TedinNaples said that he didn't encounter anyone that said they were playing the Goldstrike tournament that was going on the same time as the Fitz event. I was just wondering if anyone who posts here but didn't run into Ted might have some info about the GS event to share.
Goldstrike I played in both tournaments on Saturday. Goldstrike did an excellent job at moving me around to accomodate Fitz's schedule. I had to play in the semi's on Sunday morning at the Fitz's and since they were paying more real money, I did not re-buy at Goldstrike since the times would conflict with the Fitz's. Is there anything specific you are interested in knowing between the two tournaments?
Mostly number of entries, any mention of future events. Was the format the expected hybrid of accumulation until semis and then a switch to elimination? Thanks for the response.
The last number I heard was 380 entries. Not an accumulation tourney. Single elimination style with one chance to re-buy on Sunday morning. I think they said the next scheduled buy-in tournament would be in June.
How reliable is this number? Seems like a lot considering that in their prior tournaments they normally drew 150 to 200. Also, the Fitz and the Cruise drew off players that might normally play there.
I was told this number from a girl named Jennifer at Gold Strike who is one of the tournament directors. She coordinates all of the tournaments at Gold Strike, both invite only and buy-in tournaments. So I guess, I would assume that this number is very accurate!
goldstrike tournament Though this was an open event, over 300 of the players at the Goldstrike were comped invites. Very few buy-ins.
My opinion on this is GOOD - I'm GLAD that the GS didn't get many cash customers. Holding the event the same weekend as the Fitz shows either: 1. Lack of planning and foresight 2. A concerted effort to undermine the Fitz tourney Either way I can't support a tourney director that falls into either category. :flame:
It's called FREE ENTERPRISE - Competition if you will. It's done all the time. But then in line with your train of thought, the Fitz should not have scheduled their tournament at the same time as TXtourplayer's Cruise. Anyway, the attendance at all 3 events (Fitz, Gold Strike, Cruise) were good so maybe this FREE ENTERPRISE thing is not so bad. And maybe, just maybe, it encourages more tournaments and maybe for more money - now wouldn't that be nice. I love FREE ENTERPRISE!!!
Excellent point. I LOVE free enterprise - I just wish there was more of it. Having multiple events during a single weekend - actually makes sense for out of state patron like myself so I'm not against the concept at all. Actually go to any suburban region where there is a McDonalds and you're likely to find a competitor withing a 6 block distance as well. If the demographics support 1 fast food establishment it will support 2 and it provides choice(s). On the whole free enterprise I am a HUGE cheerleader. I won't discuss the cruise because to lump the cruise with land based BJT is comparing apples and oranges. The attendance at the Fitz, according to what I've read and experienced, surpassed their expectations. I was called the day before to verify I WAS coming as rooms were in short supply - not just because of BJ but a professional boxing match was held at the Fitz on Saturday night also. As for being "comp'd" at the Fitz - first time there so I can't comment. With the GS event - was it open? To the best of my knowledge but if their attendance was in the 300+ range it bodes well for GS - but they were comp'd entries and not paid - so it is a different crowd. The advertisment of the GS event was poor. With regard to both events this new 1 per table advances format, in my opinion, is a step backward. While we know how difficult it is to win the table a single elimination leads to player frustration and some more "unusual" play. The fact that a win at the rebuy table went straight to the semi-final? Great for the rebuy people but hardly the ideal format. Personally, and I never thought I'd say this, but I preferred the mixed hybrid to the win your table format that the Fitz held. I feel that each format gave players the same amount of playing time - 2 rounds The difference is that the hybrid formula is actually "easier" for the casino to host and involves a strategy that involves some player calculations and decisions. The only drawback of that format is that there are fewer rebuy(s) and therefore less money into the prize pool. My first choice would be a format that the TBJPA proposed with 2 per table advancing - however it seems to be a table winner only advancing that is "sweeping" the BJT scene lately - in my opinion a move in the wrong direction.
Yes, I have to admit that after playing in several of the hybrid BJ tournaments that I have begun to see the "twisted logic" necessary to advance to the semi-final round. My only creveat about those accumulation hybrids is that the host casino, really needs to keep a lid on the chip totals until AFTER all the rounds have been completed. While in the past I wasn't a fan of this type of event that was because I hadn't seen the "strategy" involved.
I know a lot of people don't particularly care for them but I will admit that I enjoy the hybrid format. That is probably because I have been fortunate enough to experience some success with that format the last couple of years. It wouldn't hurt my feelings to see a few more of them as a complement to the majority of tournaments which are strictly elimination format. A little variety isn't always a bad thing.
