Four Winds, Michigan - Monthly
- Thread starter toolman1
- Start date
Much of what we talk about is not really complaining but rather healthy discussion of BJTs. There's nothing wrong with trying to improve a situation. That's the way life is and without wanting to improve we would all be saying "gitty up" instead of turning the ignition in our cars.
Anyway, I did go to this event. They were near full so trying to change their minds about rules to increase attendance will be fruitless. As expected, most players were sub-par. They had a grasp on the principal of how to win but I saw basic error after basic error on the last few hands - both betting and playing. That being said, I did not succeed. Third from last hand did me in.
They must have got some help from another casino when setting up this event. The tournament was fairly well run for a first event but some tweaking is needed. The rules were complete and well written. The dealers had some good training and knew the rules. They were a tad slow but accurate. Speed will come with practice so I have no complaints there. My opinion is that this tournament makes for decent entertainment if you have the time and are within 2 hours drive. Prize money is not great (up to $6,000 prize pool - all entry fees go into the prize pool - 40% of pool goes to first place) but neither is the entry fee of $60.
A note to TXtourplayer if you read this:
They did have 2 rules that I've never seen before. You may want to consider incorporating then in your rules.
1) This part I like:
If a dealer fails to deal the first and/or second card to a player, the player will receive the correct amount of cards after the dealer had dealt himself and the remaining player's two cards.
The second sentence I don't like:
Once the dealer has hit the first hand, any incomplete hand will be called dead and the cards will be placed into the discard rack and the money returned to the player.
2) This rule has my complete blessing:
If a participant needs to leave the table for any reason, the player will not be dealt cards and the table minimum will be collected after each hand until the player returns.
That solves a lot of problems including the need to wear a diaper!
Now back to TLR. So you see that by discussing (complaining if you want to use that term) we can look for solutions to not-so-good situations.
noman
Top Member
4-Breeze
Agree with Toolman. Well Run. Except, no where in the rules did it mention rebuys, but eight people were able to do that, so that for the final 14 only the highest chip count of 54,xxx was the "wild card" There would have been nine otherwise, based on accumulation without the rebuys. Smart folkes that rebought.
RULE I LIKED: No: 12 on the list: "The promotion commitee will not accept any private arrangements between guests or the interchanging of rounds and or positions."
No signage. There was a hold-em tournament registration about the same time with a long line and no one knew which line to get into. As always, when you don't know ask. But, they could have had even hand written signs to help out.
Prelim round. 21 hands. 10k stack. 100 to 10,000 range. 6 deck No card could be taken to a 21, natural or otherwise. Split A 3x, but no other action after.
final round of 14 players with 7 at table, top 7 paid out., based on accumulation. Total possible entries 98 at $60 equals $5,880. 1st paid 40 percent, or $2,325.
For myself: My Max 10k last bet BJ wasn't enough for the chip leader's double for less on a 10k bet to a 6-5, catching the 10. But even with my BJ, the chip leader would have had to lose, double or not.
Final round 21 hands. 20K stack. Min 200. Max 20K
For $60 entry, for those close enough, no matter the format, not bad. 9-6vp. $3 beers. free pop and water.
Agree with Toolman. Well Run. Except, no where in the rules did it mention rebuys, but eight people were able to do that, so that for the final 14 only the highest chip count of 54,xxx was the "wild card" There would have been nine otherwise, based on accumulation without the rebuys. Smart folkes that rebought.
RULE I LIKED: No: 12 on the list: "The promotion commitee will not accept any private arrangements between guests or the interchanging of rounds and or positions."
No signage. There was a hold-em tournament registration about the same time with a long line and no one knew which line to get into. As always, when you don't know ask. But, they could have had even hand written signs to help out.
Prelim round. 21 hands. 10k stack. 100 to 10,000 range. 6 deck No card could be taken to a 21, natural or otherwise. Split A 3x, but no other action after.
final round of 14 players with 7 at table, top 7 paid out., based on accumulation. Total possible entries 98 at $60 equals $5,880. 1st paid 40 percent, or $2,325.
