Ouch! Bad review for UBT and EBJ

poor review

Ken,I hate to agree with Aaron Todd,however,I don't believe the UBT will be a very long lived TV adventure.The game itself is fine.The problem I believe lies in the presentation by only showing the 1st,8th,15th,25th & 30th hands.They may show 1 or 2 others but the point is they only show 6 or 7 hands out of 30 and summarize the rest.Maybe they feel it would be too boring for the average player.Now don't get me wrong,I do wish success for the UBT as any positive for Tournament Blackjack will only help us, The Tournament Blackjack Players.Just an observation.

 

i know i'm a sponsored player and all, but to be honest even BEFORE i became Team UBT i really liked the format of the show. You are right, we don't see as many hands, but there's a reason for that: not all of them are as relevant to the final outcome.

Ultimately, there are 2 extremes here: 1. show every single hand, which can be very boring for all but the most hardened purists to watch, and 2. show only a few key hands, which totally displaces the concept of tournament strategy and interrupts the integrity of the game.

i think the UBT tv show on CBS really finds a great balance between these two worlds: early on, we see only key hands (like the elimination hands) while the audience is being introduced to the game, the players, etc... and then later on, as the stakes (and pressure) increase, we see almost every hand. This allows for a lot of the more long-term tourney strategies to emerge.

As for the guy who wrote that article, it doesn't sound like he really gave the home game a fair shot -- if by hand four everyone was just going all-in to get it over with, then clearly there was a pretty strong bias against it to begin with. Maybe it wasn't his cup of tea, but the ratings are in: the UBT is the most watched show in the history of that timeslot on CBS, and the elimination blackjack format as licensed by PlayUBT to Bet21 and Ultimate Bet is the most successful online tournament blackjack platform ever launched. Everyone is entitled to their opinion as to the longevity of this game, but it IS kinda hard to argue with those facts --

-hd.

 

I agree with Luxor

although the 30 hand game is exciting to play, an 8 hand game shown in it's entirity might make more interesting TV. I agree televised poker is edited but it's not as obvious and I don't feel like I missed half the event or dozed off a couple of times. It seems like a large percentage of the show is bringing viewers up to date verbally on what they didn't see.

To me it's almost like watching a football game on TV that condenses 3 hours into 30 minutes airing only 10+ yard rushes, 25+ yards completed passes, field goals and touchdowns.

 

Never seen it...

...and I'm not sure I will since I have no idea whether the show will cross the pond. Does the show only show the elimination hands? How long is the show? What do the "fill" it with?

It's not clear from the article but it seems to me that Aaron Todd is talking about all TBJ. He's only seen UBT but his comments are general points that would equally apply to WSoB or any game of TBJ. Like all things, unless you understand some of the finer points of the game you probably aren't going to enjoy it as much as you could.

Could CBS not show a late night/early morning version of the show that includes ALL the hands so that the "anoraks" could enjoy the full experience without it interfering with the peak time schedule?

Cheers

Reachy

PS. Just realized calling someone an "anorak" might be a British thing. Another term that could be applied would be "trainspotter" or even "nerd". Probably better to call them "enthusiasts". What term would you guys use?

 

Reachy's questions

Reachy,

As you know, I'm not a fan of EBJ and as such I generally keep away from discussions on the topic. However, you asked a few questions so I'll address those.

The show is 1 hour long. It generally shows all the elimination hands with some commentary about the hands not in the broadcast. As rookie789 put it "It seems like a large percentage of the show is bringing viewers up to date verbally on what they didn't see". If time permits, they'll show a key hand (abbreviated) leading to an elimination hand. Then they'll show the last few hands (number varies depending on time available) of the tournaments with some detail. They fill in the time with commentaries on how the game is played, background of the players, a HUGE - ENORMOUS is a better word - amount of quick flashes (1 to 5 seconds) of players reactions and expressions (which is overkill), commercials, and general "fluff". Not a lot of meat. But you have to keep in mind that the show is more intended as entertainment since most viewers are not BJT savvy and would be bored watching the game in it's entirety.

I did not get the same reaction to Aaron Todd's article as you did. I felt he was directing his comments to EBJ more than anything else. Whatever.

