Cancel Another Tournament

Waffleing

I'm also starting to waffle on my opinion about chip counts during a BJ tournament like Ken Smith, originally my thoughts were thats part of the game but the overwhelming positive response by the top players to allow someone to buy into the finals for a premium (without qualifing) to increase the equity made me rethink my opinion, it almost sounds like thats more "Dead Money" we can win so let them in. If BJ tournaments ever hit a stride (long term) it won't be because Celebrities are allowed a premium buy into the finals without qualifing but rather building the base of players. If counting players chips each of the last 5 hands increases the number of players I say go for it, it doesn't dilute other tournament skills but may increase the number of participants.
 
I'll explain Norman

Okay Norman think about this, your in the Aruba tournament. The player with the lowest total after hand #15, #20, & #25 is kicked off the table.

Your in 6th place out of the 7 players at the table going into hand number #15. The player in 7th place use's their secret bet now. What would your bet be if you had to bet 2nd after the secret bet?

I can see where it could really change things around. It will diffenently make the betting go higher and limit the minimum bets (which is what their after).

All in all it should make for a more enjoyable TV.

What I personally think would make for the best TV is if I cash Big in Aurba, Selfish aren't I...LOL
 
Secret bet

KenSmith said:
I agree that secret bet did nothing to help Celebrity Blackjack. However, with intelligent players using it, I think it could make for good TV. We'll see.

As for how it works, the players will probably be given a piece of paper to write their bet on. The bets are revealed after the hand is over. As for doubles and splits, I've seen these handled two ways. In most cases, a double or split causes the secret bet to be revealed immediately. In the other case, I've seen slips of paper that ask the dealer what they will bet initially, how much insurance they will take, and how much they will double for.

I prefer the first solution, as the second is problematic with doubles after split, etc.
Click to expand...

Ken,

I think the format they had for secret bets on the last hand in the Gold Strike tournament in Tunica makes the most sense if you are going to use it.

In that tournament the final hand was handled by secret bet. You wrote your bet down on a slip of paper and had to announce if you wanted to insure a dealer ace on the last hand. If you selected insurance, you had to specify the amount of insurance you wanted.

Once everyone turned in their bets to the dealer, the bets were actually placed in the circle prior to dealing the hand. If the dealer did turn up an ace, then only those players who chose ahead of time to insure their bets could get insurance.

Once the cards were dealt, the hand was played out just like normal. If you had held back chips, you could double down or split or DAS.

The secret bet thing didn't really mean anything in the preliminaries since it was an accumulation format and everyone tended to go all in on the last hand and either hit or bust, but in an elimination format, it would be more interesting.

Pat

PS: I like the idea of dropping the lowest bankroll at set hands. That would make things a lot more interesting.
 
Last edited:
Thank TX

I'm starting to wrap my mind around those concepts.

Problem is. When I started a short time ago the basic structure was pretty much the same. Yeah low bets to stick around to make a play at the end.

I hate final jeopardy, but that seemed to be the way the tourneys were played.

Now that I'm convinced, after trying to study the winners of what some of the best procedures are things change.

Change ain't bad, it's just trying to adjust thinking and strategy for the change.

I believe, Ken S. always emphazied bet sizing and now that becomes more important than chip counting, though chip counting will still have to be a factor.

Though if stack size is announced it becomes a gut feel for bet amount, especially if one faces elimination for being low at those predetermined hands.

One always had a chance to the end before. Now one will have to think of the end happening three times before it actually does.

It could make for more interesting tv.

But my ol saw is, a good to excellent commentator and good editing are what make good tv.

One last ramble. Don't really care what a format is, whether chips are announced or not, or if new rules come into play. Just publish the format and rules far enough ahead so they can be analyzed. to whatever extent one wants to.
 
Last hand is right Pat

Pat, yes the Gold Strike (Tunica) tournament did use the secret bet on the last hand. But it was a accumulation format, now put the secert bet in a elimination format and allow it to be used anytime and it takes on a new twisted.

Now add in that the player with the lowest chip count after hand #15,#20, & #25 will be booted from the table and their are several ways the secert bet can come in to play.

Norman, the old saying is correct "You can't please all the people all of the time".

Some like it one way while others like it another, it will always be like that. All we can do is try some changes that will make for a happy the majority.

When and if we ever get a national assocation of players, then we can set some tournament rules for all the players to go by (like in poker). Until then it will be up to each casino on what rules they want to use, we can either play by them or not.
 
Thinking outside the box

Noman's comments made me think of a totally different way to handle betting in blackjack tournaments. Why not change betting to make it like Poker? The person on the button gets to choose the size of the initial bet. Everyone after him/her has to match the bet / raise or sit out the hand. If a person raises the bet, everyone after has the same options, call / raise or sit out. You could stop at one round of betting or continue around allowing reraises for a second or third round. If you were raised but don't call or raise, then you have to play with what you originally bet.

