"Going Pro:" Is There Such A Thing? Opinions Wanted

Great info--where from?

Thanks JoeP--can't say I disagree with that assessment one bit. Where is that survey result from?

Good cards-Sabresport (AKA Sabrejack)

 

What poll was this?

Who held this poll?
Where was it held?
And more importantly it is just the players opinion and not actual facts so what would this poll prove anyway?

Show me some hard numbers from resent tournaments (use this site, go back since it started), and count how many players here won tournaments (of $5,000 or more), how many events have been held during that time.

Know don't forget that any WSOB I & II and last years UBT events can't be counted since only SKILLED players were invited to play. WSOB III can be counted, but Opp's that was a newbie that beat all the seasoned tournament players so you may not want to count that one either...LOL

Off the top of my head I can only think of a few players who won any major BJ tournaments since 2001: Now don't count online, or mini-tournaments either.

Here are the players I know of that have won a major BJ tournament over the last 5 years:

Sam V. (Million Dollar III & another event in Reno)
Kennye (Mandalay in 2001, TI in 2004)
You Joep (winning two LVH monthly qualifiers for the MDT)
S. Yama (more than anyone, about 3-4 I believe, but I won't post when and where).
Vince C. (Canadain Masters back to back)
Harry F. (Stardust and Golden Nugget)

Now I am sure there is is several more seasoned players that have won major BJ events over that time,, but just think about how many tournaments have been held over that time also.

Lets say they host only 5 tournaments per month (Just counting LV events) times 12 months = 60 tournaments times 5 years (back to Kennye Mandalay win in 2001) = 300 tournaments (and I promise I am really low balling the number of tournaments).

So lets see we have a total of 300 tournaments and out of that we have 14 wins, MMmmmm that equals out to Skilled players winning 4.6% of the time, know I only said newbies or lesser skilled players would win 80% of the time.

Show me actual numbers and winners and you can swing my opinion, but until then don't post number with nothing to back them up and then they are not actual facts only players opinions.

I think I am a better than average player, but I face facts and the facts are that the best players in the world can't win no matter how much skill they have if they don't have luck on their side.

Show me proff otherwise or you'll never change my mind.

PS. If you want to believe that skilled players win more than not I don't have a problem with that, your only kidding yourself.

 

More Misinformation From Texas

Actually Rick if you were to spend more time searching the Internet for "Good" "Solid" information instead of typing your 6,000 post you may have discover this recent poll.

If you at least to try and look for it and then cant find it I will tell you where to find it.

In one other note you missed one of my other wins in the last 4 years, I also won the Hard Rock Blackjack Tournament in 2004. So it looks like Yama and a few other "Skilled" players have had multiple wins of 3 or more in the last 3 or 4 years

Starting to look like " Skilled " players win more than the average " Joe"

We all know that its just you who has this " I refuse to admit I'm wrong" attitude

But then again someone who relies on LUCK all the time would want to always have this "I'm in the dark opinion "

Rick there is a place for you in this community..........

A Cowboy with his Stetson Hat and a " Big Horseshoe stuck up his BUTT" :joker:


Joep

 

I have to agree with Tex on this one. I agree that it does take skill to determine your bet size but from there on out it is the luck of the cards (unless you try to tell me hitting a hard 18 and drawing a 3 is skill). At least in Poker you do not always have to catch the cards as in BJ, but you can still win without the right cards by making your opponent think you have caught them, haven't tried bluffing a BJ dealer but I don't think it would work. And Joe you state your skilled pro's have won 15 tourneys in 5 years out of 300 tries, not a very good record considering that of the your "skilled" players most live in Vegas, have a second home in Vegas or enough income from other sources to be able to travel to Vegas for nearly all the tourneys there, so just by playing in far more tourneys than almost anyone else their wins should be greater than the average player who gets to go to Vegas 1 or 2 times a year. And of the 300 or so BJ tourneys how many were "invitational" with 3 out 5 players being slot players etc. that don't even have a clue to BJ basic strategy but yet they have still won some of these tourneys, skillful players should have walked all over these people. Opps forgot you can know what to do but you still have to have the LUCK to draw the cards needed to beat the dealer unless you take the low and hope the dealer makes their hand. I hope your N.Y.P.D. retirement income is a good one because otherwise you would have a poor average yearly income if you had to depend on your BJ tourney winnings. I know you also play poker, will you be at the WSOP circuit event in Tunica next week, would like to sit and have a drink or 2 with you.