For myself: My Max 10k last bet BJ wasn't enough for the chip leader's double for less on a 10k bet to a 6-5, catching the 10. But even with my BJ, the chip leader would have had to lose, double or not.
Final round 21 hands. 20K stack. Min 200. Max 20K
For $60 entry, for those close enough, no matter the format, not bad. 9-6vp. $3 beers. free pop and water.
angelrun5
Member
It was a nice turn out for their first tournament, but they need to work on a lot of the not written rules. Making sure at least all are on the same page.
Examples:
First: Button pass...at my table when someone was eliminated that spot was skipped (as it should be) but one of the second round tables I was watching the pit boss came up on the 19th hand someone had been eliminated the dealer started to skip that spot but the pit boss made him put the button in the empty spot and continue on.
Second: Showing the burn card....on my first table the pit boss said it was ok to show the burn card on each shuffle (I don't count so it did not matter to me) but when I was in the final 14 that pit boss said no you can't show it.
Most waiting to get paid when the final 14 was done that I spoke with did not like the accumulation final table....myself included. They need to spend less time in between rounds this made the whole tournament last way to late. And they need to eliminate having the dealers wait for an ok every time they had to make change for a larger chip, at one time at my table we had quite a wait cause the pit bosses were busy doing chip counts at other tables. Everyone in charge said they were open to suggestions and they got a quite a few that I had heard and I hope they at least consider them it would be a nice weekly, expectably if they can get it done before midnight.
By the way I took 5th..could have been higher in the money if our dealer had not turned up a BJ on the final hand.
Examples:
First: Button pass...at my table when someone was eliminated that spot was skipped (as it should be) but one of the second round tables I was watching the pit boss came up on the 19th hand someone had been eliminated the dealer started to skip that spot but the pit boss made him put the button in the empty spot and continue on.
Second: Showing the burn card....on my first table the pit boss said it was ok to show the burn card on each shuffle (I don't count so it did not matter to me) but when I was in the final 14 that pit boss said no you can't show it.
Most waiting to get paid when the final 14 was done that I spoke with did not like the accumulation final table....myself included. They need to spend less time in between rounds this made the whole tournament last way to late. And they need to eliminate having the dealers wait for an ok every time they had to make change for a larger chip, at one time at my table we had quite a wait cause the pit bosses were busy doing chip counts at other tables. Everyone in charge said they were open to suggestions and they got a quite a few that I had heard and I hope they at least consider them it would be a nice weekly, expectably if they can get it done before midnight.
By the way I took 5th..could have been higher in the money if our dealer had not turned up a BJ on the final hand.
I was not aware of any re-buys but I'm not doubting you. And yes, re-buys were not mentioned in the rules. Re-buys should be added to their rules to make players aware that re-buys are available. That would add to the prize pool which is good. However, the re-buys were for the second session of round 1 and they would not automatically get into the final round (the accumulation round). There were 7 tables in the first session of round 1 and 6 tables in the second session of round 1 making a total of 13 tables hence one "wildcard" to make 14 in the final round. Without the re-buys there would have been 3 "wildcards" max (probably 2) but no way would they have had 9 "wildcards".
You also mentioned that $54,??? took first place. That's a surprise. I calculated a much higher figure would be need. Another indication that the players were not tournament savvy.
That "19th hand" may have been my table. After the second session of round 1 ended I spoke to the tournament manager about that point. I pointed out that rule results in a player having to bet/play first 2 or possibly 6 times (if only 2 players remain) in a row and that puts him at a disadvantage. Hopefully I made an impression and it will not happen again.
Last edited:
TXtourplayer
Executive Member
My thoughts on those rules and why.
1) Making sure every players has enough cards is a given, but any time you allow a dealer's mistake to determine the out come of ANY hand you are asking for trouble, BIG TROUBLE!
You cannot give a dealer that much control over the table. Not saying that they would do anything on purpose, but just as an example lets say you are dealt a blackjack and this will assure you the win, but their friend is playing (or someone they know) so all they have to do is simply misdeal and kill the hand. I have seen this done before and trust me it isn't a pretty sight.
