World Series of Blackjack on GSN, Finals

Tough for me to watch as well! And a strange format to this last game, where many, many key hands were completely missing. They could have turned this one into a two hour special, that's how tense it was. All in all, some classic tournament play -- everyone really knew what they were doing out there, it was incredibly challenging to say the least. As for me, I want to say how honored I was just to be sitting at a table with such amazing talent. When I first started counting cards and making trips to Vegas years ago to eke out my narrow 2% advantage, I never thought I'd end up at that table one day! And to top it off -- I've made some really great friends. We've got a great little advantage-player community, and I'm proud to be a part of it!

-dave.

ps: i still want to know how the hell Ken Smith hit the 18 (or was it 19) against the dealer's 10, asked for "the 2" -- and GOT IT. Now i see it was his best play, but when i was sitting there next to him -- i swear to God that freaked me out. I concluded that he was not only COUNTING down the deck, but also shuffle-tracking & keeping a side-count of every single card! Terrifying, not human, and I recommend immediate quarantine before his mad genius makes his brain explode...

 

Wow

Well that series was great. I was cheering for ya, Ken. I've enjoyed your site for several months!

I definitely have to agree with Dave, this should have been a 2-hour special. It's frustrating to get into the action and then cut to a break, returning five hands later.

Anyways I'm surprised we're on the net chatting with two guys who sat at a $100k table on cable TV with MIT Mike. That's pretty cool. Although I'd want to stay away from him - don't the casinos have a hit out on his head? : )

Dave and Ken, any good stories about your trip? Or have you spilled those beans in other threads... stuff like, did they put in up in the Sun? Over how many days did they film? Etc.

Thanks again Ken. Good luck in Vegas.

 

It sounds like it was a really great time. It certainly was fun for me to watch. Congratulations to everyone, obviously, for making it that far. That last hand was great to watch. Certainly got some noise out of me when that card flipped over and Tiki didn't bust.

 

WSoBJ Summary

Previously on the World Series of Blackjack…

Regina Guzior backed into her win on the final hand of her round, having neither the high or the low in a crowded field (through no fault of her own, she was BR4 and 2nd to act). But after James underbet and Michael Konik surrendered for a guaranteed 2nd place, Regina held on for first.

MIT Mike had excellent position on the last hand of his qualifier, but made a big mistake in leaving room for Hollywood Dave to double down. Luckily for Mike, Dave did not take him up on the offer, wanting to secure 2nd place, so MIT Mike got the win.

Micky Rosa had last position in his round, and Brad Peterson made a huge bet, forcing Micky not to match, lest he let third place have a shot at winning. When the dealer beat Brad, Micky took the win.

Jimmy Pine had the lead head to head against Previn Mankoti but was forced to bet first. Jimmy took the low, and the dealer hit to 21, putting Jimmy in the finals.

Ken Smith had the lead, but had to bet first going into the final hand. He made an anti-Wongian max bet, but neither of his opponents took the low. Ken then chose to double is 13 against a 3 to protect the high road (surrender was his best bet), and he pulled an ace for the win after a dealer bust.

Hollywood Dave Stann was head-to-head against Bobby J in the final round with position on Bobby. Dave took the high road, and after his distracting tabletalk, Bobby did not double, allowing Dave’s A9 to easily win.

And now for the finals. Just to annoy me, the stakes, minimum and maximum are all multiplied by ten. That’s to remind the viewer that this game is for big bucks, but it’s just a meaningless 0 for me.

Hand 1
Regina and Dave start with 3000, Mike starts with 2000. The dealer hits to 18, and Regina and Ken win, while Micky loses.

Hand 2
Regina bets 3000 and Dave takes his progression to 6000. Regina is already annoyed with Dave (not a good sign). Dave and Micky surrender against the Q, but the dealer busts, to give Regina the early lead.

Hand 7
Since we left, Regina extended her lead to 126K. Dave has 122K and Jimmy, Mike and Ken are all grouped around 105K. Micky made a move on the previous hand and lost 20K, so he’s betting 40K this hand. Regina bets 6000 and Dave bets 12K which would pass Regina and be within 500 of Micky. Ken thought about making a move after falling behind despite 6 straight wins, but he stays small. Dave gets BJ. Micky and Regina both get 19s on their big bets. The dealer gets 18, and Dave is in the lead, with Regina and Micky about 8K behind.

Hand 11
In the interim, Dave has built his chips up to 152K, and 40K behind, Ken makes a move, betting 23000. Ken gets a pair of jacks against a 9, and probably wishes he max bet. Dave doubles his 11 v 9 with a 3000 bet, while everyone else busts, including the dealer. Ken has yet to lose a hand, as he moves into second.