Having a version of the show that showed all the hands would probably not draw a very large audience. CBS is a major network here and ratings are what they live and die by. A show with very limited appeal to the masses is simply "not in the cards".

And last, I never heard the term "anorak". It seems like the word "enthusiast" would be an appropriate substitute or maybe "fan". I think you get the idea.

 

I think the presentation of the show is fine. As pointed out earlier, people on this board aren't the target audience. The show is produced for a mainstream audience.

The only issue I have with the show, and this is me talking as a broadcaster and not as a blackjack player, is that it really doesn't spend enough time showing how the payers got to the final table. Often it doesn't even address that it IS a final table at all. To the average viewer, it seems as if they just took 7 guys and decided to have a game with them. I think focusing more on road to that table would help the viewer attach themselves to the players a bit more. They did this somewhat in the first episode, but haven't addressed it much since (tries to do it all in the intro).

I don't know if the answer is just vignettes on the preliminary rounds or even just showing the semifinals as a separate episode in full, but if that one issue was addressed, I think the show would be as good as it possibly could be.

I don't think blackjack will ever be huge on television, but this presentation has the highest chance at success that there is. It can definitely carve out enough of an audience to support itself as long as the internet portion can get past the government.

It also REALLY needs a consistent time slot.

 

Loved it *... the second time around!

Read Todd's article. Hated it even if I, as passionate as I am about BJT and EBJ, hated the only show I watched (Ken beat Dave on the final hand). Too much hoopla for me.

I did not plan to watch the show today, but his observations made me do it. Well I loved it. Still the same hoopla, but improved somewhat! Players seems to be more sincerely involved than on the first and only show I saw. before. No more stage fright. Players seemed more natural.

I don't play poker now (a rarity these days around my gambler friends), though I played a lot about 30 years ago. Today, BJT is my game and I just wish it would be just as or more popular than poker on tv one day. Even if I don't play myself, I watch a lot of poker on tv. The UBTshow I saw today is way ahead of any poker show, in my mind, entertainment wise.

Congratulations for your win Dave. Great performance, great show.

 

I still don't like the UBT show

sorry UBT fans - but twice I have watched this show and it is a poorly edited, chopped up, impossible to follow any strategy or play whatsoever - poorly announced - mess - with no feel at all for the overall play of the table and how people are changing BR positions - just my opinion - I realize - but it is very boring and I am not impressed with the ratings - remember - professional bowling gets 4s and Bassmasters gets 2s - so 1s don't mean much

 

To be honest...the show is not grabbing me even though the game certainly has. And I agree that we could pick apart this critics story and even apply the same logic and points to poker...they certainly dont show every hand in a poker game. As far as how it translates to a home game??? Is that important?

Something needs changed but Im not sure what it is exactly....there certainly isnt a feeling of how or why players qualified to play...but for these early shows they didnt qualify right?

They basically did take 7 people and throw them together ...some for the Black jack skill and others clearly for production value....and while I cant think how else one could make the initial show...it certainly doesnt pull me into the show because of a skilled or even lucky player has earned the place at a final table....rather it feels like these were invited players and that comes thru the production.

But it is the pilot per se and so hopefully they will pay attention to every critic and polish the production to give it a less fake feel...

Frankly...every move feels staged, overacted, and even the music over dramatic...and we are just not buying it.

Todays show failed to explain why Dave Stan or Erica (whatever) even deserved to be playing each other.

It is very important that you earn your way to the game!!! I watch poker and high profile guys like Mike (the mouth) or even overactors like Phil Hulmuth or low profile players like Fosselman all have earned their way to the production thru the quality of their play. They have played up thru a series of tables and we know about that...they beat out fields of thousands and its explained and so we become involved with the show and we can pick a favorite or root against a least favorite what have you...and all for a prize purse that is defined and shown..

EBJ is not doing that. Why do I care today if Dave beat Erica today? Did either earn a place at that table??? There is just no way for me to know that or to care from watching the show. Is Erica a skilled tournament player??? I dont know ...she might well be the sharpest EBJ player on earth but that doesnt even come up in the production ( I think we understand why) but it cetainly needs to...