In the same situation using the TBJPA rules the misplaced cards would simply be backed up to the proper order and play would continue as normal. No need to get anyone upset as the cards would ACTUALLY be placed as if the misdeal never occurred.
Now there is a catch to this rule, it is only in effect as long as NO MORE than 3 cards have been dealt out of order, if 4 or more cards have been misdealt then the entire hand is killed.
This makes ALL the players at the table responsible for the dealers actions as well. If a full table of players are not paying attention to the game then it becomes their own fault.
2) As much as I would like to allow a restroom break it just isn't a good idea for any player to EVER leave the table during play, even if it is during the dealers shuffle.
What I'd do with the TBJPA rules is just call maintenance to bring over towels and a mop to clean up the mess, (just kidding...lol).
The reason I don't like allowing a player or players to leave the table is it gives a player a chance to bring chips into the game and or discuss what they should or shouldn't do over the remaining hands. It may sound like I'm not very trusting, but it happens (I have seen it many times).
Think about this, would you get up set if someone was standing behind the table giving a player advice? Of course you would, we all would, but yet you would allow that same player to leave the table where they could be coached?
Plus this could delay the table and that wouldn't be fair to the other players. An example would be, what if you are playing in two tournaments and you are needing to leave ASAP to make the other event. Now your stuck waiting for a player that is holding up the game because they didn't take care of business before hand, is that fair?
I just believe the best policy is preventive measurements with the rules. Simply put, if players are not allowed to leave the table once play begins it eliminates the problem before hand, end of issue.
In most cases each session is only between 18 to 25 hands anyway so I suggest going to the restroom prior to the start of your session and then for the next 20 to 45 minutes you should be able to remain sitting in a dry seat (hopefully)...lol.
Not that the TBJPA rules are 100% the best, but I try.
I'm not crazy about either of those rules. I will explain way.A note to TXtourplayer if you read this:
They did have 2 rules that I've never seen before. You may want to consider incorporating then in your rules.
1) This part I like:
If a dealer fails to deal the first and/or second card to a player, the player will receive the correct amount of cards after the dealer had dealt himself and the remaining player's two cards.
The second sentence I don't like:
Once the dealer has hit the first hand, any incomplete hand will be called dead and the cards will be placed into the discard rack and the money returned to the player.
2) This rule has my complete blessing:
If a participant needs to leave the table for any reason, the player will not be dealt cards and the table minimum will be collected after each hand until the player returns.
That solves a lot of problems including the need to wear a diaper!
1) Making sure every players has enough cards is a given, but any time you allow a dealer's mistake to determine the out come of ANY hand you are asking for trouble, BIG TROUBLE!
You cannot give a dealer that much control over the table. Not saying that they would do anything on purpose, but just as an example lets say you are dealt a blackjack and this will assure you the win, but their friend is playing (or someone they know) so all they have to do is simply misdeal and kill the hand. I have seen this done before and trust me it isn't a pretty sight.
In the same situation using the TBJPA rules the misplaced cards would simply be backed up to the proper order and play would continue as normal. No need to get anyone upset as the cards would ACTUALLY be placed as if the misdeal never occurred.
Now there is a catch to this rule, it is only in effect as long as NO MORE than 3 cards have been dealt out of order, if 4 or more cards have been misdealt then the entire hand is killed.
This makes ALL the players at the table responsible for the dealers actions as well. If a full table of players are not paying attention to the game then it becomes their own fault.
2) As much as I would like to allow a restroom break it just isn't a good idea for any player to EVER leave the table during play, even if it is during the dealers shuffle.
What I'd do with the TBJPA rules is just call maintenance to bring over towels and a mop to clean up the mess, (just kidding...lol).
The reason I don't like allowing a player or players to leave the table is it gives a player a chance to bring chips into the game and or discuss what they should or shouldn't do over the remaining hands. It may sound like I'm not very trusting, but it happens (I have seen it many times).
Think about this, would you get up set if someone was standing behind the table giving a player advice? Of course you would, we all would, but yet you would allow that same player to leave the table where they could be coached?
Plus this could delay the table and that wouldn't be fair to the other players. An example would be, what if you are playing in two tournaments and you are needing to leave ASAP to make the other event. Now your stuck waiting for a player that is holding up the game because they didn't take care of business before hand, is that fair?