Hand 14
Dave now has a 40K lead on the field. Micky, Regina and Ken are now all betting 4000, along with Dave who still is doing his progression. Mike and Jimmy see no point, so they stick with 1000. The dealer busts again (Dave doubles to boot), as the rich get richer.

Hand 15
Ken is back to 1000, and Dave gets a little slaphappy with his lead. He splits tens (a good move only if the deck is very positive), but then hits a 12 v. a 4 (a good move only if the deck is negative). Dave busts on his 12, but then Jimmy does the same thing, implying that the deck was negative (but why split the 10s? Wasting money just to mess with people?) The dealer hits to 18, and Dave keeps his 40K lead.

Hand 19
Dave’s given back half of his lead, as he stands at 157K. Micky’s moved up to 137K, while Ken and Regina have dropped back to around 115K apiece. Ken’s bet 23K (another weird middling bet), and Dave’s bet 13K. Ken gets 11 v. 10 and doubles down, while Dave doesn’t split his 20 this time. The deler turns over 19, and Ken’s double-down card was a deuce, costing him 92K and puts him in a desperate situation.

Hand 20
Ken’s shellshocked, and only bets 1000, well predicted by Max. I guess with 11 hands to go, and 2 max bets behind, there’s not a huge need to bet it all, but I would think that time is against you here. I also don’t know the payout distribution for 1st-6th, so I am assuming the 1st is big enough to play for here. If 2nd-4th is high enough, Ken’s reluctance to go broke makes sense. Micky uses this opportunity to make his own goofy 23K bet. Micky gets a pair of 9’s against a ten., but after flipping a 6, the dealer hits to 20, dropping Mike to 80K.

Hand 22
Mike makes a max bet, while Ken is still laying back. Dave has 10K out, and Regina has 15K. Mike doubles his 10 against a 5, going all in for 79.5K (Regina and Dave get stiffs). The dealer hits to 8, 13, and 22, and MIT Mike storms into 2nd place, 19K and 1 position behind Dave.

Hand 24
Ken doesn’t want to finish 6th, as he bets 46.5K, holding 3000 back. Micky has also max bet, trying to come close to the leaders (Dave and Mike). Micky hits to 18 vs. the 8 and Regina, with a 5K bet hits to 21. Ken stays on 19, but Dave doubles 13 v. 8, when he doesn’. The dealer hits to 21, and “Young Jimmy Dime†comes alive as two of his opponents are crippled, Ken critically wounded. Dave lost his double down, while Mike takes a 4500 lead on Dave and a 41.5K lead on Regina, who’s in 3rd.

Hand 25
Micky bets half of his 51K, and Ken is suffering the same problem that Jane had in episode 5. If you play not to bust, all you do is force 5th place to play just as conservatively and you are both hurt as a result. Regina only bets 10K. Dave bets 12K, and MIT Mike rightly matches him. Micky Rosa gets a BJ, with his bet, and decides to take this shot and double down instead. I can see why he does it, but not only does he only stand to gain 25.5K if he wins, there was a reason he did not max bet originally, and this adds the risk of coming in 6th risk to what would have been a sure thing. The dealer busts, saving Micky when Tiki turns up his 3. Micky is still in 4th, 73K out of the lead.

Hand 28
Ken picks hand 28 to bet his remaining 2K, and I don’t see the point in changing his strategy now. Dave and Mike bet matching 18.5K bets, and Micky and Regina bet most of their stacks, while Jimmy stays with 1000. They are giving Jimmy a lot of grief for his 1000 bets, but with Dave betting big and Mike matching, theres a good chance that the field will back into him. Dave surrenders 14 v. a Q. Max says it’s a bad surrender. I don’t think it’s bad at all. Dave will have final position going into hand 30, so there’s not a huge need to move. On the other hand, Dave needs to stay within 1675 of Mike to have a good shot at the end, and it is true that a surrender put Dave puts him over 1700 behind. Athough, if Dave busts, he’ll be a max bet behind. It’s a very close call. Meanwhile, Ken surrenders to avoid busting out. The dealer turns over 20, knocking Regina, Micky and Ken into a fight for 4th-6th.

