Progressive Minimum Bets

Discussion in 'Ideas to Promote or Improve Tournaments' started by toolman1, Nov 30, 2007.

  1. toolman1

    toolman1 Active Member

    I copied this portion of a thread from another category:
    The amounts ANDREW BELL mentions relate to the size tournament he was referring to. But I think it's an interesting concept. What's the feeling out there for progressive minimum bets --- yes, as in POKER.
     
  2. fgk42

    fgk42 New Member

    Don't forget they did this with WSOB too!

    Personally I would rather have surrender than progressive min bets.

    The only place where this is absolutely necessary is with the BJ Bounty where players rotate being the bank - remember it was done in Oklahoma?
     
  3. toolman1

    toolman1 Active Member

    fgk42,

    Its not a question of this or that, surrender or progressive betting. The question of progressive betting stands alone so let's not boil this down to a choice --- for discussion purposes.

    I was not aware they had progressive betting in the WSOB - I must have been napping.

    Progressive betting need not be restricted to "Bounty BJ". Why not use it for "normal" BJTs?
     
  4. London Colin

    London Colin Top Member

    I don't really see what purpose it would serve.

    Poker is open-ended and so needs a mechanism to escalate the betting and make sure that the tournament does eventually come to an end.

    With a fixed number of rounds in a BJ tournament, there obviously isn't that requirement. The only skill element I can immediately think of that it would add is the necessity to insure that you don't leave yourself with less than the new min bet, should you lose your hand the round before it is due to go up. That would be embarrasing. :)

    Are there other implications that I haven't considered?
     
  5. rookie789

    rookie789 Active Member

    Incorrect Forum Title

    I don't think the question is surrender, progressive minimum bets or any other format changes but actually believe the title of this forum should be "How Do We Promote BJ Tournaments" not "How Do We Improve BJ Tournaments". The question is not how to change tournament formats but rather how to increase tournament participation by the masses and intrigue others.

    Toolman's signature line "If ya wanna dance ya gotta pay the band" is a great start, casinos will not offer guaranteed purses for open BJ tournaments without adequate live table play from registered tournament entrants.

    Unfortunately some feel if they payed an entry fee their obligation is fulfilled without live table action but casinos are not in the business to break even with their offerings and expect us to "give them some action" which doesn't mean red chip play an hour per day for a 40K or more prize fund.
     
  6. toolman1

    toolman1 Active Member

    I haven't given this idea a lot of thought but I brought it up for discussion with the idea that hopefully some members would inject their thoughts. Again, off the top of my head:

    1) It would probably make the play more interesting. Less minimum betting because a large bankroll will be needed come the end game. Minimum betting levels in the end game should probably be close to the starting bankroll to make things interesting.

    2) Strategy could be a little more complex because you have to consider the larger minimum in the end game.
     
  7. toolman1

    toolman1 Active Member

    As usual from you, some goods points rookie789.

    Agreed that we are not looking to change things just for the sake of change. Most seasoned players are comfortable with the status quo but that status quo is not bringing in enough new players. So making changes to the game will hopefully, as you put it, "increase tournament participation by the masses and intrigue others". We are on the same page on this just expressing it in different words.

    And a big ABSOLUTELY on your comment about side action.
     
  8. London Colin

    London Colin Top Member

    Probably the only way to truly evaluate ideas like this is to try them out, but my gut feeling is that it would be a change for the worse, making the game too much of a lottery.
     
  9. London Colin

    London Colin Top Member

    I mentioned this before and nobody commented - why can't the side action come from sources other than live tables, in particular from raked BJ sit-n-gos?

    Surely this would benefit both the casino and the players -
    • Savvy tournament players, reluctant to play negative-expectation games, can instead indulge their passion for TBJ.
    • Savvy tournament players, skilled in card counting, whose side action would be costing the casino money, will instead be giving the casino 10%.
    A key difference between BJ and poker is that BJ takes so much less time to complete. If the minimum number of players at a table is not set too high, I would think there could be a tremendous turnover from sit-n-gos.
     
  10. LeftNut

    LeftNut Top Member

    My thoughts, too. If the "house" was making enough profit from a rake that was built into the entry fees for the main tournament & any SnG's, the entire problem of getting enough side action would become a moot point.