I just believe the best policy is preventive measurements with the rules. Simply put, if players are not allowed to leave the table once play begins it eliminates the problem before hand, end of issue.
In most cases each session is only between 18 to 25 hands anyway so I suggest going to the restroom prior to the start of your session and then for the next 20 to 45 minutes you should be able to remain sitting in a dry seat (hopefully)...lol.
Not that the TBJPA rules are 100% the best, but I try.
With all due respect - and I do respect you, I think you are manufacturing excuses to keep your rules in tact, TXtourplayer.
FIRST RULE - misdeals:
SECOND RULE - leaving the table:
Now I'm not saying you should accept this or any suggested changes to your rules. I'm just saying please avoid making up or manufacturing invalid excuses.
FIRST RULE - misdeals:
There can be no dealer manipulation of the outcome with the rule I suggested. The dealer has no knowledge of the next card coming out of the shoe so he can't purposely deal a good or losing hand to a given player. With your rules, if a "enemy" player is dealt a BJ then the dealer can force a misdeal which would invalidate the BJ dealt to to player that the dealer despises.
SECOND RULE - leaving the table:
First of all, this will not delay the game. If anything, the game will move faster because one less player needs time to make a betting decision as well as a playing decision.
Second, getting advice. The chip counts will change while the player is gone from the table and therefore any advice is subject to being invalid. If a player needs "quick" advice he is probably not that good of a player and will have a hard time adjusting to the change in chip counts when he returns. When a absent player returns he must re-examine all the other players chip counts which is time consuming and in fact puts him at a temporary disadvantage. Also, the hard reality of BJTs is that advice is constantly given by spectators, sometimes by flagrant violations such as talking to spectators or more coyly by secret signals.
I have heard of players p***** in their pants or worse because they were winning and maybe $50,000 is at stake. I would not want to be sitting next to that player - would you? Is this what we really want in BJTs?
Second, getting advice. The chip counts will change while the player is gone from the table and therefore any advice is subject to being invalid. If a player needs "quick" advice he is probably not that good of a player and will have a hard time adjusting to the change in chip counts when he returns. When a absent player returns he must re-examine all the other players chip counts which is time consuming and in fact puts him at a temporary disadvantage. Also, the hard reality of BJTs is that advice is constantly given by spectators, sometimes by flagrant violations such as talking to spectators or more coyly by secret signals.
I have heard of players p***** in their pants or worse because they were winning and maybe $50,000 is at stake. I would not want to be sitting next to that player - would you? Is this what we really want in BJTs?
Now I'm not saying you should accept this or any suggested changes to your rules. I'm just saying please avoid making up or manufacturing invalid excuses.
Last edited:
TXtourplayer
Executive Member
Just the facts
Toolman I respect you as well, but I think your confused on rule number 1. From what you posted they have at Four Winds suggest that on a misdeal they burn the entire hand if I am understanding this correctly.
This is where the dealer could have too much control over the hand. It isn't about them knowing or not knowing what cards may or maynot be coming out next, but what cards are ACTUALLY on the table at that time can be effected by the dealers misdeal.
In the TBJPA rules the cards are simple backed up to their proper position as if no misdeal had ever taken place. I don't understand how this isn't the best possible situation of handling a misdeal.
Now rule 2, I am a big ice tea and water drinker so I know what you are talking about when your at the table and nature calls, but that is something that you should take care of before sitting down to play. I have been very fortunate that I have never had to sit next to a player that couldn't or didn't hold it and if I have I'm even happier that they didn't tell me. Now I have however used the expression that I just S---! after having a bad best as has several of us have, but thank god it was only as an expression and not an actual expereance.
(Are we really talking about using the restroom at the table during tournament play? WOW, this has got to be one of the strangest topics ever on BJT.com)...lol
Now continuing with rule 2, I do agree that chip counts and situation change from hand to hand, but coaching will cover most of those situation.