 

WSoBJ Finats (continued)

Hand 29
Jimmy 114,500
Micky 5,000
Regina 12,500
Ken 1,000
*Dave 122,250
Mike 148,250

Dave starts out betting 27,000 just enough to take the lead if Mike pushes. But what Dave needs to do is max bet. That way, Mike has to think twice about matching, or he risks giving Jimmy a way in. It’s similar to the gambit Bradley Peterson made earlier. Mike, with noting to lose, matches Dave’s bet. Jimmy pushes the door open himself, betting the max and giving him his best chance to win. Meanwhile, in the loser’s bracket, Regina matches Micky’s bet to hold onto 4th position, while Ken has to go all-in with 1000. Mike gets a 20 against a queen, while Dave gets 17. Dave could double here for a shot at the lead, but I think his best hope is to pray for a miracle on hand 30. He doesn’t double. Jimmy has an 8, thinks about doubling, but just hits and gets a 3 for 11, then 14, 15 and 16. He hits (he needs to) and busts. In the loser’s bracket, Micky gets a 20, while Regina busts. With his last 1000 on the line, Ken shows off his knowledge of the free hit, by hitting his 19. After all, his only hope of not coming in last is hitting to 21, while the dealer gets 20 and ties Micky. It would be comical if there was not $5000 on the line, but he gets his 21! Sadly, the dealer busts and his brilliance is for naught. Although Dave should kiss his feet (as should the producers), cause without the free hit, the dealer would have hit to 18, and Mike would be over a max bet in the lead with 1 hand to go. It’s still hopeless, but not as hopeless.

Hand 30
Jimmy 64,500
Micky 7,000
Regina 10,500
Ken 2,000
Dave 149,250
*Mike 175,250

Mike bets 40,000, giving him the option of surrender. But in exchange for locking out Jimmy, it does not cover a BJ by Dave. Seeing that Jimmy may not want to risk busting on the last hand and dropping to 6th, I think a max bet by Mike is better. Jimmy, after being locked out of 1st (unless he got a BJ), figures that Dave is going to have to double down, tries to get the low on Dave. It won’t work, since Dave can double for less and still beat Mike, but I assume that was what he was trying for. I think his best bet was to max bet and pray for BJ and hope that Mike can’t surrender. His chance of losing 4th would be pretty small anyway. Micky bets 2500 to lock out Ken. It doesn’t give him much shot at 4th, but still the right bet. Regina matches the bet, but loses the chance to surrender into 4th. Ken bets it all and prays for BJ. Dave has two choices: Max bet and pray for a double-down, or bet up to 13,500 and win while Mike loses or surrenders. I think that Dave’s bet of 12000 was the right one.

Hand 30
Jimmy 54,500 10,000 20 Dealer: 10
Micky 4,500 2,500 20
Regina 10,500 2,500 15
Ken 0 2,000 14
Dave 137,250 12,000 7
*Mike 135,250 40,000 13

Mike is a huge underdog, so he has to surrender, and force Dave to win. I think Mike is really not positive, but Dave talks him through it and tells him that he has to surrender, and for the first time, I wonder if Dave’s kibitzing hurt him. This game is all about making bad decisions in key stressful situations, and Dave didn’t let Mike make a possible mistake. Jimmy has locked 3rd and there’s nothing he can do. Micky could split, but he’s got a shot at 4th by staying and he does. Regina is wishing she could surrender into 4th now, but she can’t. Since she doesn’t need to win the hand, just prevent a swing, she studies the “win both ways†chart in her head and decides to stay on 15. Unfortunately, the correct play in the real chart is to hit (hey, I would have gotten it wrong also). No longer will a magical free hit save Ken, so he plays it normally and busts. Dave needs a great card, but he gets a worthless ten, and after consulting the “Push is as bad as a loss†chart in his head (which says he would have had to stay on 15), he puts it in the dealer’s control. The dealer flips over the 5 for a 15, giving Dave his shot, but then flips a 3 for 18, giving Mike the championship, and vaulted Micky into 4th. A good showing for the MIT blackjack team.

Postscript:
Regina was supposed to hit to 17. If she did she would have gotten Ken’s A and 7 and busted. Ken would have gotten Dave’s 10 and busted. Hollywood Dave would have gotten the dealer’s 3, and would have hit to 10, opposite what we now know was the dealer’s 15. We don’t know what the remaining cards in the shoe were. But it seems pretty likely that is Dave only told Regina what HER best play was we’d be looking at a different champion. Food for thought…

 

First of all, congrats to the winner and to all participants of WSOBJ.

Guys, you have done a great job, for yourselves and for all fans of bj tournaments. I truly believe you tremendously helped popularizing bj tournaments and perhaps you opened doors for many interesting possibilities in the future.

Catching a moment in between my (mostly poker) tournaments, a brief comment:
One of the most important skills in tournaments is to identify situation correctly.
For example, Regina’s play is not “win both waysâ€. It is “avoid full swingâ€. She may “let†Micky win if she pushes and she is okay losing her hand if he pushes. In this situation correct play is to stay on hard fifteen vs. dealer’s ten – as she did.
Now, for those who want to know the exact numbers, staying gets Regina fourth place 63.6% of the time while hitting it once drops her chances to 62.4% and hitting to seventeen works 62.2% of the time. Yeah, huge difference.