 

Here's your problem Joepa: the majority of people are idiots.

Case in point - if you walk into any casino in the country and poll every person sitting at a table playing blackjack on whether you hit/stand 12 v 3, or hit/stand/double A7 v 4, the majority will give you the wrong answer.

yes, there is skill involved in these tourneys, but luck plays a major factor in winning.

 

a few thoughts

What is luck? Is it external factors over which we have no control but affect the outcome of a situation? Is quantifiable or not? If it is how do we measure it? Does it vary? If so over what period or cycle does it vary? Per hand? Per card? Per game? Per month? Per year? Are some people more lucky than others? Is luck therefore zero-sum over an infinite period? If we can measure luck could we use that information to make more "skillfull" plays/bets?

The real question - Is luck more of a factor in TBJ or Poker? I get the feeling that both TBJ players and poker players feel that there is more luck in TBJ and that therefore it must be an "inferior" game.,

Cheers

Reachy

 

There is a better place

Joep,

Stop trying to convince Rick and other otherwise. You have expalined it at length. There is a better place for him and others who believe as he does - at our tournament tables! I recall from about 20 years ago - well before poker was near as popular as it was today when 10 poker players were asked the same basic question - luck or skill? 7 said luck and 3 said skill. The 7 were long term losers and the 3 were long term winners. The metric or key is the DIFFERENCE in LONG TERM win rates/winnings between the two groups.

The Count

 

You told us nothing?

Joep your right, I am sorry I didn't know about your HR win, hell that brings the Skill percentage to a whopping 5% total over the last 5 years...LOL, but then again I am only counting LV tournaments and I added Sam V. Reno event and Vince C. 2 - Canadian wins in the skilled players wins just because I didn't want members here to think it is all luck to win...LOL

If anything I feel your helping me prove my point that it is more luck than skill to win. After all you could only come up with one more name of a skilled player winning over the last 5 years? Hell I even said that there were probably a lot more I didn't know about.

Now as to you poll, both Sabresports and I asked where you got this poll from so we wouldn't have to try and hunt it down. If there is really a poll I would think you would want to share it with us to back up you claim, but then again it is only opinions and not facts.

You posted that I can't admit when I am wrong...LOL, So far when I ask you for something like where this poll came from you try and cloud the issue with comments about my spelling or the number of posts I've made, why not just answer the question and stop side stepping it. I won't ask you to admit your wrong, but not answering the questions damn sure won't make you look right.

Damn Joep maybe you can get a job at the Monte Carlo hotel and casino when Lance Burton is on vacation, you seem to be pretty good at making thing appear from no where (like this poll you talk of)...LOL

To make it simple, several months back you where talking about your personal tournament BJ record, I can't remember if it was posted here or on the radio and I believe you said your record was around 16% for wins (I maybe wrong but I think I'm in the right range).

Now if a big BJ tournament "PRO" like you only have a 16% winning percentage how can you figure that lesser skilled players have a higher winning percentage than the 20% that I claim they should have over the last 5 years? Maybe I was wrong maybe it is even lower winning percentage...LOL

Us Texans don't minded listening to BS, but we do like to see the proof that some slick talking New Yorker isn't trying to sell us a bill of goods without a receipt.

I said in my last post I will gladly admit that I am wrong if you can "SHOW" me the results where skilled players have won more times over the last 5 years. But please don't waste my time and others members on this site by posting number up with no back up.

Joep if you want to be know as a "BJ Pro" so be it and I will be the first to admit that you are an EXCELLANT tournament BJ player, but I personally feel that you are wrong in the amount of wins a skilled player will get vs. the luck factor.

 

Hi Reachy. Welcome back.

That's certainly a question, but I don't see why you would call it the real question. I don't think there can be any doubt that skill plays a more dominant role in poker, because it has the whole extra dimension of psychology - reading a situation to either work out that you are probably ahead or convince someone that you are ahead when you are not, putting them in the uncomfortable position of having to risk everything if they don't fold, etc., etc.

I don't think that makes TBJ an inferior game though, just a very different one. Personally I find poker boring, because I don't really have those skills and consequently tend to just sit there folding hand after hand until I get one that's good enough to play from a purely mathematical standpoint.

Regarding the quest to quantify luck, consider Wong's book :- It's full of statements like "bet this much and your chance of advancing is 0.48, but bet that much and it is 0.50". That's not really much reward for doing the right thing! But it all adds up over time.