These are not things I am making up to make the TBJPA rules look better these are actual situations that have occurred in different tournaments. The TBJPA rules are not something I made up myself and just decide these are the best possible rules. I had players such as Ken, S. Yama, Norm, Ace Machine, Monkeysystem, Leftnut, Swog, Walt, Dr. Bass, Rookie, ChipsMcoy, Trouble, Landlord, Eastxpro, Joep, Mr. O, and many many others all look over the TBJPA rules and help me try and create the best possible tournament rules and that would cover every possible situation so not to be left up to interpretation by the TD.
So the TBJPA rules are not just something I threw together because I liked them, they are based on actual situations from situations that several of the top tournament players have encountered and we then discussed what the best way to hand each situation. That is why I'll never just tell you "BECAUSE I SAID SO or BECAUSE THEY ARE IN THE RULES". I will always explan why the rule is in place and the reason behind it for every player benefit. If a situation should come up then we will address it at that time or if someone, (such as yourself) has a suggestion I'll be more then glad to listen and post it for all the members to see and vote on.
If you remember personally I liked no limit on stacking chips, but the majority favored max. of 10 chips per stack and the rule was changed, so again the TBJPA rules are for ALL the players and are made up by the players so I have no reason to make up excuses to try and make the TBJPA rules look and sound good. Matter of fact I don't even play in TBJPA events I am hosting or acting as TD.
Toolman I respect you as well, but I think your confused on rule number 1. From what you posted they have at Four Winds suggest that on a misdeal they burn the entire hand if I am understanding this correctly.
This is where the dealer could have too much control over the hand. It isn't about them knowing or not knowing what cards may or maynot be coming out next, but what cards are ACTUALLY on the table at that time can be effected by the dealers misdeal.
In the TBJPA rules the cards are simple backed up to their proper position as if no misdeal had ever taken place. I don't understand how this isn't the best possible situation of handling a misdeal.
Now rule 2, I am a big ice tea and water drinker so I know what you are talking about when your at the table and nature calls, but that is something that you should take care of before sitting down to play. I have been very fortunate that I have never had to sit next to a player that couldn't or didn't hold it and if I have I'm even happier that they didn't tell me. Now I have however used the expression that I just S---! after having a bad best as has several of us have, but thank god it was only as an expression and not an actual expereance.
(Are we really talking about using the restroom at the table during tournament play? WOW, this has got to be one of the strangest topics ever on BJT.com)...lol
Now continuing with rule 2, I do agree that chip counts and situation change from hand to hand, but coaching will cover most of those situation.
These are not things I am making up to make the TBJPA rules look better these are actual situations that have occurred in different tournaments. The TBJPA rules are not something I made up myself and just decide these are the best possible rules. I had players such as Ken, S. Yama, Norm, Ace Machine, Monkeysystem, Leftnut, Swog, Walt, Dr. Bass, Rookie, ChipsMcoy, Trouble, Landlord, Eastxpro, Joep, Mr. O, and many many others all look over the TBJPA rules and help me try and create the best possible tournament rules and that would cover every possible situation so not to be left up to interpretation by the TD.
So the TBJPA rules are not just something I threw together because I liked them, they are based on actual situations from situations that several of the top tournament players have encountered and we then discussed what the best way to hand each situation. That is why I'll never just tell you "BECAUSE I SAID SO or BECAUSE THEY ARE IN THE RULES". I will always explan why the rule is in place and the reason behind it for every player benefit. If a situation should come up then we will address it at that time or if someone, (such as yourself) has a suggestion I'll be more then glad to listen and post it for all the members to see and vote on.
If you remember personally I liked no limit on stacking chips, but the majority favored max. of 10 chips per stack and the rule was changed, so again the TBJPA rules are for ALL the players and are made up by the players so I have no reason to make up excuses to try and make the TBJPA rules look and sound good. Matter of fact I don't even play in TBJPA events I am hosting or acting as TD.
Last edited:
I agree with Tx on players remaining at the table.
Allowing players to leave the table will cause problems.
1) Anytime a player leaves the table there will be the possibility of accusations of some sort of coaching, whether it is likely or not, and whether it could be effective or not. Some players WILL complain.