Going with the poker analogy of betting, you could even require small and big blinds and also raise the blinds at certain intervals.

It seems like that would change the whole strategy of betting and could make for more excitement.

Pat
 
Lets leave that style betting to poker

I'm not crazy about having poker betting on Blackjack. I like the fact that I can make a bigger or small bet then anyone else at the table, in fact that is a big part of trying to make your move in a BJ tournament (betting the opposite).

*Note: One thing that should be changed is "String Bet" in BJ.

There is no such thing!

This is the biggest misconception in tournament play. As long as the next player hasn't acted it makes no difference if you drop one chip and then add to it.

As a matter of fact it would speed up the game I think. If I saw someone next to me make the wrong bet I would get my bet out ASAP to freeze them out. It would force players to be ready with their bets instead of waiting to fiqure out what they want or need to bet.
 
Last edited:
TX-Betting

Wow, was I glad to see you post "no such thing as string bet in BJ"

I've been called on that three times and the last time it happened(called by another player) I couldn't imagine how I did it. I was making a conscious effort not to.

As TX said and I've tried to argue in the past, until the player to my left makes the bet, I should be able to place or change any amount in my betting circle, let alone deposit all the money in my cupped hand, which seems an easier way for me to put a large stack in, rather than sliding it and having it fall all over.
 
Common mistake

Most players get use to a certain tournament (local most of the time) and when they go to a new tournament they think they are running it all wrong.

What the players need to realize is most all tournaments are run differently and each may have their own house rules. Even if we formed a players assocation each casino could and would have the right to change some rules.

Don't get up set with the other players they are right if it is posted on the rules, the problem is sometimes the rules are wrong...LOL.
 
Wave off on betting and "low man out"

At one of the monthly local tournaments I play they have a rather unique method for betting. Once you complete your bet, you have to "wave off" on it using the same hand motion you use to indicate no more cards. The dealer will not go to the next player until you "wave off" on your bet.

Before you "wave off", you can add to or subtract from what you originally laid down. This eliminates any questions about string bets, trying to slide a tall pile of chips, and other problems or disputes about betting.

When I first played this way I thought it was dumb. Now I think 1 (one) should be scored for casino ingenuity (I never thougth I'd say that). The system works well and no player squabbles. String bets are no longer an issue. :D

Now I want to put in my 2 cents about "low man out" after a set amount of hands. I think it's a bad idea. How many times have you seen in games (card games, board games, sports games, etc) where the underdog rallies to win or put up a decent challenge. It's part of what makes ALL games interesting to watch and play. A lot of people like to root for the underdog, its part of human nature. I always have a "don't ever count me out attitude" unless it is impossible to win. Say I can't play anymore because I'm loosing? Eliminate me because I'm loosing? Isn't that like kicking a man when he's down. Not very sportsman like.

Playing "low man out" would put blackjack in a unique and unenvyable position. It would become known as the only game that does not let you fight back from last place. Arn't we in the tournament community trying to attract players? I think this will turn away more players than it will attract. In poker there's a saying "All you need is a chip and a chair". DON'T TAKE AWAY MY CHAIR :mad:
 
Low Man Out ?

I totally agree with Toolman about low man out on hands 15, 20 and 25 or any hand for that matter except after the final hand, this would totally change the game from 1 game to 3 games each round, it's enough to double on hard 17 with a max bet the last hand but to do it 4 times ( I assume it's more than a 25 hand round) completely changes the game and you might as well take "going for the low" out of the BJ dictionary. A secret bet also sticks in my craw but it might eliminate the necessity to count chips to size your bet and determine if you want to cover a natural or DD by an opponant, both these options sound like gimmicks a casino might offer to attract hi rollers (without tournament experience) to a VIP BJ tournament. "Hell honey, if I get by hands 15, 20, 25 and win a big secret bet, I can win $20,000 no matter how skilled the others are". If you want gimmicks I have one to offer, if the dealer has BJ the first player to slap it (like slap jack) pushs and doesn't lose their bet. Poker tournaments seem to be the model referred to by BJ players as something we should follow and they play until their chips are gone, the short stack is not eliminated from the table on the hour each hour, think about how exciting it is to watch someone double their chips 2 or 3 times and move from 7th to 2nd at the table.
 
For TV only

Rookie I agree with you 100% for normal tournament play, but this is for TV play. As much as I love BJ tournaments I even have to admit watching a BJ tournament is not the most exciting thing on TV.

