larger events - figure if I am going to get stomped - might as well be by Ken Smith
I am really not trying to put down the people who played on WSOBJ or the invited players - nor the fact that players get invited - nor degrading everyone who played in the WSOBJ - just - it really is a well playing mini - with some pretty average players - as well as a few good ones
I think if they are going to run a 'small' tourney - with 40 players - invite the proven players - I would not see a problem with a 'special event' where Ken Smith, Ken Einiger, Hollywood Dave, S. Yama, Phoenix Sam, etc. were the invitees - proven top level players - and pit them against each other for big money in a straight tbj event - fun to watch
or go the way of the WSOP - run off a tourney with 8,000 entries - open to everyone - and let all slug it out -
its the small 'mixed' event - where a few 'qualifiers' luck into it - and the invitees range from mediocre to very good - that I was not impressed with - and don't think really promotes tbj -
I know that this year they are running a lot of qualifiers - and imagine that the play in vegas was pretty competitive - with all the skilled players there - but that still doesn't have the massiveness of the WSOP -
know that we are a long way from a WSOP size event - but if we could somehow capture that 'feeling' - and get 2,000 players together for a game - wow -
and I do recognize that playing in a major, big money tourney means you can run into a Ken Smith or S. Yama - or such - and that is a level of competition that you aren't likely to see in a podunk casino mini - but is the average player in such an event that much better than the experienced mini players in a place like Laughlin? - or Vegas? - I'll probably find out sometime this year - as I plan on playing at least a couple of larger events - figure if I am going to get stomped - might as well be by Ken Smith
agreement
I also agree with you regarding the skill level of weekly players in certain locations. But I've seen many skilled local players choke in their first 2 or 3 majors(including me). I enjoy watching the pros beat up on the ploppies.
But the WSOB is not about the best players in all cases, it's mostly about entertainment. I love blackjack but on TV it's boring for regular folks. While hold'em poker is fun to watch. I'll let the expert promoters figure out what attracts the largest audiences. The more fans of the game the better for all of us.
We have many weekly players who will pay $30 to win $1,176(100% equity).
Who wont pay $100 in a 100% equity + a $16 buffet for 2, because the $100 tournament hasn't been filling up. This attitude is what hurts TBJ. Soon they will stop having TBJ at all in Stl.
Sorry for getting off subject a little.
tgun
I also agree with you regarding the skill level of weekly players in certain locations. But I've seen many skilled local players choke in their first 2 or 3 majors(including me). I enjoy watching the pros beat up on the ploppies.
But the WSOB is not about the best players in all cases, it's mostly about entertainment. I love blackjack but on TV it's boring for regular folks. While hold'em poker is fun to watch. I'll let the expert promoters figure out what attracts the largest audiences. The more fans of the game the better for all of us.
We have many weekly players who will pay $30 to win $1,176(100% equity).
Who wont pay $100 in a 100% equity + a $16 buffet for 2, because the $100 tournament hasn't been filling up. This attitude is what hurts TBJ. Soon they will stop having TBJ at all in Stl.
Sorry for getting off subject a little.
tgun
Last edited:
fgk42
New Member
WOW, Interesting to hear that coming from you Ken.
As someone who attending the super-satellites in Vegas I was impressed with the table play also, but then what do I know! So It's good to know that I agree with you on that.
I made a comment that from what I saw at the super-satellites, the play would have made for better TV than what I actually saw on Season 3 (only saw 3 episodes!).
While I understand you can’t give details about winners, etc. Could you please elaborate on WHY you weren’t impressed with the level of play during the WSOB? Was it due to “ploppy” play? Was it due to erratic play? I’m just curious as to how you, Ken Smith, define quality of play.