Unless the show is gonna be about a few models playing a few Pro Black Jack players then they really need to rethink the formula...Im not buying the over dramatic acting and mugging nor the fake audience over reaction...

I have been to tapings...I understand that producers fire up the audience for reaction but this needs to have a real feel to it...when the poker audience getsfired up its for a reason we all understand and we are aware of a back story...this boy earned his way here by buying into a $5 internet qualifier and now this hand decides if he will win a life changing amount of money...and his buddies are there going nuts....I buy into that! Thats what makes poker watchable...this show...EBJ lacks that.

But hopefully the show will evolve....its a new formula...it needs tweaked but it still has the high potiential to be a great success.

Slick is good but it has to be real as well....so far they only have one of these two parts.

 

Fair criticism, but --

Included in the beginning of each and every show is a 2-3 minute breakdown of the fact that 100 or so of the world's best players were invited to a secret location 17 miles off the Vegas strip to duke it out for a week, and that these final contestants emerged as the top winners in each tournament... as for the internet qualifier, they also explain that he/she won their seat online at playUBT.com

the second season will probably address more of your concerns, however, as the majority of the tournaments involve the public at large to a much greater degree.

-hd.

 

I must say that I didnt catch the whole show today and certainly missed the intro and set up so it is unfair for me to not buy in. But this is exactly how I "discover" that poker is on too...Im surfing and bang...so I often dont catch the intro for these shows as well and yet I almost always stick with them once I find it. Why is that?

First I think because poker is repeated often and so there is a better chance that I will come across it. Second it is usually more than one hour long and this also makes the surf and find situation easier...

The CBS decision probably gets a bigger audience but a decidedly less diverse group(those who watch TV Sat early afternoon)...not all that large a group per se...). Compare that to ESPN's coverage of poker ...I might surf into it at 8pm, and then again at 2 am and maybe even at 2 Pm again...and between the three times I run across it I end up watching and becoming invested in a whole game.

Unless Im watching Saturday at 1 or 2 PM (rarely BTW) Im not gonna surf into this show...nor is anyone except the college basketball or football group or whatever runs normally at this time. Card players generally play and watch at night...put this show on as a repeat at 1AM and you will get a bigger audience that is certainly more attracted to this type of game...

Its a great game and I want it to come across as that on TV...its just not doing it yet...but I think that it can and will.

The whole formula is sound...it just needs tweaked so that we become involved with the big mouthed chip leader vs the cute and quiet underdog who is about to double up.....bank..she does it! I love it when Phil Helmuth starts crying about how if it wasnt for luck he would win every event...but its not bragging for production sake...he really feels that way and it comes thru...

My guess is that EBJ needs more air time...less slickness (forget the guys in fedoras and suits and wigs) More back story and more help by the moderators for the tv audence to understand why a bet is somewhat important , very or critically important.

I want to cheer for someone...today I could cheer for Dave because I know him but the show needs to provide me with enough back story so that I can pick a favorite and follow the action that way...heck why do we like to watch Dole Brunson? Is it the wrinkled skin, the snappy clothes, the quick wit??? None of these things and yet they always tell his back story (and it may be complete BS...who really knows) but I dont really care and I just love to watch this guy play!

I think getting the game into the casinos will help (certainly the most interested audience)...the online game helps but it is currently not being promoted correctly... and the show is the third leg of the stool and its a good start and now just needs tuned up....

I watched a story today about making the Seinfeld show and how the first year only a few watched and they considered canceling it....can you imagine ???

 

Bad Review!

Wasup wit dat.

It's one "guy" columnist writting to fill space, no different than all the blathering, blithering, idiot, yell over talking heads on the tube(sports, politics,home decorating or food preperation) who are not accountable today for what they said yesterday.

Hoy boy! He held a home game! How many of you really enjoy playing penty ante poker with your friends, or have ever inserted a round of BJ into a "Dealer's Choice" night of substantial stakes "Home" poker. Ho hum.

The truth of the matter, whether placid, sleepy, cold TV(K.S. must have read Marshal McCluen and don't ask what he's doin...he's long dead.) attracts the masses to EBJ, it is about the only game left for a BJ player looking for not only a challenge, but "some" money.

