Atlantic City Report

TXtourplayer,
I understand what you are saying, but if you base it on a relative percentage, not the actual or total chip count, then your 3rd place finisher(s) advancing are picked fairly........all are compared to a base number of 100% of the chip count of the person winning the table that they were on. The percentage calculation puts everyone on a level playing field. The percentage number accounts for the toughness or easyness of the table they were on.

Easy table = alot of chip counts should be high

Hard table = alot of chip counts should be low

Players at their table are compared to the winner of their table. The % calculation takes that into account to puts all players on a scale of 1 to 100. I would also like to suggest that it is highly unlilkely that there would be a tie, considering all of the combination of chip counts that there could be. And then for the percentage to be the same (a tie) on the highest percent being determined (in order to advance) would be an astronomical coincidence. There would be a much greater likelyhood of a tie in a chip count at a table, meaning that either both who tied advance, or that there would be a play-off or roll-off or use of some other tiebreaker in order to ensure that only the top two advanced. Of course, if three players advanced from a table due to a tie in the chip count and that came in an early round, it could very well be that one of the tables in the subsequent round(s) would have one too many players, making the tables 'unbalanced".

Let the wild card players advance due to their table play, not due to the luck of the draw.

 

Toolman1; rookie789

I agree with both of you why casinos offer tournaments. I do disagree with toolman1 that most, or at least many, players would leave after loosing a preliminary round. I've seen that most players who get knocked out in the first round are right back in line doing a re-buy, if not two re-buys. That tells me that they really do want to hang around and try to win the tournament. It is the competitive nature in all of us to try to win. They do the rebuys to get back in the tournament to EARN their way to the succesive rounds. Banking on the odds (which are against you) to get lucky and advance because your name is one (or two) drawn out of anywhere up to several hundred competitors already knocked out doesn't seem very likely. It would seem to me to be easier to win one of two spots advancing out of 6, or a 33% chance (even for each table) than to be one or two out of a pool of several hundred.
Don't forget, I didn't say eliminate the wild card position, I'm just advocating that it be filled by someone who "earned it", not got lucky with a draw. And, it can be announced on the second day. I actually like the commorodity that goes on in the casino with other knowledgable BJ players, like yourselves and other members on this great website. If the casino believes that postponing the announcement of the wildcard until the second day of the tournament because it will keep the competitors in their casino with live action, then so be it. I personally wouldn't cut a planned and (mostly) previously paid for BJ playing trip short.......I'd stay and play and watch the balance of the tournament. Staying the extra nite compared to the entire trip which might and probably does include air fare is actually not that much more expensive.

To all, thanks for the good dialogue and interaction regarding this subject. Hopefully other casino personell will heed ACJohn's lead, interest and concern for conducting good, fair and competitive tournaments. Kudos to you ACJohn for your interest and request for input from the many readers and players on this website. Keep up the good work with your tournaments!

 

Wild cards

21playerBJ,
It sounds like this is an issue that affected you personanlly when you were 3rd best at a table and did not get drawn in for a wild card. Either you advance to the next round winning 1st or 2nd at your table based on your play or you don't, to say I was the best of the losers is not a valid reason to advance. Non-qualifiers are non-qualifiers. History and precedence at elimination BJ tournaments require all non-qualifiers to be on an equal basis to advance via a wild card drawing if available. There are tournaments that advance players as you suggest called accumulation tournaments. The term "Elimination" has a specific definition, "to remove from consideration".

 

The following is just a thought and not set in stone. Example: a 2 day tournament. Day 1/Round 1 4 sessions, players knocked out may play a later session round 1 only if space is available. Day 1 will advance 3 players per table. This is to have as many players stick around as possible, because the wildcard will not come into play until after the second round.

Wildcard Rule: wildcards may be used to ensure there are enough players in the 3rd round to balance the tables. The 3rd round is a 7 table round with the winners advancing to the final table. Wildcards will be used to bring the total number of players to a balancing number:

21 players 3 per table
28 players 4 per table
35 players 5 per table
42 players 6 per table
49 players 7 per table

Examples: 1. At the end of the second round there are 34 table winners then there will be 1 wildcard to bring the number to 35. 2. At the end of the second round there are 39 table winners then there will be 3 wildcards to bring the number to 42.

The wildcard/s needed to round out the number will be the highest non-winning chip total/s from the second round. Note: a tiebreaker may be needed.

 

Why?

As I said earlier, I HATE WILD CARDS! I feel if you're playing in a tournament you should have to win your way to the next round. However there are times when you need to fill empty seats in the following round, this is when wild cards come into play. I alway state in my tournament rules that wild cards will be drawn "IF" needed.

