World Series of Blackjack III, Week Three

I thought it was boring compared to week 1

I am not being biased because I am Paul's Bro but non of these episodes have been closely as entertaining then week 1. I have never seen anyone so damn lucky as Jeff got. He kept getting face cards over and over again it was sick. Another things to point out is when someone finishes 1st place they don't even celebrate. They have just won 25K which is more then a lot of people make in almost a years time.:laugh:

 

Right assass...

Last nights show was a real letdown. Paul's show was the butter maker entertainer, but I still think week 2 had some great blackjack play, even tho the two top players screwed up,,, that Charlie out witted them all. Good luck to you bros today at your tournament.

Barn

 

I thought I was the only one bored last night...

It's not been what you might call "great TV." Even the Knockout Card and the BK Powerchip can't liven up the production. I think part of the problem is how slow the play is. And as far as not celebrating, I'm estatic if I walk away from the table with $200. Pays for my gas and some good eats! Of course, I've never won $250,000 the previous day. $25k might seem like small potatoes after that.

 

Oh ass ass forgot to meention

"""I have never seen anyone so damn lucky as Jeff got. He kept getting face cards over and over again it was sick."""

You already forgot your streak at bj21 last weekend? LOL They come and go man. Just remember, losing 4 in a row is a much better chance than winning 4 in a row playin blackjack. Never let a hot streak get stuck in your head!

 

To each their own...

As far as celebration at the table when you win (or others lose) is an individual thing on how you celebrate.

Sure your happy if you win, but at the same time you don't want to make the other players feel any worse than they already do, (I don't anyway).

I may clap or throw my hands in the air, but I try to limit my celebration (other than smiling ear to ear).

There is no rule that says you can't celebrate after a win, but at the same time I perfer acting like you have been there before.

As far as watching other players after a win, I like to see some excitement over just sitting there with a cocky attitude, (like sure I won, did you ever doubt I would).

 

High Rollers

Did the Hilton give these HRs the spots on the table or did they deserve it via wins at tournaments? Like they need the 500k, that guy last night said he won half the WSOB take the night before. The week before a big shot news guy in seat 1. Get lost. Not good for the show , IMO.

B

 

I believe...

It is normal for the host casino to receive a certain number of seats in the WSOB, for their High Rollers.

Actually the casino's High Rollers have done very well in the WSOB every year. At least one has made it to the finals every year so far.

 

Well then tex

Since Im from a country cowboy family I guess I should get a free seat at all your upcoming tournaments! LOL You gots to treats yur own right ya hear! LOL LOL

 

As a Southern swamp boy, can I get in on that, too?

 

For sure...

I have a deal for all my High Rollers going on the cruise.

The deal is $80 fee plus $300 per entry and guaranteed re-buys. But you have to pay for your own transfers to the cruise and passage on the cruise and taxes.

No wait a minute! That's the same deal for all my players, O'well guess I just treat all the players equal...LOL.

 

Little Late

Didn't see week three till the replay friday.

Discussion has gone on ever since GSN started the tourneys, but goll darnit, good black jack doesn't have to be reality TV. Reality TV does it's bit and that's a market segment.

When the WSOP first was televised it was just plainly the game. Poker players or those interested in how the supposed top pros played tuned in to pick up something or see how they matched up.

Black Jack jumped(the whatever the phrase is) is be reality and gambling on TV.

While the first two weeks had reality, the third week had some(excuse me) weak play from a couple of top players. Forgive me my Queen, but you let the psycho, Mr. Rogers take advantage of a surrender, by suggestion it. He never would have thought of it. And if you would have...well. and Mr. Root did just an outstanding job with weak hands.

In the long and short of it, that episode demonstrated how skillful play could and should have overcome the high roller, whale style of play.

 

This is a "major" tournament?

I didn't get to see week one - maybe they will rerun it sometime - but I guess it was entertaining because of the personalities - week two I did see - and I enjoyed it - because there was some skillfull play by Kami and Darryl - even though they flubbed a hand each - I actually found that oddly reassuring - that I am not the only one who has the occassional brain-dead moment - but week three was pretty pathetic - not only was there no 'personality' livening up the show - there was no skillfull play either - if this is the quality of play in "major" tournaments - I play tougher tables every month in my local mini-tournament -

Maybe televised Blackjack would be a little more entertaining if they showcased skillfull play - from the two episodes I saw - there were two fairly skilled players out of ten - so how on earth did the other eight get into a major tournament? -

the local casino tournament winners obviously got there by luck - the high rollers by invitation of the Hilton - but what qualified the others??

