I am new to tournament play having played in only 3 the last a small tournament in Reno last week, qualifing was unusual; every 15 minutes from 1 to 6 PM with the top 5 money winners plus wild card making the final table, a leader board was posted showing the current top 5. I played with 3 qualifing rounds left to play, on the last hand if I bet 100 and win I'm in 4th if I lose I'm in 5th, if I bet 500 and win I'm in 3rd but a lose would eliminate me, I bet 100 and won but 2 players in the last round knocked me out. I would appreciate any more experienced players analyzing my betting strategy on the final hand. Thanks
Qualifing Round Strategy
- Thread starter rookie789
- Start date
TXtourplayer
Executive Member
You did right
I think I would have played it the same way you did. By playing smart you give your self two chances to get in the finals High or Low. The other two players did what they had to do to beat you. If they both would have lost you would be in, but if you bet more and lose your out with no chance to advance. I think your play was good you just needed more luck on your side.
Hind sight is a killer in tournament play, don't let the woulda, coulda, shoulda, thoughts get you down. That stuff happens in every tournament to someone.
How did your last hand playout? Did you lose and go to 5th or win and go to 4th? With your question I am assuming you won.
I think I would have played it the same way you did. By playing smart you give your self two chances to get in the finals High or Low. The other two players did what they had to do to beat you. If they both would have lost you would be in, but if you bet more and lose your out with no chance to advance. I think your play was good you just needed more luck on your side.
Hind sight is a killer in tournament play, don't let the woulda, coulda, shoulda, thoughts get you down. That stuff happens in every tournament to someone.
How did your last hand playout? Did you lose and go to 5th or win and go to 4th? With your question I am assuming you won.
Thanks TXtourplayer
Yes I did win the final hand and was in 4th place with a max of 12 players to knock me out of the finals, i made it through the 1st six players still in 4th place but 2 players in the final qualifing round moved me out. I appreciate you're response, I am entered in Ken's Global-Player tournament and look forward to butting heads with you Pro's. Thanks again
Yes I did win the final hand and was in 4th place with a max of 12 players to knock me out of the finals, i made it through the 1st six players still in 4th place but 2 players in the final qualifing round moved me out. I appreciate you're response, I am entered in Ken's Global-Player tournament and look forward to butting heads with you Pro's. Thanks again
Depends on the totals
My decision in that situation would depend on two things primarily...
1) How high are the totals on the board? That is, how likely is it that two out of the next 12 players will pass me?
2) Are the 12 players likely to understand that they should bet aggressively enough to do that? The answer to that is probably yes.
If your total was high enough to be somewhat difficult to reach, then I like the more conservative play. If on the other hand it was not that far above the starting bankroll, a more aggressive play may have been better.
My decision in that situation would depend on two things primarily...
1) How high are the totals on the board? That is, how likely is it that two out of the next 12 players will pass me?
2) Are the 12 players likely to understand that they should bet aggressively enough to do that? The answer to that is probably yes.
If your total was high enough to be somewhat difficult to reach, then I like the more conservative play. If on the other hand it was not that far above the starting bankroll, a more aggressive play may have been better.
Thanks Ken
The qualifing round was 12 hands with a starting bank roll of 500, minimum bet 25, maximum 1,000, I had 2,100 before the last hand when i bet 100 instead of 500, at that time 1,275 was 5th, 2,175 4th, 2,575 3rd and 3,300 2nd. I based my decision on that unless i DD or split on the last hand with a 500 bet the best i could do was win 3rd but if i lost I was eliminated. FYI the guy that knocked me out doubled on hard 13 the last hand and caught a 7, he must be a subscriber to your site. Thanks for your response
The qualifing round was 12 hands with a starting bank roll of 500, minimum bet 25, maximum 1,000, I had 2,100 before the last hand when i bet 100 instead of 500, at that time 1,275 was 5th, 2,175 4th, 2,575 3rd and 3,300 2nd. I based my decision on that unless i DD or split on the last hand with a 500 bet the best i could do was win 3rd but if i lost I was eliminated. FYI the guy that knocked me out doubled on hard 13 the last hand and caught a 7, he must be a subscriber to your site. Thanks for your response
Bet big, bet small...
Rookie789, going to the last hand you were faced with two basic options:
1) Bet 100 to become the fourth best score at 2,200 if won or fifth if (pushed) lost at (2,100) 2,200
2) Bet at least 500 to become BR3 at 2,600 if won or BR5 at (2,100) 1,600 if lost.