2) I'd hate to see what would happen if a player stayed away from the table all the way to the final hand and won the round because the dealer had wiped everyone out. I sure wouldn't want to be the tournament director when that happened!
It's simpler to just require players to be present. If you leave, you forfeit.
Allowing players to leave the table will cause problems.
1) Anytime a player leaves the table there will be the possibility of accusations of some sort of coaching, whether it is likely or not, and whether it could be effective or not. Some players WILL complain.
2) I'd hate to see what would happen if a player stayed away from the table all the way to the final hand and won the round because the dealer had wiped everyone out. I sure wouldn't want to be the tournament director when that happened!
It's simpler to just require players to be present. If you leave, you forfeit.
I understand Ken's and Tx's logic. I didn't expect to change the world just posting what I thought was a good idea - and I still like it. 
Not that I'm looking for any more discussion on this subject but we are always comparing poker tournaments to BJTs for ways to get more interest in BJTs. I hesitate to bring that comparison up since I personally do not like it. What I am about to say is slightly off the subject at hand but pertinent in a strange way if you think about it. BJTs say don't talk to anybody - everybody shut up - but poker does not have a problem with players talking to the spectators, other players, leaving the table to "have a cigarette", or do I dare say "GO TO THE RESTROOM". Blackjack is different I guess but should it be that way. To those who say yes, silence is golden, I say of course, let's continue to keep it as boring as possible. My 2 most recent final table observations was at the Orleans and LV Hilton. At the Orleans I was not sure if all the players were awake, I can only assume so. I think rookie789 took a couple of cat naps at the final table but you have to ask him for conformation. At the LV Hilton I watched for about 5 minutes. The place was like a funeral wake. At the far corners of the ballroom, which was quite large, the only sound you could hear was the clicking of the shoe as cards were dispensed. I think the most noise made was my footsteps walking out. Talk about excitement. Yep, not talking is certainly a great way to help popularize BJTs. Good Luck.
Getting back to a bathroom break. I don't have a problem with not being able to leave a table. The vest I use when in a casino has a compartment in the back for larger bulkier items. 3 diapers can fit in there with no problem so I'm OK. But listen up TX, if you are ever seated next to me or even at my table you may want to ask to be moved. 
If I sound cynical, it's just the mood I'm in. Everyone wants to make BJTs more popular but we insist on keeping "Sacred Cows" that help make that dream impossible.
Not that I'm looking for any more discussion on this subject but we are always comparing poker tournaments to BJTs for ways to get more interest in BJTs. I hesitate to bring that comparison up since I personally do not like it. What I am about to say is slightly off the subject at hand but pertinent in a strange way if you think about it. BJTs say don't talk to anybody - everybody shut up - but poker does not have a problem with players talking to the spectators, other players, leaving the table to "have a cigarette", or do I dare say "GO TO THE RESTROOM". Blackjack is different I guess but should it be that way. To those who say yes, silence is golden, I say of course, let's continue to keep it as boring as possible. My 2 most recent final table observations was at the Orleans and LV Hilton. At the Orleans I was not sure if all the players were awake, I can only assume so. I think rookie789 took a couple of cat naps at the final table but you have to ask him for conformation. At the LV Hilton I watched for about 5 minutes. The place was like a funeral wake. At the far corners of the ballroom, which was quite large, the only sound you could hear was the clicking of the shoe as cards were dispensed. I think the most noise made was my footsteps walking out. Talk about excitement. Yep, not talking is certainly a great way to help popularize BJTs. Good Luck.Getting back to a bathroom break. I don't have a problem with not being able to leave a table. The vest I use when in a casino has a compartment in the back for larger bulkier items. 3 diapers can fit in there with no problem so I'm OK. But listen up TX, if you are ever seated next to me or even at my table you may want to ask to be moved.
If I sound cynical, it's just the mood I'm in. Everyone wants to make BJTs more popular but we insist on keeping "Sacred Cows" that help make that dream impossible.
Last edited:
TXtourplayer
Executive Member
My Pleasure
Toolman I always enjoy chatting with you while at the same table, I just wish I could beat you once and a while, your too tough, but now I guess I'll just have to slow play you next time...LOL.