There are more extreme scenarios, where a complete newbie may lock themselves out of any chance of advancing (been there, done that ), but once a person has some understanding of the game then I think the differences between the top players and the rest of us are much more subtle, so that they can only be measured (in terms of results) by looking at hundreds of games.

 

Mis-understanding

What Joep and I are discussing is WINNING the tournament, not just advancing and making it to the finals. I believe that to actualy win a tournament you need more luck than skill.

Now to advance to the point where you can get into the finals I believe skill is is more important (you still need luck), but I do think skilled players advance more often throughout the BJ tournaments as a whole.

If I didn't I would be a DAMN fool (we all would be) going to play and as many as I do if it was just 100% luck.

I'm changing the subject a bit, but this is why I like my point system for ranking players. I want the players who advance consistantly and not the one time winner (who got lucky) to be shown as the better players at the end of the year. I also don't want the players who can make it to every tournament to be at the top for that reason either. I want the ranking system to be fair for all the players or it isn't worth having one.

I'm really not starting my point system just to feed some of the players egos, my a piont (ranking) system is to keep score for cash prizes at the end of the year. I will however give a "Player of the Year" award for the top ranking player in the TBT.

Does this mean that player will be the greatest tournament BJ player in the world? NO, but they will be the best TBT player for that year and that is all I am worried about.

 

It's good to be back Colin

Thanks for the welcome . I also find poker boring and probably follow the same strategy as yourself.

The reason I said that poker vs. tbj is the real question is because I get the impression that some people think that there is less skill in TBJ, poker players in particular, and that is something that has to be addressed. This luck vs. skill debate will only go away when we can convincingly answer that question. Luck in poker doesn't seem to be an issue, to poker players at least.

The way to do it? Bring poker players on-board and have lots of tournaments with similar structures and a TBJ ranking system. If skill wins games more consistently than luck does it should be reflected in the rankings. If we can then somehow compare poker rankings/win rates, etc with TBJ rankings/win rates this may throw some light on the debate. So with the advent of UBT, WBT(?) and others, plus a greater presence online both on stand alone and integrated sites I think we should be getting some answers soon.

Rest assured we all need luck to win anything from chess to golf to snooker. If Tiger needs to hole out on 18 to win the Ryder Cup and a passing bird crashes into his ball he's lost! Now that's REALLY bad luck! *fingers crossed*

Cheers

Reachy

 

I think the way ETBJ has been marketed to try and attract poker players may have been a bit misleading. I saw a few comments from disappointed poker players in the early days, which were less than complimentary about the game.

In some ways I'd say there is more skill involved in TBJ, but it has less immediate impact. The notion of a 'bad beat' in poker - "I did everything right, had my opponent right where I wanted him, and then would you believe it .... ?" - just doesn't apply in BJ (well OK, when a dealer 21 beats your 20 there is a certain similarity, but it's not quite the same thing.)

As a rule, 'doing everything right' in TBJ maximises your chances, but only marginally increases them, compared to poker.

 

Early days

What did the comments from the poker players say? I'd be interested to see them.

I also think that marketing TBJ to poker players shows a lack of confidence in the game of TBJ itself. Poker is percieved/marketed as a game of skill - I can't remember who said it but there is a famous quote that poker "takes an hour to learn and a lifetime to master" and there are other references to poker being equivilent to chess. This may or may not be true but no one has said that about TBJ. Yet.

I also think that the gap between good and bad players is greater in Poker than in TBJ. At the top end of either game skill is the major factor for success. At the bottom end bad poker players lose alot more often (or win alot less) than bad TBJ players.

Cheers

Reachy

 

I meant in the chat

So there is no record of it (fortunately given the poker players' fondness for profanity when chatting )

It was really just general whining, with a "what's the point?" sort of flavour to it. I felt like saying

"Have you considered betting small? Then you'll be happy, rather than upset, when the dealer makes a hand."

I kept quiet though.

 

It'll take time

It'll take the top poker players to convert the general poker playing community to joys of TBJ. When they see them playing TBJ as a tactical and sophisticated game then they give it a go. Those that aren't already converted that is...

Cheers

Reachy

 

You asked for the math here it is

This particular thread has raised some emotions and actually has caused some misinformation that might be taken for fact if not researched. This is never a good thing, you should always try to post the facts as best as possible and if you can even include math to back it up .

