I am new to this website, and somewhat new to BJ tournaments. I've played in quite a few tourneys, but only two in the last year. I read Casino Tournament Strategies a year ago. I've lost my copy, but I have a new one coming in the mail tomorrow. I have won more than I've lost, however for all intents and purposes, consider me a total newb. My play has been exclusively in a single format, with a certain number of players from each table moving on at the end of each round, chip stacks reseting at the end of each round, all players starting with equal stacks, and no max bet. I am now trying to learn how to handle different formats. In particular, I have a tournament coming up soon with the following rules: 2 players from each table advance to next round (plus a few wildcard seats for largest chip stacks that weren't in the top 2 of their table) 25 hands per round chips carry forward from round to round players may bet 1-25 on each hand during the first round and 1-50 on each hand in all other rounds starting chip stacks will not be equal and will depend on hours played during the qualifying period there will be an option to buy 100 extra chips before the beginning of the tournament Starting chip stacks will be either 100, 300, 500, or 700. I have been told that typically about half of the field starts at 100. Most of the rest start at 300, with a couple at 500 and usually no one at 700. I will be starting at 300 and will probably buy the extra 100 chips. I expect approximately 100 players. I know that the book discusses carrying chips forward from one round to another. Does the difference in starting stacks change any of that? Is there anything I should know aside from what is in the book? Any particular threads or websites I should be reading? Obviously the best strategy for the first round will depend on the chip stacks of the other players at the table. If more than two of us have 400 chips to begin with, then I'd just have to play a pretty normal game. If not, I'll have a several max bet lead, so in that case I assume I would want to bet min until someone looks to be making a solid run, then once I identify the primary contenders, just match their bets to try to maintain my lead? And if I start with a several max-bet disadvantage, I would most likely have to just start firing max bets immediately and hope for the best, although shooting for the wildcard spots might be worthwhile if I know the target levels for the wildcard seats. Am I on the right track so far? If so, will the logic for each following round essentially be the same, since we'd still starting the table with different stack sizes and the top 2 still move on? Thanks!
Yes, you've definitely got the bases covered with the way to approach this event. The small max bet limit really handicaps the players with short stacks. The leaders can match max bets with little risk of damaging their bankroll, making catching up difficult. Doubling and splitting more aggressively than usual will be appropriate, as will playing your hands to increase the chance of swinging your opponent. Since the chips carry over, if you're not sure what to bet, a large bet probably has more value than a small bet. It seems almost a given that the eventual winner will be someone who carries a large starting stack into the final table. In all the many events I've played, I've actually never played an event with different starting banks. I know these have become common in the Oklahoma market. I'd love to hear your feedback after the event.
Thanks for the reply and advice. I had a longer reply typed out and my computer crashed, so I'm just going to type the Cliff Notes version this time. Would I be correct to assume that I should essentially ignore what is going on at the other tables unless either a) the situation is hopeless at my table and I know I am playing for a wildcard seat, or b) the decision between a small and large bet is a close call, as you mentioned before? Does anyone have an estimate for the 1st round wildcard cutoff? My guess right now is 390, based on using the square root formula and the average starting stack, even though the distribution of starting stacks and of advancing ending stacks don't match the assumptions of that formula. I figure that's at least a starting point.
I'd be focusing on advancing from the table. Concentrate on being one of the top two there, then the wildcard chip stack total becomes a non-issue. Even if you get to the next round and find yourself somewhat handicapped by a shorter stack, at least you're there and have a chance. Of course, if a couple of bombers at your table get lucky and run away from you, then you might as well start bombing away yourself in hopes of either catching them or being fortunate enough to snag a wildcard. Personally, I strongly dislike this format - finding yourself competing with players at other tables (this includes accumulation events). Even though it's statistically meaningless, we've all experienced the situation where some tables will have a dealer who cannot make a hand and other tables will have a dealer who is drawing to 20 or 21 relentlessly. In this format, even if you manage to advance from a table with a smokin' hot dealer, you're probably starting out with a severe handicap at the next table. It's not a fair fight. Good luck to you, Engineer, and let us know how it turns out!
Thanks! It sounds like I've pretty much got the right approach to this one. Hope it works out for me! Given that I am starting ahead of about half the field and I expect to play better than most of the field, I'm estimating myself to have roughly a 20% chance of making the final table (getting paid!), compared to 7% of the overall field making the final table. Should be fun!