 

hold on a sec

 

Gotta throw my hat in for Angie on this one here, too... while i agree that the majority of players i've seen so far on WSOB3 have been pretty green around the edges, what actually impressed me about the 3rd episode was that (after we lost the first player, who seemed pretty clueless to the nuances of betting strategy), the remaining field all seemed to have a pretty solid understanding of tourney strategy.

But hey, if its obnoxious showmanship you're after, you only have another 8 days til my preliminary round episode airs!

-hd.

 

Queen of Blackjack - wasn't meaning to dis anyone personally - I have been told many times I suffer from Obnoxious Personality Disorder - I was just disappointed with the overall level of play I have seen on the show - I have played a few small tournaments - and like to think I am "learning skillfull play" - probably delusional on that one - certainly - anyone who wins their way into a tournament deserves to be there - that is what a lot of people have been saying in posts on this site - open tournaments - get to the money through winning - also - as Joep has pointed out - anyone who has gotten a rep through performance in past tournaments - by winning - deserves to be invited to play based on long term performance - I'll even agree with that - and if the Hilton wants to include some high rollers - well that's the price of putting on the tournament - but I have been expecting to see a higher level of overall play in the series than I have yet - may be a lot of reasons for that - including flawed judgement on my part -

In the small tournaments I have played - I have run across quite a few regular local players who have a pretty good understanding of tournament strategy - and who play a pretty solid game - in my judgement - and who make some mistakes - and I certainly include myself in the 'makes some mistakes' group - I was looking for something decidedly above that level of play overall in a major televised tournament - instead what I have seen is that the average player in the two rounds I have watched probably compares pretty much with the better players in my local mini-tournament - even the announcers have been reduced at times to comments of the "that bet was a mistake" category - I am used to people saying that about my bets - I guess the fact that I could watch a major tournament table and think "I would be comfortable playing at that table" is a little scary -

Hollywood - I will look forward to your performance - I think blackjack tournaments need more strong personalities showing some emotion -

people on this site seem to compare bj tournaments to poker tournaments a lot - but in poker - it is player against player with a lot of verbal interchange between the players - that makes for entertaining television - in bj - it is a bunch of terminal introverts sitting at a table quietly calculating odds and bets - and playing against a neutral dealer - and it is considered rude to comment on someone's play - and improper to talk about how someone played a hand - no wonder I like to play Pai-Gow -

 

Problem "nailed"

You "nailed" down the real problem with BJ on TV. As a 10 year old would say: boooooring. May be entertaining to a tournament junkie but to the general public, no way.

 

I agree with Angie

As a former television producer, I have seen the camera shyness that
Angie described over and over -- it makes even talkative people quiet - much of the time. Walk a mile in her shoes guys (and gals)!

 

Not just on TV...

I've done a lot of video production and seen many talkative people brought to a halt by the red light on the camera. But it's not just TV. Several tournament and regular 21 tables I've played have had uptight, serious players. I guess they lose focus if they talk??? Their serious tone has not helped them play any better. Personally, I've gotten serious when I lose 12 straight hands, but you really need to enjoy the game. Otherwise, why bother?

 

Just a couple of random comments to add on this subject.

I certainly agree that the camera makes many people react in a way that might not be their norm. Outgoing people clam up and tasks that are simple off-camera become much more difficult when you know millions will be watching your every move. Some get afraid to take any risk and others take chances that they would never do in a non televised event. Many of the top poker pros will often admit in interviews that they sometimes play hands differently when being televised. My national TV experience is limited to my Wheel of Fortune episode but I promise you that solving those puzzles gets a lot harder when the spotlight is shining in your eyes. So yeah, TV does have it's own set of unique difficulties.

The other thing is the assumption that the players in large buy-in tournaments are going to always be multiple skill levels above anyone playing in smaller weekly tournaments. I got bounced out of a tournament at Pearl River last week by a sweet little old lady who I initially categorized as a "playing on a lark" type player who would not be my major worry on the table. After she dominated our table, I complimented her on her play. She then revealed that "I used to play 8 tournaments a week on the coast before Katrina". So you never know what you are up against. There are plenty of people who are good tournament players with tons of experience from playing many, many weekly events with small buy-ins. Most of these players are content to do what they do and would never dream of investing $500 or $1,000 to play something as frivolous (in their mind) as a blackjack tournament.

Many of the larger buy-in tournaments will have lots of the best players around but there are usually some playing who just had more money than sense. Anyway, I guess my point is that I don't think there would be any argument that most big events have a higher percentage of "good" players than most small events but you can still find some very skillful players in those weekly events.