A few months back Reachy I believe asked if you could make money playing blackjack tournaments.I looked for this old thread but it does not seem to be anywhere.

This new thread appeared and the title of it is " Going Pro" is there such a thing ?

What ever you do for a living is what your profession is,so if one of your sources is obtained playing blackjack tournaments than you can and should be considered a pro even if you have other sources of income if you are making more money that it cost than you are a " Pro" now keep in mind I'm not just talking about over a 1 or 2 year period that would be to short term to really analyze your overall results.

Somewhere in this thread I believe Pokernut refereed to my only making final tables about 17 % of the time that I have played. This is where his take on 17% as being to low of a number to make money at playing Tournament Blackjack is wrong.

Lets look at the math of Blackjack Tournaments

I will make the numbers real easy to work with but they will work with any entry fee that you play

If you were to play 1000 blackjack Tournaments with and entry fee of 1,000 dollars in your life time you would spend 1,000,000 in entry fees

Now if you only made the final table 17 % of the time which a season pro has the ability to do .You do not even have to win the tournament to make money over your tournament playing career

With a 1,000 entry and 200 players that would create a 200,000 prize pool
This would be a typical pay schedule for that prize pool

First place 100,000
2nd 50,000
3rd 25,000
4th 15,000
5th 6000
6th 4000

So now if you were to make a Final table 17 % of the time and finish with an average of some where between 3rd and 4th place which would be 20,000 pay day and you were to times that by 170 final tables over the span of 1,000 tournaments your over all payback would be

A Whopping 3,400,000 less your entry fees of 1,000,000

So your over profit would be 2,400,000 MILLION DOLLARS

Some of you have asked me to back my opinion up with numbers so here it is .As you can clearly see to be successful at tournament you don't not have to make the final table all that often and you can even just finish somewhere in the middle of the pack to make a solid income from this.

I along with a few other players have been fortunate enough to have kept this overall percentage up over our playing careers.We could most likely play for the rest of our lives and never win another tournament and still be ahead.

This is why skill over the long term puts LUCK to shame . Don't be fooled by misinformation that is posted here work on your game even if you play for low stakes it's a good feeling to play and know you are on the top of your game . Luck will always balance out SKILL will not

What other fun thing can you do and make money at ?

Sometimes Serious Money

Joep

 

I did ask about pro TBJ

Here's the link - http://www.blackjacktournaments.com/bb/showthread.php?t=1940 although my question/hypothesis was more related to online TBJ rather than the live game. I posed the question because I had been reading about so called online poker professionals and I wondered when/if it would be possible in TBJ as well. I decided it would be but not until the player pool is much much bigger.

Cheers

Simon

 

I absolutely agree Joe. No question about it.

More than once I've tried to steer this debate towards getting an assessment of just how long the long term is (the variance, I suppose, in mathematical terms), and just how much of an edge a reasonable player might have over the average, and a pro player might have over a reasonable player; but the debate never seemed to want to go in that direction.

Armed with that kind of information, you could tentatively apply the kind of metrics quoted in connection with advantage play -

'Risk of Ruin'
'Kelly Criterion'
etc. etc.

 

Reachy if my memory serves me correct you had asked me this a while back about Win/Final Table% and I could swear that we talked about it here . You even asked me if I would reveal how much I have won overall in tournaments.

Without getting to specific my total tournament wins are in the high end of the six figure range.

Elyssez has pointed out to me via PM that I spoke about this very same subject on the radio show.What show I'm not sure of but maybe Elyssez will remind us both of it.

With all these tournaments to play 24 hours a day my mind is like

JELLO :laugh:

Keep in mind with only a 17% success rate that means you will fail 83% of the time in tournaments and still make money. Not a bad way to have fun and make money.Let the guys looking for the horseshoes keep bending down to pick them up


Joep

 

Agree with JP on this one

While my own data base cannot be considered empirical evidence yet (too small a sample), from an anecdotal point of view I would support his premise that a 17% participation in final tables would prove profitable in BJ tournaments.
With a land based accumulation of 320 BJ tournaments (2 player pool) and a slightly less than 17% final table participation (we are nowhere skilled as JP), my sample shows a nice profit after entry fees and travel expenses.
The on line experience (G/P and Bet21/UB) is also very close to 17% and also shows a nice profit after fees.
I think that we would all be impressed and appreciate if King Kenneth would share his final table data with us on this(his) forum.
All others who have data should also share and this would help gravitate data to solid empirical evidence in support of skill vs luck.