Why no casinos in Vegas ? Not a good enough deal ? As I asked before, how many seats have been sold and what happens with the unsold seats ?
Tax Issue answered Thanks, that makes sense and is good news. I was having second thoughts on entering because it would be really bad to win a 25,000 seat, pay taxes on the win, and then get eliminated right away. Good luck to you, too !
Wsob Iii BJMailman I am not sure who has satellites and who doesn't. I have heard of some casinos that are hosting private only satellites for their VIP's and as far as any left over spots I am sure GSN will select players to fill them out. As far as Vegas in concerned I think they did or will have some, but once again they may have been invite only events. Besides what differents does it make where the satellites are held at least they are offering them to all the players this year. And if Vegas doesn't have any open satellites those players can travel to one of the locations where they offer open satellites events in another state. Most of us have to travel for tournaments anyway so where isn't that big of a deal. Jonny21 don't worry about taxes unless you win the big bucks. If they went by what you could win Ed Mcman would be costing me a fortune....LOL. Good luck to all in the satellite events.
If the 40 seats aren't sold is GSN going to lower the prize pool ? Because they will be losing $50000 per seat. Or is the prize pool guaranteed ? If they just fill the unsold seats, I think we all know who they will pick (famous name pros of course). And they won't have to pay or play to enter.
The 40 seats will be filled, so the prizes are guaranteed. Whether GSN or the participating casinos have a say in what happens with any unsold seats, one way or another, there will be 40 players.
Unsold seats From my understanding, GSN is keeping a very tight limit on the number of unsold seats -- probably because of the extra ca$h incentive, as well as the draw that this year, *anyone* can win -- the true spirit of any competition. The four finalists from last year (Cami, Wong, Rick, and champ Kenny) will most likely be guarenteed a seat, but that's about it. I wouldn't be surprised if one or two others found themselves invited, but i doubt it this year. I have mixed feelings about this -- on one hand, i respect the opening of this event to the general public; by its definition, the World Series should give a shot to everyone willing to compete. But i have to admit, there is a certain value to keeping it maybe half public, half known pros -- you still get the benefit of saying the general public has a shot at glory, but from a TV perspective can still guarentee that you will have a more easily marketable show. For instance, not everyone who plays baseball has a shot at being in the World Series; first you must be of high enough caliber to land a contract with a baseball team & from that point, fight your way to the Series. So there are legitimate grey areas there. Despite the recent spike in blackjack-themed shows being developed for tv, the truth is that the ratings numbers aren't nearly as impressive as other gambling/sports shows (poker, for instance). But luckily, the pendulum and the momentum are swinging our way, and i believe 2006 will truly be a banner year for our game. If GSN wants to switch over to this nearly 100% qualifier way of doing things, i will support them & that decision. I just hope it creates a dynamic show that can help further the popularity of our sport, rather than just becoming a bunch of old white guys sitting around trying to 'get lucky'... -holly d.
I hope your right That sounds great to me Hollywood, (about getting a invite back to this years show) but I haven't heard anything yet so I am still planing a trip to some of the satellite events. As much as I would like to get a automatic invite I understand that it is business and if GSN can get $50,000 for my seat I am sure they would take it (as would any of us). Maybe I can just win a seat and not have to worry about it anymore...LOL.
Hd I agree with your post with 1 exception; 1) I also hope it creates a dynamic show which helps the popularity of our sport but what is wrong with a "bunch of old white guys" if they qualify. "Old white guys" may have a few skills and can be entertaining also. I think an "Elder white guy" was by far the leading tournament money winner on Rick's cruise and the winner of the last Hilton 1,000,000 is a couple grey hairs past 30. Maybe your terminoligy should have been "rather than just becoming a bunch of guys sitting around trying to get lucky". I think for the most part to qualify for a seat at a satellite tournament you have to defeat 239 other players, all 40 qualifing players will not get there with luck.
World Series of Poker The 2005 World Series of Poker finals made for very entertaining TV. I believe every one of the players on the final table either bought his entry or won it in a satellite. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong about that. Anyway, none of the finalists were made-for-tv personalities or big name pros, yet it still made for good television. Tournament blackjack could be the same - eventually. However, I think televised tournament blackjack is still in its infancy and needs to guarantee the presence of the big names to generate interest in the television audience. Putting together satellite winners with big name players should make for some great tv. I'm only in my early 40's, but can only wish I had the energy and mental sharpness of the "elder white guy" who was the big money winner on Rick's cruise. He definitely was more than just lucky. :gun:
I find most of the posts concerning the qualifiers vs the wekk known pros getting special invitations very interesting. I believe that what is being forgotten is that this is a program being made for TV. That is where the big bucks of revenue comes from, not the entry fees. Therefore, this show must be tailored to appeal to the mass, but limited, audience. Among that audience, i doubt very seriously that there is .005% that can even name one BJ pro. That audience is there for entertainment, and possibly dreaming about how they can repeat the Moneymaker feat to become rich and famous. (It just so happens that Moneymaker has moved to my hometown) So WTG GSN, play it for all it is worth so it can get bigger and better every year!!