    I'm not so sure about the progressive minimums. As already pointed out, poker has escalating blinds specifically to insure that the game will end. TBJ has a finite number of hands, so that's not a problem. Good idea, though, just IMHO not really workable.
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2007
  11. fgk42

    fgk42 New Member

    Problem with progressive minimums:

    1. Hot Dealer (not just physical so stop panting) and on hand 12 the minimum goes up to more than what chips you have. Are you eliminated? :confused:
     
  12. ANDREW BELL

    ANDREW BELL New Member

    :D
     
  13. ANDREW BELL

    ANDREW BELL New Member

    Colin, I agree that we need to find a way to make b-j tournaments profitable to casino's. And this I belive has to come from the players. as you said the players don't give the casino's enough side play for it to be profitable for the casino's. here's some food for thought on a made for t.v. B-J tournament

    1. There are only 70 seats in the tournament.
    2. play one round, 10 tables, only one advances to final table
    3. every player has a mulligan chip
    4.After the only round of play 7 play in final round. should take less than a hour for all 70 to play and less than a hour for final table.

    This floor mat is made for t.v. This would be a plus for a casino to host.
    If the buy in was $2500.00 that would give the tournament a pool of $175000.00. from that pool you would pay the dealers and pit boss, salry and tips. the player does not have to worry how much to tip , and the casino does not have that overhead.any new player would have 1/70th of a chance of winning.If there would be t.v. envolved that would increase the pool of pay out and that could come from t.v. and the host casino.

    I'm sure this floormat if far from perfect, but on this site there is more than enough expertice to refine it . [ or dump it ]
     
  14. fgk42

    fgk42 New Member


    Andrew - I'll agree with you that it TBJ are going to continue it needs to be paid and supported by players.

    With regard to your proposed format:

    1. 7 players at a table - way too crowded. 6 is the max mainly given the physical size of TBJ players

    2. Only having 1 advance is a BIG NO NO. I HATE that 1 advance rule and generally WON'T play in those types of events. There is just too much luck with TBJ for a 1 player per table to advance.

    3. Why must everyone think that TBJ have to have TV coverage? Let me tell you this: No TV station is gonna take a chance of filming a BJT in the beginning. Once you have a "track record" then you can think about TV.

    I think a BIG mistake that BJT promoters/hosts have is holding the BJT on the main casino floor. BIG NO NO

    WHY

    You're tying up tables that could be bringing in real money. A crowd forms and it's just disruptive overall.

    I believe the key is to hold the BJT with 4 or 5 tables in a conference room. Have a "cash bar", pump in music (I'll bring my ipod) and make it a fun good time. Fewer tables means fewer dealers (the host's biggest expense). This also means the players will have more "down time" between rounds and what should they do...play the cash tables right?

    With regard to fees: Have it listed like they do with poker: 500+50 or 400+40. The extra fees (10% vig) goes to pay the dealers and overhead.

    So how does the caino make?

    Simple - sell a mulligan (50-100) optional (this is pure profit)
    Re-buys - casino keeps these fees - set at 50% of initial buy in so for the 550 event the rebuy is 275 - pure profit for the host casino.

    The only thing is the initial event HAS to be a guarenteed event 50,000 say. If they only get 30 players & 550 (15,000+1500) then the host is gonna lose money - so they would invite 60 of their players for a total of 90 players. Now if there is 50 players doing re-buys (275 * 50) 13,750 so the host has collected 15,000+13,750=28,750 + 1,500 for dealers

    BUT they've com'd 60 of their players into an event and this becomes a loss leader of 20,000 ( actually less depending upon how many mulligans were sold).
     
  15. TXtourplayer

    TXtourplayer Executive Member

    Free will

    I am against any forced betting, except maybe for TV. If players want to low ball throughout the tournament that should be their right. After all they paid their entry and should be able to play the why they want.

    However on the flip side, I do believe that a maximum limit should be set in tournament play to help cut down the luck factor.

    The low bettors don't really effect the table, while a "Rabbitt" or "Slammer" can with no limits can throw a table all out of wack!

    It may sound like dual standards, but a minimum bet allows everyone a chance to play the entire round or at least most of it. A rabbitt, when hitting may force the entire table to start chasing them by mid-way through the round.