Had I not known the players or been on last years show it wouldn't be no where near as exciting for me to watch. Lets face it something needed to be done to spice the tournaments up. Maybe cutting out the low person isn't it, but at least they are trying something and not just blowing TV blackjack off.

Were getting another chance and I hope it works to pick up new players interest. The current players like the regulars here and on Global are already hooked on tournaments, we need to draw in new players to replace the 100 plus that are baned from tournaments now.

Funny thing is once blackjack get a following like poker has the ban players will then be the ones the casinos want at their tournaments just like the top poker players (it's a draw for the casinos).
 
Play til you have no more marbles

When I was a kid, I think my first exposure to gambling was marbles (no dinosaur jokes please - well maybe one :laugh: ). Each of us started with the same number of marbles and you played until you were out of marbles. The game went on until one kid had "all the marbles" - YES, we played for "keeps"!

The point of this short story - we humans want to beat a competitor with skill or luck or both. The game is not over until you beat the last person with a better score. Whether we talk about marbles, monoply, checkers, poker, or blackjack, a win is NOT A REAL WIN UNLESS YOU BEAT THE COMPETITION. If the competition got eliminated because he was "low man" at some arbitrary time, then you have not beat him - he was forced to stop playing. He still had some marbles and maybe he could have won but he was forced to stop playing. The victory is somewhat empty.

I don't believe the TV audence will go for it. It might even turn them off. I totally agree that watching blackjack is something less than exciting (wait a minute, I have to go outside and see if the grass is still growing). But by the same token, I don't think "low man out" will help - it may hurt. :(
 
TV Only

Rick I also agree TV needs to spice things up for ratings but I hope not with secret bets and eliminating players after hands 15, 20 and 25 while promoting the show as including the best players in the world. The Aruba tournament probably has about 20 or less BJT.com players included and BJT.com has 2,691 members, lets not forget about the 2,670 or so BJT.com members not privileged to compete at Aruba. I'm not saying the format was your idea, just that if BJ tournaments lack interest with the general public changes need to be made but in my opinion eliminating players and secret bets are not the answer to keep viewers on the edge of their seats, secret bets and celebrities are included in "Celebrity Blackjack" and the only thing exciting or worthwhile watching on that show is when a female celibrity gives HD the finger.
 
Give it a chance

Like I said before TV blackjack needs a boost somehow. Before saying no give their ideas a chance (and no they weren't mine...LOL). I remember hearing that they were going to start with $100,000 in the finals of WSOB. I thought that was the worst idea ever, yet to my surprize I really like watching it better with the higher amount of chips being used.

I'm not saying the ideas will be good only give them a chance. If you read my earlier posts with GM, I don't like the idea of counting chips for the final five hands, but as I posted I am willing to give it a chance. You have to be open mined.

If we don't try new things we won't know if they will work or not. Trust me if the secert bets and low man out is not working they will revise the format. This is Big time TV and they are putting a lot of money out for these shows. We have already practiced these new formats (with some of the poker players) They seem to go off fine. Now how will they be viewed on TV, who knows. Hopefully the show will be a success.

Rookie you talked about the 2,691 on this site and only 20 or so of us will be on the show, think about this if the show fails the other 2,670 will probally never have a shot at being on TV. Now on the other hand if the show is a success they will be getting fresh faces for new shows just like they do for poker.

The first year of the WSOB I would have loved to been on it, but I wasn't. That didn't mean that I didn't do all I could to support it and hope for it's success. The more successful something gets the bigger it will grow. Last year I was asked to be on the show and this year several new players will be asked to be on it.

I am thrilled that I was asked to be on the new show and I understand how those that weren't feel, but just be patient. Everybody that is on the show are working to make blackjack tournaments better for all of us. If this new show is successful it will open more doors for new players to get on TV and even more doors for open events at the casinos.

In closing I would like to thank GSN and in perticular Kevin B. for giving TV blackjack a chance. If it wasn't for him and GSN we wouldn't be talking about any of this now.
 
Last edited:
OK - Give it a shot

I got into this discussion only to express my opinion. After all, isn't that what a forum is about? Of course I'll keep an open mind and see what happens. For the sake of the future of blackjack tournaments, I always hope there is success in improving the game even if I disagree with a change. Let the WSOBJ roll. Looking foreward to seeing all you "pros" (I know you love that term) play. Hopefully I can pick up some pointers. I have my personal favorates (doesn't everyone) but I'm not going public with that info. I do wish everyone the best and may lightning strike when needed the most. Let's see those killer instincts come out!!! :gun:

:cool: Bottom line: I will play in tournaments irregardless of the rules. Good rules or bad rules will affect my opponents as much as me. I can work around the problems but maybe my opponents can't. :laugh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top