There would be two more rounds and twelve contenders challenging your score afterwards.
Players that are not members of Ken’s site would be more timid and a bit reluctant to push out their money to get to the right score. Nevertheless, most of them would recognize the necessity to win enough chips to better the fifth best score.
If you would have your opponents playing optimally against you, even if you won your 100 bet, they would take turns playing like this: bet max (500) first hand, bet max (1,000) second hand, use progression betting 250/500/750/250/500…to end up with 2,250
Chance for getting to 2,250 from starting bankroll of 500 is about 22%. Starting the chase every second or third hand there would be 95% certainty that at least one of your opponents would surpassed you. Well, that’s a fantasy.
In reality, perhaps two-thirds to three-quarters of the players would give themselves a chance to score more than 2,200 by winning one bet. Since 2,175 and 2,200 are so close your opponents would go for the fourth spot. It means they would try to get to (or drift to) at least 1,225 before the last hand and then bet enough to end up with more than 2,200 if the bet is won. So, about a third of the eight to nine players would have more than 1,200 and take the shot at you. If three successful players try to put the nail in you coffin not on the same hand -two of them would have overcome you about 61% of the times, leaving you only about 40% chance of advancing to the final.
If you lose your 100 bet your chances would be slightly smaller.
Now, if you bet more than 500 and lose you would be still in fifth place but your chances of advancing would be virtually zero. If you push then size of your bet really doesn’t matter, does it?
If you win your bet you elevate yourself to the third spot. Since you can’t afford to lose you should opt to bet maximum, especially that you have enough founds for a defensive split. Winning 1,000 sets you so high that your score, short of rare “accidents†would be unchallenged by your opponents and if you win a double or get a blackjack you would have the second highest score. Playing a hand and using basic strategy makes you a winner more than 43% of the times.
Even better, if you had found yourself with 2,100 before going to the last hand your chances of becoming BR3 were much greater.
In accordance to Ken’s post, that your play depends on degree of aggressivness used by your opponents, to justify you choosing a minimum bet you would have to estimate that about half of the remaining players would not try to challenge your score aggressively enough.
S. Yama
Rookie789, going to the last hand you were faced with two basic options:
1) Bet 100 to become the fourth best score at 2,200 if won or fifth if (pushed) lost at (2,100) 2,200
2) Bet at least 500 to become BR3 at 2,600 if won or BR5 at (2,100) 1,600 if lost.
There would be two more rounds and twelve contenders challenging your score afterwards.
Players that are not members of Ken’s site would be more timid and a bit reluctant to push out their money to get to the right score. Nevertheless, most of them would recognize the necessity to win enough chips to better the fifth best score.
If you would have your opponents playing optimally against you, even if you won your 100 bet, they would take turns playing like this: bet max (500) first hand, bet max (1,000) second hand, use progression betting 250/500/750/250/500…to end up with 2,250
Chance for getting to 2,250 from starting bankroll of 500 is about 22%. Starting the chase every second or third hand there would be 95% certainty that at least one of your opponents would surpassed you. Well, that’s a fantasy.
In reality, perhaps two-thirds to three-quarters of the players would give themselves a chance to score more than 2,200 by winning one bet. Since 2,175 and 2,200 are so close your opponents would go for the fourth spot. It means they would try to get to (or drift to) at least 1,225 before the last hand and then bet enough to end up with more than 2,200 if the bet is won. So, about a third of the eight to nine players would have more than 1,200 and take the shot at you. If three successful players try to put the nail in you coffin not on the same hand -two of them would have overcome you about 61% of the times, leaving you only about 40% chance of advancing to the final.
If you lose your 100 bet your chances would be slightly smaller.
Now, if you bet more than 500 and lose you would be still in fifth place but your chances of advancing would be virtually zero. If you push then size of your bet really doesn’t matter, does it?
If you win your bet you elevate yourself to the third spot. Since you can’t afford to lose you should opt to bet maximum, especially that you have enough founds for a defensive split. Winning 1,000 sets you so high that your score, short of rare “accidents†would be unchallenged by your opponents and if you win a double or get a blackjack you would have the second highest score. Playing a hand and using basic strategy makes you a winner more than 43% of the times.
Even better, if you had found yourself with 2,100 before going to the last hand your chances of becoming BR3 were much greater.