Wild Cards are not just to keep players around after they have been eliminated, that is just a bonus for the casino.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the 3rd players advancing. I would never use this because I wouldn't want to put up with all the bitching that would go along with it.

21PlayerBJ I wouldn't want to tell the 3rd place finisher with $2,500 in chips that the 3rd place finisher with $950 advances over them because of a higher percintage. This would be the #1 reason why not to do it this way.

1. The other 3rd place finishers BITCHING.
2. The extra work to determine which ones advance.
3. Most everything else will be covered under #1.

If you want to go to this much trouble just run a playoff table(s) between all the 3rd place finishers with the top two advancing from one table or just the winners from multiple tables.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Now to ACJohn, if players lose and play again in round #1 that is still a re-buy. Re-buys may start as early as the 2nd session of round #1. If the second session is not filled or a player no shows that seat maybe filled with another player. Note: a player playing their first session of the day is perfered, but a re-buy may get it if there isn't one.

As far as advancing 3 players from each table, once again I am not crazy about this unless needed in later rounds to level out the tables. It waters down the tournaments to me, your allowing half the table to advance then offering re-buys on top of that. By the second round you are back with all most the same number of players you started with.

Another problem is you are taking away re-buys by advancing 3 per table. By doing this you lower the possible price pool.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Each casino is different and can run their tournament however they wish and there is "NO" wrong way of doing so.

I just think if we are ever going to get or try to get a set of "National Tournament Rules" for all the casinos to go by that we have to start some were.

Other then Jimmy Wike (Ceasars), Les Thacker (LV Hilton), and Adoif Lepre (Sheraton-Tunica) we don't have very many casino exc. that really work with the players and are willing to listen to our advice.

Now we have another casino exc. ACJohn (Harrah's AC) asking "What do we want", well we better not blow it. Lets tell him what DOES WORK, not why not try this. We can alway experiment with new things later.

I just want to say thanks John for asking the players advice and willing to work with us. I'll come in from Texas to play your next tournament, just because you are trying to be fair to the players and run the best possible tournament you can. Bottomline that will bring in more players then anything else.

 

Logic?

ACJohn:

I don't understand your logic or use of the term "wild card".

The players that are eliminated on day 1 will not play in the second round. Therefore, they are not eligible for the "wild card". What is the incentive for the losers of day 1 to stick around? Assuming re-buys are not available, you loose the interest of 1/2 of the entrants.

This is not a "wild card" by the way players and casinos alike use the term "wild card". If you decide to run your tournament with this rule, then you must eliminate the term "wild card" because you now have a rule that determines who will advance and not subject to a random drawing which is what a "wild card" is.

 

I am defining a wildcard as a non-winner who gets to advance; in my case the "wildcard" will be chosen by chip total not a draw. The point being there may not be a wild card if the right numbers work out. We will advance 3 per table on Day 1 to have a large group stay over… The alternative is to always have wildcards to force player to hang around. I have learned one thing from running numerous tournaments (mostly poker) that there is never a perfect tournament that all players will agree on, with that being said my suggestion is what I thought to be the best middle ground idea.

 

I still have a terminology problem

ACJohn:

Of course the final decision is yours. As you stated when you entered this thread, you are looking for suggestions to run a better blackjack tournament and suggestions you did receive. I wish other tournament supervisors would have that attitude. I'm sure all members of this site hope your tournaments succeed - the more tournaments the better is our overall attitude. I believe you will keep an open mind and adjust the rules if needed to improve your tournaments.

That being said, PLEASE do not use your own definition of the term "wild card":

If you put in your literature that a, or several, "wild card(s)" may be available then the players will assume that the "wild card(s)" will be a random draw open to anyone who enters the tournament. In the scenario you defined, the advancing player is a winner - he/she got the highest chip count among the 3rd place finishers. He/she is advancing because of chip count just as the 1st & 2nd place winner advanced due to chip count. The only difference is that the 1st & 2nd place winners only had to beat their table - the 3rd place winner had to beat all the tables after excluding the 1st & 2nd winners from each table. That 3rd place finisher who is advancing is not subject to a "lucky" draw, hence not a "wild card".

In any case, I wish you success. More tournaments are good.

 

Terminology

Toolman1 and ACJohn,

Don't let an otherwise sterling effort to solicit player input and, an outstanding plethora of well thought-out recommendations/replies be tainted by semantics in the creation of a much needed tournament that takes into account player preferences. The terminology you are searching for exists. 1st and 2nd high chip count players advance. 4th and lower chip count players do not by SINGLE ELIMINATION while 3rd highest chip cout player do not by DOUBLE ELIMINATION. Again, my complements to the efforts on both sides towards the accomplishment of such a worthy objective!

