From November's Las Vegas Advisor: The UBJT will be using both a secret bet as well as eliminations rounds. The round will last 30 hands and start with 7 players. At the 8th, 16th and 24th hand, the low chip count will be eliminated. This will have the obvious effect of adding some excitement to the first 25 hands of the tournament. In addition, it's the elimination format that often makes reality shows and poker tournaments so popular. While I haven't considered it too deeply, I think a primary strategy for this format is to use the early part of the tournament to attempt to stay in front of your RHO or your RHOx2. When it's an elimination round, just match your RHO's bet, and you are likely to be fine. Of course, I'm very disappointed that I'm not the one that came up with such a great idea. The LVA article says that a patent is pending on this format, but I'm not really sure how you can patent a tournament concept and how you enforce your patent for tournaments all over the country and internet.
I agree From everything I have ever heard is that a tournament format "Cannot" be patented. I may have been given false information so don't hold me to that. If you can Dr. (RR) should patent his (New Frontier) format as it is still the best tournament blackjack format around (as most tournament players will agree).
Playing the UBT Toonces, You are totally right about strategy being totally different when you play several elimination rounds. The new term being thrown around is LB1 and LB2 which is Low Bankroll One and Low Bankroll Two. Those become critical bankrolls in elimination play and there is going to be lots of discussion soon on the best strategy to play when you are caught in that position with an elimination hand coming up. Add the secret bet option on top of that and you get all kinds of variances! I'm sure the books will have to be rewritten on how to play elimination blackjack. Pat
Mnemonics What does RHO and RHOX2 stand for? It seems to me patenting a promising new tournament format would not be good for tournament blackjack. Something that would improve the game and generate interest should be allowed all over. I should think that the people sponsoring and using the new format would recognize that they stand to gain more in the long run by allowing it into the public domain to generate interest. Besides, they'll open up a can of worms for themselves because you have to enforce your patent in the courts in order to keep it and they'll find themselves suing casinos. Since they depend on casinos to run their enterprise they'll find themselves between a rock and a hard place.
Ubjt Hey, patent--Trademark--Register, whatever they have to do. We've all discussed to death the death of casino tournaments and the myriad reasons why. Here's a group of entrepreneurs who put considerable planning, bucks, organization, thought and salesmanship into an idea. As in any new product development they should be entitled or at least make the effort to entitle their intelectual property. They took the risk. They are entitled to the rewards. There was talk a while back about "old" guard..."new" guard. These "people" are old guard with a new guard vision. The BJ community and in particular tournament players will find it the most exciting, competitive, equal and fair to all, of anything offered before. And ,I might add, the monetary rewards to participants (and possible 15 to 20 minutes of fame attached), without fear of banning, backrooming and all of that, will be greater than anything that has come before.
I'll answer for toonces, and definitely endorse his new addition to the tournament lexicon: RHO = Right hand opponent. RHO2 = The second opponent on your right. Thanks toonces! We needed that. I suggested the LB1 and LB2 designations, replacing the more awkward BR7, BR6 which are dependent on the number of players still at the table. New ideas need new terminology. We're getting there.
LB1/2/etc the LB terminology has definately caught on here in LA for the taping of the finals, and is something i will be proud to add to my forthcoming book, with all due credit going to Ken Smith for the coinage. in other Ken Smith news, he and i had one hell of a tussle at a final table yesterday. specifics can obviously not be released at this time, but i will say this: God bless Ken Smith. Some real genius shit happening there; win or lose, that guy can PLAY! An honor, sir... -holly d.
Ken is correct about what I meant by RHO and RHO2. RHO and LHO are borrowed from Bridge lexicon, and it naturally applies here. So, I take it from the thread here, that many of you have been playing some UBJT rounds under this format already. Without giving away any results, can you guys talked about how people are modifying their strategy to these rules? For example: - Are the elimination rounds usually a fight between LB1 and LB2, or are LB3 and LB4 having to play differently as well? - Are people uniformly using secret bets for the last hand only, elimination rounds, or using it when they have to bet on the button?