In accordance to Ken’s post, that your play depends on degree of aggressivness used by your opponents, to justify you choosing a minimum bet you would have to estimate that about half of the remaining players would not try to challenge your score aggressively enough.
S. Yama
Last edited:
S. Yama thanks for the response
I have a lot to learn but it seemed to me that after a 4 hour drive and a chance to make the finals the conservative bet was my best bet, I was in 4th with 5 going to the finals after 126 players played qualifing rounds with only 12 left to play, 2 out of 12 had to beat me and only 3 of 126 had beat me so far, thats 16.6 % had to beat me and only 2.37 % had beat me so far. I'm sure you're much more advanced than I am in tournement play but I don't understand you're analogy of the final 12 players betting max $500 the 1st hand and $1,OOO the 2nd hand, if they lost either they are broke. I appreciate you're comments, I have a lot to learn.
I have a lot to learn but it seemed to me that after a 4 hour drive and a chance to make the finals the conservative bet was my best bet, I was in 4th with 5 going to the finals after 126 players played qualifing rounds with only 12 left to play, 2 out of 12 had to beat me and only 3 of 126 had beat me so far, thats 16.6 % had to beat me and only 2.37 % had beat me so far. I'm sure you're much more advanced than I am in tournement play but I don't understand you're analogy of the final 12 players betting max $500 the 1st hand and $1,OOO the 2nd hand, if they lost either they are broke. I appreciate you're comments, I have a lot to learn.
Not everything is equal.
Rookie789, I appreciate your inquisitiveness.
Before we go any further please tell me what would be your plan of play if you were playing in the last qualifying round (or next to the last) and the fourth and fifth best scores were 2,175 and 2,200?
Now, your play was a nice one. It might have been not the best one but not the bad one for sure.
My analysis is kinda dry; I wasn’t there. One of the parameters used was estimation of a type of players playing after you. Were they experts? But it takes one to know one. Were they a thinking type? Or were they the last dozen from the slot tour bus who lost race to the luckiest machines, and damn, all keno chairs were occupied and now they got stack with this stupid bj tournament?
Usually, in the beginning of accumulation type of tournament many players have no idea what the desired score should be. A majority of players play not aggressively enough, not giving themselves a chance for advancing. There are a few that shoot for the sky and after scoring some incredible wins still manage to crush and give back chips that were aplenty to advance.
Some players are quick learners though, and if reentry is allowed or if they happen to watch a few rounds and turn on their brains they start playing better. Playing in the last round(s) has a huge advantage and most of the times is quite different from early ones.
Most tournaments assign playing times randomly but not all. You could be surprised how often players “who care” manage to get later playing times.
Sometimes it is allowed to ask for specific playing time, sometimes you need to wait so the list fills out.
That means that players in last two rounds most likely are not your regular Joes (but more like Joeps – smart, very smart). They would not represent the average of what happened until then. They may know with much better precision what’s needed and they may know better how to execute it.
Enjoy the weekend; talk to you Monday,
S. Yama
Rookie789, I appreciate your inquisitiveness.
Before we go any further please tell me what would be your plan of play if you were playing in the last qualifying round (or next to the last) and the fourth and fifth best scores were 2,175 and 2,200?
Now, your play was a nice one. It might have been not the best one but not the bad one for sure.
My analysis is kinda dry; I wasn’t there. One of the parameters used was estimation of a type of players playing after you. Were they experts? But it takes one to know one. Were they a thinking type? Or were they the last dozen from the slot tour bus who lost race to the luckiest machines, and damn, all keno chairs were occupied and now they got stack with this stupid bj tournament?
Usually, in the beginning of accumulation type of tournament many players have no idea what the desired score should be. A majority of players play not aggressively enough, not giving themselves a chance for advancing. There are a few that shoot for the sky and after scoring some incredible wins still manage to crush and give back chips that were aplenty to advance.
Some players are quick learners though, and if reentry is allowed or if they happen to watch a few rounds and turn on their brains they start playing better. Playing in the last round(s) has a huge advantage and most of the times is quite different from early ones.
Most tournaments assign playing times randomly but not all. You could be surprised how often players “who care” manage to get later playing times.
Sometimes it is allowed to ask for specific playing time, sometimes you need to wait so the list fills out.
That means that players in last two rounds most likely are not your regular Joes (but more like Joeps – smart, very smart). They would not represent the average of what happened until then. They may know with much better precision what’s needed and they may know better how to execute it.
Enjoy the weekend; talk to you Monday,
S. Yama