There are no BJ games to be "had" The invitee tourneys, however you want to classify them or quantify them are wrought with pit falls for a practioner.

The only "real" challenge and test and money opportunity is in EBJ. Or maybe R. Jensen's TOUR. Or if you really want to play BJ, maybe you should play "Dealer Surrender."

The long and the short of it, without beating a dead horse, is this expert columnist should just concentrate on sports betting, where maybe, someone can hold him accountable.

 

Norms right!

The tournaments are drying up! The invite tournaments are certainly not for the average player and come with a vey high price!

Im afraid tournaments are going away and it easy to see why.

They are not being supported in numbers great enough to make them economicaly feasable.

I posted in another thread what I noticed very recently but actually I saw the same thing at another start up online site that offered high ev games...when you cant get 30 people to throw in 22 dollars for a 12,500 prize...??? Well, what thats say? Put on the owners shoes and tell me what you would think.

I know what I would think.

Its correct to say get on board with EBJ .....its your last best hope of a real game....you dont have to be a real forward looker to get a feel of the truth of this statement....

Of course ignore that if you are a casino whale who gets invited to every staged event they offer....

I have a feeling there are very few whales reading this site...

Your game is going away....

"We have met the enemy...it is us!"

Support your game or prepare to mourn its loss....it is simple business ...anyone can undestand it.

 

my take on the article

Interesting article concerning EBJ. I think the most intriguing aspect of this article is that the author wasn’t really commenting on the “show” as much as the whole TBJ concept. Playing EBJ or any TBJ at home – that is very interesting and I’ve never thought about it.

The one line that Aaron Todd uses in his article, I think, strikes at the heart of the matter:

There it is, having the perceived “edge” over someone/something else. Does EBJ have that “edge” for the average player?

My personal response is yes and no – let me explain.

Yes – because of the increased variance of the game that has been previously discussed

http://www.blackjacktournaments.com/bb/showthread.php?t=2945

The increased variables and fewer number of hands let the “less experienced” players have a shot at “the edge”. Nevertheless it is a double-edged sword.

No – because EBJ and TBJ in general, are so much different that conventional BJ. Most people on this board have played a fair number of BJ tourneys (whether live or online) and are familiar with formats and tiny nuances that the general public is NOT familiar with. The general public IS familiar with BJ and TBJ is different, EBJ with secret bets and “elimination hand” is just so “unfamiliar” that they believe, like Aaron, that they are at such a disadvantage they can’t overcome it. So when in doubt fall back to the familiar.

I’ve been busy lately and played at my favorite B&M casinos recently and talked to people while playing at the BJ tables. It is amazing to just ask a few questions and people will ramble on and on – or just ignore you and walk away!

Most everyone I encountered knew “basic strategy” and how to play BJ (watching their games was a different story as I was amazed at the “mistakes” I saw so often). However very, very few had every played in a BJ tournament. Even fewer were familiar with EBJ!

The very fact that a person would actually have to count chips in a BJT was enough to convince many people that I talked to from playing in a tournament – too difficult, too much trouble, too hard – these were among the responses. My thoughts were – TOO BAD!

Now I have a question for Aaron – has he or his buddies every played BJ at home before? Just regular BJ or even TBJT? No? I thought as much. He mentioned it in his article,

It all boils down to work – yes shuffling 6 decks versus the single deck for poker, chip counting, wanting to play and NOT be the house, etc… In essence TBJ & EBJ is hard work, counting and calculating and memorizing strategy about when to double, insurance, surrender, etc..

Poker is easier – pocket pair bet big. Pocket garbage – fold. Pocket and face card call.

Ok, there will be people out there that disagree with my paintbrush assessment and to them remember I’m speaking of the MASSESS. But they again it’s all in the cards!

 

The Championship show was much better than the other two I saw which were very very bad. I was paying close attention to the commercials sponsors. NFL apparel had a 5 sec spot and Sharkman dvd was top sponser, besideies bet21.net and ubt, had a 30 sec spot. I would hate to see how much money they are losing on this show!

 

Well, this is only my second post, but I'm going to jump in feet-first anyway.