    With a maximum bet, this at least keeps the rabbitt under some control.

    This is my opinion anyway.
     
  16. RKuczek

    RKuczek Member

    "Side Action" is ruining Tournament Blackjack

    Once again we are seeing posts encouraging players to give casinos 'side action' - to encourage the casinos to offer tbj - a VERY bad idea -

    why?

    because when casinos are motivated to offer tbj to get side action - they are focusing on running tbj as a promotion - no different from a slot tournament - casinos don't run poker tourneys just for the side action - they rake the entries and make money off of the tourneys - that's why we see more poker tourneys than all other types combined - forget side action - that's a loser concept - encourage casinos to run raked tbj tourneys - and make a profit off of the tourneys themselves - then we'll see more tbj - if casinos think side action is where their profit is - then we get few tbjs, run as promotions, with carnival game rules -

    and don't forget, that casinos don't want side action from advantage players - just unskilled players - this isn't a factor in poker - where the cash games are raked - so casinos don't care if you are a skilled poker player - but they very much care if you are an advantage bj player - again - side action just encourages the casinos to set up their tourneys to benefit those players with the least skills - run them as pure promos - and discourage the more skilled players from competing - that's NOT how to promote more and better tbj

    if we want tbj to flourish, with more tourneys and decent, fair, formats and rules - with open entry - we need to make the tourneys themselves a profit center for the casinos - anything else is just bs and wanting the casinos to give you something for nothing

    raked tourneys and be willing to put your skills on the line - that's how we will get more and better tourneys - the idea of encouraging casinos to run tourneys for side action does not benefit serious tbj players - just players who want/need casino handouts and comps, because they can't play well enough to survive in a competitive environment - we don't need or want carnival game promo tourneys set up for unskilled players - we want tourneys set up to test the skills of players - and that give the casinos a profit center - so they will want to run good tourneys frequently - because they will make money by doing so -

    when casinos make money off the tourneys - then we will see more and better tourneys- not before

    if we want tbj to flourish - then recognize it is not bj, but a unique game unto itself - forget side action, encourage profitable (for the casinos) raked tourneys - promote skillful play, not 'positive ev' - and forget gimmicky, carnival game formats and rules changes - demand fair and reasonable formats and playing rules that allow for as much of a skill component as we can put into a game that is already very much luck driven -

    the aspect of poker tournaments we want to bring into tbj is that it is a game that casinos WANT to offer as they make money off of it - and - poker tourneys, while luck is important, allow the skilled player an opportunity to compete in a fair game against other players - with skill determing the outcome as much as possible - we don't need to alter tbj to make it 'more like poker' and end up reducing the skill component to zero as a result - that is not going to help tbj
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2007
  17. toolman1

    toolman1 Active Member

    Unfortunately for us TBJers, casinos, unconsciously, lump tournaments into 2 categories: POKER and ALL OTHERS. Before poker became popular there was just the ALL OTHERS. So lets look at the 2 categories.

    POKER TOURNAMENTS:
    Played basically the same as live poker. No additional training of dealers to speak of. Few if any additional "supervisors" needed. Each table makes about the same profit for the casino as a live poker table. Its a no brainer for the casino - keep customers happy and make guaranteed profits whether a person is playing live or tournament poker. In other words, the casino is making money on every player that walks through the door. If a casino runs a "free" tournament then they have minimal costs per person. Harrah's (Las Vegas) runs a invite only quarterly $75,000 Poker Tournament based on 2,000 players. That's a seat value of $37.50 :eek: . Their cost per player to run the tournament is small (because the cost is distributed over 2,000 players). So maybe their total cost is $50 per player. Most players will bring someone with them so the casino brings in 4,000 potential players for live games. Even if each of those 4,000 average a loss of only $100 over a 3 day visit, that's $400,000 taken in by the casino. Realistically, those 4,000 will lose a lot more. Harrah's gain from gaming could easily be well over $1,000,000 for this event.

    "ALL OTHER" TOURNAMENTS:
    Lots of promotional expense. Lots of planning. Lots of special training. Lots of setup expense. Lots of additional salary expense. No guaranteed profit from each player that walks through the door. A 10% rake on a $100,000 tournament is $10,000. Does anyone think that that's enough to prompt a casino to have a tournament after considering expenses.