Great questions. The elimination hands are usually fights between LB1, LB2 and LB3. There's a huge advantage to having a chip lead going into the elimination hand, but even then if you are on the button, it can be dangerous. Although the battle is often among the low banks, there is usually a threat of elimination that reaches almost all the way to the top. When the low banks are fighting hard and betting huge, a dealer bust threatens the highest banks unless they are willing to risk a large part of their stack. One of the recurring themes from Vegas and LA is the danger of being LB2 in the hands prior to the elimination. LB1 knows they need to make something happen, and it is not unusual to see them go all-in prior to the elimination hand. That's a tough development for LB2, because unless LB1 pushes the all-in bet, LB2 becomes LB1 no matter the outcome. Then the same argument can be carried up a notch to LB2/LB3, and so on. The secret bets have been used throughout the rounds. If you are near the bottom of the pack, betting on the button for an elimination hand, that secret bet can make the difference between playing the next hand or not. But with the considerable value of the secret bet at the end, it's a real dilemma about saving it or using it earlier. All these considerations make every hand important and every decision critical. Playing rounds with this format is absolutely thrilling, and absolutely exhausting.
2 questions I have 2 questions regarding the low player elimination format: 1) For illustration purposes, let's assume low player is eliminated at the end of the 5th hand and there are 6 players. Now, let's also assume that BR4 busts out (no chips) on the 5th hand. The question is: Is BR4 (was BR4 when hand 5 started) considered "low player out" since he did play hand 5 or is the surviving player with the lowest remaining chip count (let's call him BR5) at the end of the 5th hand eliminated? 2) When a "low player out" hand is completed, is there a full count down or just the players that are obvioulsy low?
Only one player is eliminated on the elimination rounds (unless two players go all-in and lose). If a player loses an all-in bet, they are the elimination victim instead of the surviving low chip count player. All player's chips are counted after an elimination round, even if it is obvious who is eliminated. Initially, in the "Dry Run" tournament in Vegas, this was not the case. At that event, the chips were only counted until it was apparent who was low count. I pointed out to the organizers that this was unfair, because some stacks were counted in front of the table while other stacks were not. They changed the rule as a result. This group is extremely open to rule improvements. In fact, there were several well-considered rule changes just between the Vegas and LA portions of the current events.
Wow...so even if someone busts out on hands 1-7, then hand 8 still eliminates a player? That is harsh and does make things even more unpredictible. I also like the fact that the elimination hands also make you continuously refigure who will have position on the last hand. Can you guys talk more about the specific rules? I suppose you get one Secret Bet per round. How is that logisticly done? Do you make the secret bet in sequence? When do you have to declare that you are making a secret bet? What are these other rule changes that they have instituted that you spoke of, Ken?
The secret bet is a lammer, that you place on the circle instead of a bet. You then leave the table to fill in the bet on a secret bet card. Staff checks the bet to make sure it is legible, legal, and not written in a way that could be ambiguous. On the hand when you use a secret bet, you can also insurance for a secret amount, double for a secret amount, or make a surrender/stand decision in secret. These last options are available to any player at any time, as long as they haven't used their secret bet lammer already. Even if you did not initially make a secret bet, you can trade your lammer for an "action card", if you want to double or insure in secret. The rule changes that were made since Vegas: Doubling for $100 was allowed in Vegas, even though the minimum bet was $500. That has been changed to accurately mirror the usual casino rule that doubles must be for at least the table minimum. ($1000 in LA.) Another rule change since Vegas: You can't secretly insure for $0. If you take an action card on insurance, you must at least insure for $500.
What if 2 players bomb out before hand 8? If two players bomb out before hand 8, will they still eliminate someone on hand 16? Or do they eliminate someone only if the table hasn't already been reduced down to the number of players it would have if no one went out on their own?
Pay Attention You Could Be Eliminated !!! On the elimination hands 1 player is eliminated regardless if 2 players were eliminated on the previous one.So a round could be over as early as hand 8.Not likely but possible ,as has been said before this is a very interesting format that keeps you on your toes and makes for great TV
Elimination rounds I agree the elimination factor changes the whole strategy about play. In Vegas with two advancing out of seven, a lot of tables were over at hand 16 or shortly after instead of playing to hand 30. In LA it seemed like a lot of people changed their strategy to not be quite as aggresive with their bets early because if you lose a big bet it almost forces you to go all in to have any chance of staying alive on or before an elimination hand. You see a lot more negative progressions played, basically doubling up your bet after a loss. You still have to count chips, it can kill you if you miscount and mess your bet up, particularly on an elimination hand.