Toolman I always enjoy chatting with you while at the same table, I just wish I could beat you once and a while, your too tough, but now I guess I'll just have to slow play you next time...LOL.
noman
Top Member
Toolman U r Correct
I was a self-inflicted victum of faulty thinking.
In between rounds I asked the tournament co-ordinator,(at the computer) how many entries there were, subtracted that from the max and self indulgently figured that eight high finishers would qualify. But as you said. In round 2 there were six tables, requiring only one top finisher. And the 54K I dont think means anything when you're trying to win a table. Only for the final 14 would the calculation come into play.
Again rules said nothing about rebuys, but there would have been 8 more available, in addition to the ones who did rebuy(regular visitors and invitees to their invitationals, which were run as this one. If only I'd asked yet one more question of the co-ordinator. To me the confusion came from the rules which stated how open spots for the final would be filled, if the max players didn't register.
Additional thought on final. Two tables of 7 with the high 7 chip counts cashing. could and usually does favor one table over the other.
But again for the area it's a start. They may or may not tweak it, but with the turn out, it might also prod some of the other 5 in the area to restart sumpin.
And there was an inordinate long delay between the second prelim and the final, when the coordinator already had the 54K from the first round.
I was a self-inflicted victum of faulty thinking.
In between rounds I asked the tournament co-ordinator,(at the computer) how many entries there were, subtracted that from the max and self indulgently figured that eight high finishers would qualify. But as you said. In round 2 there were six tables, requiring only one top finisher. And the 54K I dont think means anything when you're trying to win a table. Only for the final 14 would the calculation come into play.
Again rules said nothing about rebuys, but there would have been 8 more available, in addition to the ones who did rebuy(regular visitors and invitees to their invitationals, which were run as this one. If only I'd asked yet one more question of the co-ordinator. To me the confusion came from the rules which stated how open spots for the final would be filled, if the max players didn't register.
Additional thought on final. Two tables of 7 with the high 7 chip counts cashing. could and usually does favor one table over the other.
But again for the area it's a start. They may or may not tweak it, but with the turn out, it might also prod some of the other 5 in the area to restart sumpin.
And there was an inordinate long delay between the second prelim and the final, when the coordinator already had the 54K from the first round.
I would like to see other casinos in the area take the hint also but I think that's "pie in the sky". Four Winds is only close to the Blue Chip. The other casinos in Indiana are actually too far away to feel much pressure from Four Winds. But we can always hope.
In the meantime, the Four Winds will provide me with a monthly deviation option from my normal routine. Only hope they draw the side action to make this event profitable for many years to come. Even with the defects in their rules, it's only $60 and provides hours of entertainment.
I left after I was eliminated so I wasn't there to watch the final round. Maybe anglerun (or someone else) will see this post and respond with the 2 figures.
angelrun5
Member
I don't remember exact totals but I ended somewhere around 17000 and the winner had I belive 40000, second place also had a stack in the 40000's. I don't remember the rest. The guy who had been leading at the chip count at both the 17th hand and 20th hand took third place (he was at my table also) I know at the chip count on the 20th hand I was barely holding on to 3rd place but not out of the shot for first, and had place a bet that I hoped would have put me there, but the dealer getting a BJ on the last hand with a 10 up shot that in the foot.
I'm surprised, amazed, and whatever superlatives I can conjure up that 1st was only in the 40,000 range. Considering that the players started with 20,000, those 2 tables of the final round must have had 2 hot dealers.
angelrun5
Member
I know the other table said they had a really hot dealer, but I don't think our table the dealer was that hot, we had a couple people that were betting big from the start but the cards changed on them and they continued to bet big so you can guess what happened.
This was the first time I had played an accumulation table, so I didn't know what to expect as far as chip count or betting so I just went in with the mind set to play my table as I would normally and hope for the best.
This was the first time I had played an accumulation table, so I didn't know what to expect as far as chip count or betting so I just went in with the mind set to play my table as I would normally and hope for the best.
LeftNut
Top Member
I think she did pretty damn good, making the 1-of-7 finals then ending 5th out of 14 despite her admission that she didn't know anything about such a format.