    Now I can't see, in my lifetime, how casino's will ever consider BJTs anything more than a promotional gimmick to bring in players for the side action and categorize it like slots, 3 card poker, Pai Gow, etc.. Without side action there simply is not enough profit unless you raise the rake to a level that is unacceptable to the player in which case you get less players with a resulting profit drop for the casino. Yes, its a vicious circle. If the casino does things like keep rebuy money, that's the same as increasing the rake and the players will not stand for it. Some casinos have resorted to various gimmicks to supplement income. But this is often necessary to come up to the profit they expect (including side action) considering their expenses.

    The casinos will not have more open BJT events until there are more players and those players are willing to give side action. That's the long and short of it. So we should be concentrating our efforts on changes to the game that will bring in more players and then the casinos will be, at least a little, more willing to try open tournaments.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2007
  18. RKuczek

    RKuczek Member

    Toolman

    You ignored several of the main points in my posts, and didn't think them through -

    1. Casinos DON'T WANT SIDE ACTION FROM SKILLED BJ PLAYERS, ONLY FROM UNSKILLED PLAYERS, AND THE LESS SKILL THE BETTER - therefore they will design tbj tournaments to emphasize luck over skill as much as possible, turning them into something as close to a slot tourney as they possibly can - as THEY WANT TO DISCOURAGE SKILLED PLAYERS FROM COMPETING AND GIVE UNSKILLED PLAYERS AN EQUAL CHANCE TO WIN THE TOURNEY

    2. poker tourneys rake the buy-ins only, just like a raked tbj would be - and poker tourneys take as long or longer to play than tbj - so the casinos could make the same percentage rake and make it faster - the more players - in either poker or tbj - the longer the tourney takes to play - for the same number of players - tbj plays faster -

    3. Casinos could create an acceptable type of side action (from their perspective) - simply by offering Sit-and-Goes - and rake the buy-ins on them - no worry about advantage players taking down the house that way - this would work just as well for tbj as cash games work for poker tourneys

    4. Casinos always have the option of running any tourney as a promo - just by comping in players - or - adding money to the prize pool - tbj the same as poker -

    5. The reasons that we don't see more tbj players are: Casinos have no interest in promoting tbj, as they don't make money off of it; the rules and formats are not standardized, and this discourages inexperienced and/or casual players from competing; the games tend to be gimmicky, this discourages smart players from competing; no one has identified a group to market tbj to, it is not 'blackjack players', as tbj is a different game, emphasizing head to head competition, most blackjack players want something else.

    6. if we want a lot of open tourneys with good rules and formats; we need to change something - not just keep harping about how people don't give casinos 'side action' and thinking about new 'gimmicks' to 'make the game more exciting', that obviously is not, has not, and will not work

    7. we need to develop a fundamentally new perspective on tbj - and educate casinos that tbj can be profitable for them - just as poker has become a profit center - if it is developed right - and that is as a raked game of skill - and it needs to be marketed to competitive persons who want a contest of skill -

    8. pushing more of the same old rants will only get us the same old results - think out of the box - don't just repaint the existing box - try thinking of tbj as something more than a 'promo for poorly skilled high-rolling bj players' - think of it as a new game - and educate casinos to change their perspective on it - that won't be easy - but it at least may work - what we have now doesn't
     
  19. toolman1

    toolman1 Active Member

    RKuczek,

    I didn't ignore the points you brought up. True, I didn't quote everything from your post but I covered everything in my response. Normally I don't respond on a point by point basis, that's not my style. However, I'll make an exception here since I can't sleep (insomnia) anyway and need something to occupy my time :D .

     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2007
  20. LeftNut

    LeftNut Top Member

    One thing that I haven't noticed here - if a casino ran a raked TBJ that gave them some kind of profit, they would also consider that there would be side action as a result. Not only from the TBJ players, but also from folks who accompanied them to the event. Spouses, friends, etc., who would likely not be as well-versed in advantage play as the tournament contestants themselves. I've gone to casinos where a juicy video poker play was available, accompanied by friends who wandered around banging away at the nickel video slots. You can bet that the casino bean counters are aware of this phenomenon, too!
     

Share This Page