Back at Barona 1

Yes, I was going to reply to this earlier, but couldn't remember the winner. It was indeed John Blunt. Sorry for my mental lapse John. It was a well-deserved win for a strong player.
 
Thanks

Thats good news. I figured the casino fee to be near .075% using Joe's posting and if the wildcard 10K$ seat wasnt given the casino take would have been double. I hope before the next Barona we get some info as opposed to last time when there was a void. I guess its hard to predict wildcards before hand because they will be used to fill spots of vacancy. Maybe the lowering of the next Barona entry fee will bring more players and exhaust the wildcards. It is a mid week event tho....

sabrejack said:
It happened. Prize was a seat valued at $10K in yearend Barona TOC. Pretty sure the winner was John Blunt.
Click to expand...
 
Pretty good wild card system...

A few weeks ago in Tulsa, we used a different type of wild cards.

Instead of drawing names from the players eliminated, they took the top scores from the 3rd place finishers from the round before and advance them (if needed).

It was not a bad idea and seemed to work pretty well. I know several players that liked it better than the name drawing type of wild card system we have all been use to.

Of course if no wild cards are needed those 3rd place finishers waiting will be left waiting.

What do y'all think of this wild card system?

It really did work well and rewarded good play over luck of the draw.
 
Sounds good

<Instead of drawing names from the players eliminated, they took the top scores from the 3rd place finishers from the round before and advance them (if needed).>

But, isnt the wildcard a tool to keep players hanging around? From the player standpoint its good because we could actually maneuver hi/low with the extra placing spot in mind. But, for the casino they could lose the interest of 3 or 4 players that will walk away with no hope. In OK it wasnt a big problem because the game schedule kept people there to play event every day. Single day events, for example, it would be better to keep it all losers in the draw. Unfortunately we have to keep the casino mind too.
 
Good point

I am the first to agree that we have to do what is best for the casinos if we want to have tournaments. But this wild card system does have some merit, at least for multi-events such as Tulsa.

The one thing I like about it is the wild cards are only taken from the last round played. The biggest issue I have is some player that didn't get out of the first round getting drawn in to the final table, I know it is fair for everybody and just luck of the draw, but I still hate it...LOL.

Another plus for the 3rd place wild cards advancing is no doubt that they were in the wild cards, (a few places have been known to only put in their high rollers for wild card draws).

The main reason I like the 3rd place wild card (possiblities) is most players can still play to advance even if first and even second place is out of reach.

There are pro's and con's for both ways, and I'll play which ever way is offered.

Suggestion for wild cards that are drawn: Let the players have Wild cards that they put in the raffle bin when they come for the drawing. This way the players will know their in and when drawn, they will be there (no calling 20 names to get 7 players) this is another thing that I don't like.

So it isn't about what I like, it is what the majority of you like. I guess it is poll time...LOL.
 
I think Barney has it right. There is no doubt in my mind that a wild-card system which rewards good play is a good thing and more fair. Of course the fairest thing is no wild card seats, but if you feel the need to have them, it should be somehow based on performance.

But the real reason "they" have wild cards is that it keeps hundreds of gamblers in a casino to kill hours of time with nothing to do but gamble in the hopes of winning a wild card seat. It is not at all in the best interest of the players (whose time has value and would rather know instantly whether they should stay or go) but is in the best interest of the casino. So, I think a vote on this would be meaningless.
 
Your vote does count...

I ask all players because I want to know what they want.

When I run a tournament, it isn't about what I want or how I like it, it is how the players like it.

Without your feedback (all of your feedback) I won't know what the majority of the players want.

Know I agree with you about wild cards (I hate them, I think you should win to advance), but there is need's for them, such as:

1. Keeping the players around for the casino.

2. To fill seats, if needed.

For most of my tournaments it is just the later, I only award wild cards if needed.
 
Wildcards

Here at the Comanche casinos for their quarterlies and $1mil tournament they use the same system. Highest non advancing scores get wildcards. It does keep players in the casino. For players that play late in an all day event, many like to watch the tables and see what the wildcard score might be. For the players that don't advance but have finished with some chips can either wait around or return about an hour before the second round to see if they can get wildcard. There has been some quarterlies at Comanche Nation that everybody that survived with chips advanced, because of so many bust outs. Like TX said if you are out of first or second to advance but know that you are close enough for wildcard why risk your chips. At Red River during a tournament they have most all the tables open and full. They use the tables in the back for the tournaments and the ones in the front for play during, except on Tuesdays. At Comanche Nation thou, all the tables (BJ) are closed for the day, smaller place.
 
my .25 - inflation

Wild cards go both ways:

Case 1 – EVERYONE who participates has their name entered into a barrel for a wild card drawing.

Pros – it’s fair to everyone who paid a tourney entry fee
It keeps players hanging around thereby increasing side action for the host casino
Everyone has that shot at a second chance even if they don’t deserve it

Cons time consuming – people who qualified/advanced may have their names called
Keeps people waiting around when they would rather just leave
Doesn’t “reward” any particular type of play – donk or pro all have the same chance

Case 2 – Highest non-advancer from the table gets into the wild card drawing

Pros Rewards players who “almost” made the cut
Less players in the bin to draw against

Cons Unfair to the 4th place player who only had 1 chip less than the 3rd place player
Will result in some players playing for the wild card and not playing for the win
Will chance how some players think and play on the final hand
Less players standing around for side action to the host casino

Case 3 – Only players in THAT round are entered into the wild card

Pros Rewards players who have made it to the semi-final round
Less players to compete against
Favors more skilled players – as they will have advanced to the semis more than the “ploppies”

Cons Not fair to the ploppy who paid an entry fee just like everyone else
Lets the ploppies go home early so less ploppies for host casino side action

Personally, I favor Case 1 – It is fair. Once a name is called it is removed from the bin and not put back in. Everyone has an equal chance and it helps the host casino. I mean look we need to have a win-win situation for this to work.

Besides, when I bust out on hand 1 from going all-in I want another chance!
 
It may be unpopular with the skilled players, but I agree with fgk.
Just fill the seats with drawings, with all players eligible.
And, I say that just a week after I successfully advanced in a round as a third-place high-chip-total.

The standard drawing accomplishes one of the most important things... It keeps people around in the casino. If the casinos aren't happy, nobody's happy.
 
I also concur with fgk. Why? I just plain like it. I play tournaments for a hobby, ya, ya, I said that before. Having wild cards drawn from a drum add a certain air of excitement to the event. If your name is drawn you have an incredible natural high. The closer the drawing to the final table the higher the high. It's fun and it helps keep the players in the casino which is what they want. If the casinos don't get what they want, namely side action, then there will be no more tournaments. Ya, I said that before too.

Besides, in my relatively short time playing, I got drawn into a final table, 2 semi final tables, and a couple of 2nd rounds. What's not to like? :D
 
OK, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm biased since I have only qualified in one open wild-card in my tournament life (and it was only to the second round of an LVH tourney). When I'm in Vegas, I have a limited amount of time and other people to coordinate plans with and I don't enjoy having to continuously reconvene every hour and stand around for 10 minutes to listen for the 2% chance that my name gets called. I do it because being there has an EV of perhaps $100, but that's just EV that deserves to go to the advancers, instead.

It's not a free ride. Every wild card seat is money and EV taken from players that advanced fair and square. I'll put up with it because it's part of the business plan that makes these things work, but it's not what I would prefer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top