S. Yama

 

Hi Everyone,
I run an online MSN free web community called DoubleDown Enterprises:BlackjackUnlimited, and I've got to say the email and feedback we've gotten about the WSOBJ hasn't been as positive as here. While the majority of our posters and emailers all seem to be glad the game is getting more exposure thru this show, many of my members and I have voiced disappointment with the way the play has gone/covered. If blackjack hopes to develop something as big as the WSOP has become, I believe that a viewer watching has to get the feeling they're really seeing top notch play, and getting excellent critical breakdown of what's going on. To be honest, if the coverage of the show were as good as some of the reviews I've read here over the weeks, I think the GSN show would've been much better.

One example is the way that the possibility of ties was never really explained much at all, and even when it did come up, very small discussion of the rules governing it was found. Another thing that bothered me during the show was the announcer's constant insistance that players need to be going all in- often in the early 20ish hands- when in reality the point of mastering tournament play is being alive and within striking distance for the final five hands of your tournament. You don't want to let another get far ahead of you (rabbitt effect) but you don't want to blow out and not even be around for the real action. It seemed like the show had gotten some of the players who would've normally known better to be far more aggressive than their prior hands (up to that point) called for...maybe to add "action" to parts of the bj tournament that can be boring for t.v.?? If that were a concern, they could've edited better and simply done recapping on non-essential hands.

And please don't get me wrong. I'm glad to have another avenue where blackjack is being spotlighted. But much of the play in this tournament didn't seem quite the same as I've encountered in casino tournaments over the years- including letting the players talk and discuss strategy at the table. The last tournament I played in out in Vegas a player was warned he'd be kicked out if he tried talking strategy at another player...Again, if it was for t.v. effect I can understand the idea, but think next time around they should follow more traditional tournament approaches and let the play speak for itself.

Congrats to MIT Mike, who I was pulling for And I'd like to give a big THANK YOU to Micky for finally doubling down on a blackjack!!! I was waiting for someone to do it, and was surprised by the relatively conservative lack of 10 splitting. That's far more common in tournament play than we saw.

Ken, did you have a dealer tell on that magic pull/free hit? Your move in hindsight didn't hurt you but sure did effect the others on the table...or was that something you wanted? When I've encountered plays like that in the past it's been because two players have had agreements to split winnings and "help" or "hurt" the table as necessary to aid one another.

btw, I've given props out and a link to this site to my members before so keep up the good discussions and feel free to check us out too!

 

If the players knew ahead that it took so long, I think they might give the 2nd place in first round a huge discount, and just shot for the 1st place. Of course this rule doesn't apply for those like Dave who was looking for TV exposure.

 

Thanks, Yama. As I pointed out in my summary, that at the time, I also had a hunch that she should stand, since she only loses by standing if the dealer hits to 17, 18, or 19. It was only after I looked at the "Win Both Ways" chart, that I second guessed myself. Sadly, I do not have my own "Avoid Full Swing" chart, nor does my brain have room for it. Have most of you memorized these situational play charts, or do you go on instincts at the table?

I wholeheartedly agree. For the last two shows, I've been yelling at the screen every time Matt and Max were giving players like Richard Munchkin, Ken Smaith and Jimmy Pine a hard time over their minimum bets. Yes, the dealer was busting like crazy for 2 rounds in a row, and shame on the tournament players for not having the foresight to predict that. For all their complaining, Richard Munchkin has an unlucky double-down away from taking the lead in the wild card round, and Jimmy Pine nearly backed into the lead. I'm sorry that minimum bets are so boring for your viewers, but if you really can't stand that, make some stupid rule like requiring the players to bet at least thier bankroll once over the first 20 hands. For me, I don't have problems with 1000 bets over the first 10 hands or so, until leaders and followers are defined. You are not going to show all the hands anyway.

Except that the left off the button location. Oops!

 

Last hand's bet for Mike and Dave.

Mike's bet 40000 was a good one, but I would suggest betting 25000. The only disadvantage of 25000 to 40000 is: 25000 can not cover Dave's double down for a max bet (while 40000 can cover it by doubling down). But 25000 can automatically cover the low without surrender, and as long as Mike does not bust, Dave will have a tough time to decide whether to double. 25000 also has the advantage over lower bet that in case Dave gets a BJ with max bet, Mike can still double.