The Count

 

See what I mean?

Just the last four post support what I have been saying about advancing the highest percentage 3rd place finishers.

We have players discussing the proper terminology already, just try to explain to a player with more chips why they don't advance over a player with few chips, or to the other 3rd place finishers why they don't advance.

Now don't get me wrong, I would play in this format (just like any others I play in), but I would never run one. It just isn't worth all the problems you'll have.

 

My thoughts

ACJohn,

What ever you use get a set of rules to each and every player and dealer.

I have done two promo BJ tourneys at Harrahs-Laughlin. The dealers did not follow the printed rules.

I dug them out-

"Players must bet in order"

"Player has 10 seconds to place bet or the minimum bet will be placed automatically"

The dealers just didn't understand the significance of seeing other bets placed and hassled people for not being quick enough.

****
My favorite Mini is at the Edgewater, Laughlin. They do it twice-a-week so they get it right. They have three preliminary rounds on six tables. Initial buy-in is $15. Rebuys, if available are $10. $1,500 prize fund guaranteed. So a maximum of 42x3=126 spots.

Two advance to the semi's. Semi's-one advances to final. One wildcard for the final. Sometimes there are unbalanced tables. Sometimes there are no rebuys (snowbird season).

$500 in chips, but a dealer tip of $1 gets you another $100 which everyone does.

High card gets the button to start. They use flip cards to keep track of the hands. Red/Green/Black/Purple chips. Count before last hand.

Top of the hour sessions of twenty hands gave enough time for rebuys/breaks, but not enough time to leave the casino. Wild card/Final starts immediately after semi-final.

Payoff- $700/400/200/50/50/50/50, which makes for some interesting play decisions.

***
So Harrars-AC has seven spots on the tables? Harrahs-L is six or even five.

 

We have either 5 or 6 spot layouts on our live games. The tournament we held was in a ballroom not on the casino floor we used 7 spots layouts on those games.

 

I perfer 6 spots

I just perfer the 6 spot tables. They give you enough room, 7 and you start to feel too packed in. Another reason for 6 spots (over 5) is to accomodate more players, which will means more money.

The biggest rule I can suggest is the advancement of two players from each table all the way through the tournament until the finals. This one rule will help you draw the most players.

Dumb rules you can live without:

As far as betting out of order, I never understood why that was any problem? As long as the players bets within the time limit when it is their turn what difference does someone else betting out of order make? Just have in the rules that once a bet has been made it cannot be changed.

Lets see, it speeds up the game. It give the other players an advantage to see how much they are betting. Damn I wish everybody bet early and out of order.

Now by making a player pull back their bet made out of order, you can place a bigger bet (lets say $200) and let the other players in front of you see it making them bet differently, then change it to a lower bet when it is your turn.

MMMmmmm which way sounds better to you?

You just set the rules and I'll play by either set, but I'll play either way to my fullest advantage.

The best and proper rule is to bet in order, but any bet made out of order must stay.

One other Stupid rule is the chip drop. The first chip that hits is your bet. Why? If someone is dropping their chips (during their betting turn) what difference does it make if they drop 1 or 20 chips. It is still done during their turn and before anyone else has to bet.

I compare this rule to the George Brett "Pine Tar" rule in baseball (which was reversed). It is in some tournament rules, but it was put in by someone who doesn't have a clue about what they are doing.

However stupid or not if any of these rules are in the offical tournament rules you have to play them that way.

 

What is the format?

ACJohn, how many tables do you have available and how many entries are you looking for? From post #24 the implication is that you have at least 7 tables available for play at one time (the semi-final round), but the examples of contingent wild cards and a variable number of players at the semi-final tables suggest an open-ended registration with the total entries cut off at some arbitrary point depending on ... What ???... I don't know.

Without knowing a specific format my wish list is generalized but I agree with TXtourplayer the best tournaments, from a player-friendly perspective, are 6-player tables with two advancing in each round.

A table elimination format does not necessarily lead to unbalanced tables. In my experience, most BJ tournaments are the elimination-type, have a pre-determined maximum number of entries and a fixed format, resulting in a known number of players advancing between rounds. With rebuys available in the second and subsequent first-round sessions the tournament usually fills up to the maximum thus obviating any unbalanced tables. Any wild cards required, whether by constraints in one or more of the variables or deliberately designed in, are known in advance.

I echo the other members and add my appreciation to you for joining this forum and asking for the players’ input. I’ll be looking for your next tournament.

--jr

 

I had 26 games in the ballroom, but used 7 as live games. I never used more then 17 in a session and had 340 entries over 4, 1st round sessions. $300 buy-in+$30 entry fee, first place paid roughly $34,000.

John