I'm the type of person that the UBT show is designed to attract. Totally an amateur, know a little something about cards and odds. The same type as the 7,000 or so "dead money" entrants in this year's WSOP Main Event, although I detest playing poker and wouldn't go myself. The same type who loves a home game with less knowledgeable folks, and who gets a kick out watching poker - and the UBT - on the tube. Here's my take on this whole thing, and please understand that I'm not holding myself out as an expert, by any means. And some of you true TBJ / UBT players aren't gonna like some of this.

Somebody mentioned in another post that UBT needs something to trigger huge interest, like poker enjoyed a few years ago. Well, for poker, that something was a somebody, and his unlikely name was Moneymaker. When he picked off 2.5M in front of the TV cameras, poker went ballistic. Suddenly, people who'd never heard of Holdem were channel-surfing for all they could get. The allure is that anyone can win. Even Joe Schmoe from Tinytown USA could watch and imagine it happening to him. UBT has a taste of that, with the online winner's presence at the TV final tables. UBT needs a Moneymaker to make a big noise, but the nature of EBJ lessens that possibility significantly without some adjustment.

1. Mr. or Ms. Online is badly behind the 8-ball right from the start. Help 'em a bit. Get a scoreboard for chip counts on the show. The online player is used to seeing the chip counts constantly and immediately displayed, then gets to the TV stage and is confronted with piles of chips and pretty much no idea how to deal with trying to count and remember all those chips. Sure, I know that you professionals know how to do that, but you've already got one helluva lot of advantages already. Give the online player a chance, he/she already has enough new things to deal with - TV cameras, lights, the crowds, other players right nearby, handling chips and seeing real cards instead of cyber-cards. Things that you're accustomed to that they're not. C'mon, guys (and gals), you're already so much better than they are, do you really need that advantage, too? Besides, you'd get to see the scoreboard as well.

2. Mr. Stann mentioned that WGN has picked up the rerun rights. Sweet! That's what is needed, a steady presence on the tube. It has also been bandied about here that there is too much good stuff that never makes the show, probably due to time constraints. Why not patch up a 2-hour version for the WGN reruns? I know darn good and well that UBT has a lot more footage that what appears on the CBS show. Doubling that time would allow for more hands to be shown, plus some of the back stories and one-on-one interviews. And that's a double-down that makes everyone a winner.

3. Somebody else mentioned canning the boob shots. Yessirree. Sure, Tilly's Tits are an interesting sight (ask Mr. Stann), but focusing on them isn't necessary and doesn't add a lot to the integrity of the game. Did I really see one of the ladies doing cartwheels in a bikini? What the.....? Are these ladies professional card players, or are they just eye candy?

4. How about one TV final table that features 7 players, all from the online tournaments? You wouldn't even have to give that winner a spot at the $1M table, although doing so would sure create some serious buzz. Remember, poker had it's amateur Moneymaker, UBT could use a similar shot in the....... arm.

Just my non-expert 2 cents' worth.

- Brian in MI

 

Wow........

Spot on!!!!!!!

You have captured the flag!!

You are correct about Moneymaker ( that caught me too)... you are correct about the show ....they can certainly edit it into an 2 hour presentation and bring the general public into the excitement of the game.

The internet qualifier is the key to grab the public and yet I dont think in fact there really were internet qualifiers for this first season...yes I know they mention internet qualifiers...but there was no internet site when this was recorded and so somehow they are patched in I think...not sure really.

But you are certainly correct....the average Joe and Jane need to see that they have a real chance .....

Yes there can be some boobs and some flash and bang guys too but the average person needs to be able to invision themselves sitting at the table too....and with this game its certainly possible...in fact this game is better for that than poker could ever be!

Internet (maybe thats verboten now) players in a tournament may be a good idea...different than the free roll which is more like a lottery ticket win than anything really....

You have captured the essence of taking this thing to the next level....now if we can just find the next Moneytaker....errrrr ahhhhh ...Hows Randy Moneytaker sound??? Or Moneyshaker or booty shaker or weenie wacker ...oppsss maybe to XXX....

Great dive into the forum...welcome and great job on the post...