Now let's talk about Dave's bet 12000. I think 13500 is a better bet. In some cases, Mike might have a very high chance to tie the dealer (for example, Mike 20 vs. dealer 10), then for Dave it is worth doubling down to cover Mike's tie by giving up the low. I did some computation, and it shows that "Dave 11, Mike 20 vs dealer 10" is the perfect example for Dave to double. The reason that this play was possible was because Mike bet over 1.5*lead=3900. For some "local adjustment", then 38000 is a better bet than 40000. I still prefer 25000 over 38000 though.

 

Winning wrong and losing right?

I love reading all the comments about "Correct Plays"; I found that the best play, highest percentages don't always win. I am just letting the newbies know so they would be disappointed one tournament making the right play and get beat by someone’s "Wrong play".

All I am tell you is I would rather win the wrong way then lose the right way. Everybody could laugh at me and I would be laugh as well, all the way to the bank.

Don't get me wrong I play by the book about 85% of the time, but you have to spice it up some time during your round in tournament play unless your just on one of those magical round where your winning your minimum bets while the others are losing bigger bets. Sure it happens, but how often. How many times do you win by all the others busting out early?

Years ago I looked back at how I won some of my tournaments, a DD on hard 12 and caught a 9 on the last hand, dealer made 21 on last hand with me going low, dealer BJ on last hand and me taking insurance, and the list goes on. I won several without the drama, but I also lost several to bad beats.

The game is LUCK, who has it? Last nights finals were a perfect example. MIT Mike was in last place and hit a big DD (good luck), Ken's big bet DD 11 vs. 10 and got a 3 (bad luck), Micky hitting BJ (lucky) DD and winning after catching a 3 (Very lucky), The entire group lucky Ken and Jimmy didn't come out firing or it would have been over by hand 12, Ken's hitting a hard 19 and catching a 2 (good luck and a very smart play) but this was about the only good luck Ken had after the 12 hand, MIT Mike by the dealer catching that three on the last hand (Very good luck), Hollywood the same three for the dealer with hard 15 ((Very Bad luck).

I'm not saying go play crazy to win, but I don't want you newbies to think playing 100% correct will make you a winner either. It is gambling my friends and anyone can win on any given day, so don't beat yourself up if you think you made the wrong play and lose out, it hurts just as bad when you make the right play and get beat, sometimes worst.

I had this conversation with Ken last night, I told several of the newbies to play their game, use their own style play until they are comfortable trying someone else’s.
The old rule of thumb is if your not sure push it out, you may get lucky!

 

Dave,
Ken was just trying to show you how to play the final hand !
Seriously though you guys played a great final table. But how much would have paid to have drawn first base.
IG

 

Tremendous Tournament

Watching the final last night was a chance to relive just how fun, exciting and competitive the whole tournament was. I feel very fortunate to have won considering the likes of Ken Smith, Anthony Curtis and my good friend Mickey. I have to give major props to Hollywood Dave. Like myself, Dave came in with basically no tournament experience but you could tell that Dave has a steep learning curve. By the time the final rolled around Dave had become a pretty saavy tournament player. Dave's a very sharp guy as well as a really good guy. It was an incredible weekend, at times very stressful and tiring but I think all the participants had a great time. I learned a lot about tournament play from the very best, and was pleasantly surprised at how much I liked all of the participants. I feel honored to have been invited to compete against the world's best, and I congratulate GSN on a job well done.

 

pleasure to watch

Bravo, Mike!
Congratulations and best wishes in your future tournament career.
I hope to see you among us in the major BJ ivents (Frontier, Hilton, etc.)
Your modesty is really outstanding and your references about others are warm and well-disposed.
My regards, tirle.

 

Dave, was one of those key hands when you made the remark about playing for a candy bar?

For everyone else, by way of explanation, I was in the audience at Mohegan Sun for the taping back in January. At some point during the final table, Dave made a comment to the effect that Hey, we’re only playing for a candy bar (referring to the 100,000 dollar bar). Having seen how much was missing from watching the previous 6 episodes, I was curious to see if this bit of banter would survive the cutting room floor.

One scene, without the audio, which did survive was during hand 11. Ken, still on his roll, had just won his 23k bet and pumped his fist in the air a few times. He was not being presumptuous – it was in response to his one-man rooting section (me) yelling “Yea, Kenny”.

We had met at the spectator’s tables during the play of the first game the day before and during the conversation Ken told me he was one of the participants. I asked what his name was and recognized it immediately, having previously read everything on BlackjackInfo.com.

As Ken has pointed out here, the games were really long-winded with many interruptions just for TV production purposes—it took as long a 3 hours to get thru the 30 hands. Much room for improvement here, but all in all, I think it was a good first effort by GSN.

--jr