kelly_c_ritter
Member
I played in the July 25-27 bj tournament at Paris, and wasn't particularly thrilled with some aspects of it. Originally, the tournament was supposed to be at Bally's , but was changed to Paris. This was an invitational event which was supposed to have a $40k prize fund. They cut it to $20.5k when they garnered fewer than 100 entrants. There were a limited number of $250 rebuys available with rebuy players playing along with original entrants. Rounds were 15 hands with a countdown after 10 hands, and no secret bet. Entrants also received a T shirt and $100 in food vouchers for either Paris or Ballys.
I really don't like the Harrah's blind draw format whereby a player cannot even indicate a preference for when they would like to play.
In the second round, there were 18 tables with only 1 advancing to the semifinals. I believe that they had 30 first round tables (2 advanced in the first round) which would have meant 60 players made it to the second round. This led to some second round tables nominally having three players while other tables had four players. Sure, it is random whether you are at a four person table or a three person table, but there is no reason at all why you couldn't instead make things equitable for all by having 12 tables with 5 at a table (maybe 2 advance instead of 1?). This isn't sour grapes on my part since I was supposed to be at a three person table which ended up being a two person table when one person didn't show up.
They then added six wild card entrants by way of a drawing to the 18 players who earned their way in. To me, this seems like too many wild cards. They didn't need to do this. The tournament rules simply specified that there would be at least two wild card entrants that would make the semis.
Why was the turnout so low? I didn't receive an invite, but my Harrah's ADT
easily warranted inclusion in this event, but trying to get details on the tournament
was difficult. I went over to Bally's on Friday evening to register, not knowing exactly where the registration was being held, but knew it was at Bally's rather than Paris. I inquired at the VIP check-in area, and they weren't even aware that the tournament existed. I have to believe that Harrah's could do a whole lot better job
attracting people to their tournaments. Drastically cutting prize funds when turnout happens to be lower than they would like is just going to discourage people from attending these kinds of tournaments in the future because they will start to expect
lower than advertised prize funds.
I really don't like the Harrah's blind draw format whereby a player cannot even indicate a preference for when they would like to play.
In the second round, there were 18 tables with only 1 advancing to the semifinals. I believe that they had 30 first round tables (2 advanced in the first round) which would have meant 60 players made it to the second round. This led to some second round tables nominally having three players while other tables had four players. Sure, it is random whether you are at a four person table or a three person table, but there is no reason at all why you couldn't instead make things equitable for all by having 12 tables with 5 at a table (maybe 2 advance instead of 1?). This isn't sour grapes on my part since I was supposed to be at a three person table which ended up being a two person table when one person didn't show up.
They then added six wild card entrants by way of a drawing to the 18 players who earned their way in. To me, this seems like too many wild cards. They didn't need to do this. The tournament rules simply specified that there would be at least two wild card entrants that would make the semis.
Why was the turnout so low? I didn't receive an invite, but my Harrah's ADT
easily warranted inclusion in this event, but trying to get details on the tournament
was difficult. I went over to Bally's on Friday evening to register, not knowing exactly where the registration was being held, but knew it was at Bally's rather than Paris. I inquired at the VIP check-in area, and they weren't even aware that the tournament existed. I have to believe that Harrah's could do a whole lot better job
attracting people to their tournaments. Drastically cutting prize funds when turnout happens to be lower than they would like is just going to discourage people from attending these kinds of tournaments in the future because they will start to expect
lower than advertised prize funds.