Clarification Legitimate concerns by all, this is truly a debate worht having. However, let me just clarify as i think i was a little unclear -- i didn't mean that 'old white guys' have no skill or need to 'get lucky' -- rather, i was combining two stereotypes into one, and it came across as more callous than i intended -- the first stereotype being the fact that the largest demographic of blackjack tournament players happens to be white men over the age of 50 (many of whom i absolutely acknowledge are incredible players with sharp minds and mathematical skills that frankly make me nervous when i play them), and second the fact that many tourney qualifiers, due to the very nature of the game, don't have the skill level, but got lucky a few key times & end up in the finals. I just worry that, unlike a tourney like the Hilton Million Dollar events in which 200 finalists make it & a decent number of those 200 are legitimate pros, an event like the WSoBJ with only 40 'finalists' leaves the door open for some bad variance and voila, you've got 40 people who just got lucky & aren't solid players at all. And i don't know about you, but part of the draw of the WSoBJ is to tune in and see what great moves the best players in the world are coming up with, not just watching people paly blackjack. Look at Moneymaker -- almost everyone in the poker world acknowledges that he played pretty badly in the 2003 WSOP, getting saved by miracle two outers time and again. While he proved that truly 'anyone can win,' and he has indeed gotten better since then, still it was the supporting cast of known pros at his final table that he beat that made his accomlishment so much greater -- Sam Farha, Dan Harrinngton, etc. The same holds true for this year's 2005 WSOP -- without taking anything away from the incredible accomplishment of Hachem, what was also a major part of those final few tables was the incredible run by 2004 champ Greg Raymer coming in 20-somethingth place, Phil Ivey going out shortly after, and Mike Matusow ending up on the final table as well. And these are legitimate aspects of marketing any gambling television show, because they create the drama & excitement with which to package and sell the program to the audience and ultimately, advertisers. A great debate, and one i definately see the points of both sides on. Perhaps some sort of combination of both worlds is the compromise for now, until the ratings of blackjack tv shows catch up to their big brothers and can find enough longevity to stand on their own, at which time going 100% qualifier would be the obvious choice. In the meantime, it does none of us any good if we sacrifice the unique demands of creating as dynamic a tv show as we can for the concerns of a completely open, balanced game & lose the building of a legitimate audience following in the process. -hd.
Hollywood I'm not trying to kick a dead horse and admire you for becoming more tolerent as you come closer to the "Old White Man" phase in your life. My only dispute to your last post is; "bad varience and viola, you've got 40 people who just got lucky & aren't solid players at all". Hypothetically 40 satellite qualifing tournaments times 240 players each equals 9,600 players trying to qualify. I would think out of 9,600 potential players trying to qualify the cream will rise to the top and there wouldn't be "40 people who just got lucky" qualifing for the finals. If at least 10 skilled/pro (.00014%) of the 9,600 potential players can't qualify for the 40 finalists maybe they shouldn't be there. I don't disagree we all need to support this venue, just your opinion the Big names deserve a free walk, as Springbac stated in his post probably .0005% of the viewing audiece will know any player by name. I think one of the things that has made poker so popular recently is seeing a no name underdog winning. There is no way new players will join this sport/game if they think only a select few will continue winning.
Old White Men I feel that the point is well taken about so many old white men participating in tournaments. Has anyone questioned why it is so? Since I qualify as one of "them", please let me make a few obvious comments why it is the case. 1. "They" have the time. Work no longer gets in the way of play. 2. "They" have the $. A lifetime of work prepares for leisure. 3. "They "enjoy the recreation and friendships that develop from this source. 4. "They" do not want the mind to become a void, so the mental exercises required for tournaments helps the state of being, much like that required in duplicate bridge. I say thank goodness for the online tournaments, the internet, & the hopefully growing live tournaments around the country, I hope to meet many of you there. 5. Since I no longer have the aspiration to hit the bars & chase the skirts, it provide a fulfillment of leissure time. The days of my participation in softball, basketball, golf are behind me. So the next time you think of "them", just hope that maybe your father or grandfather may enjoy it as much as I do.
Results Speak For Themselves If I had to pick my top 5 Tournament players there is a good chance they would come from a group of white men over 40.Who I would pit against any so called " Johhny come lately " group . A new group or new web site does not make you a good player, results do and this new group might have to get to over 40 before anyone even notices them . " Results Speak For Themselves "
Just win a satellite It doesn't matter who or what you are, just win one of the satellite events and your on the show. What everybody keeps forgetting is that the WSOB is a game show, not a BJ tournament. It just has BJ tournament format for the show. It is just like every other game show they can pick who they want, except this year they are offering spots to the casinos (for a fee). In return the casinos are hosting these satellite events, some open and some just for their VIP's. So now everyone can have a shot at winning their way on the show If all 40 spots are purchase by the casinos i'm sure GSN would love that, however if any of them are left I am sure everyone would agree that GSN should be allowed to pick whoever they want since it is their money they are gambling with on the show. By the why I am 48 (next month) and white so I guess I fall into the older white guy group myself. And as far as anyone knowing any of the players your right only a small percentage of watchers would know any of us. I have had a few remember me from last years show, but it is more like "Yea! Your the one with the cowboy hat, I remember you"....LOL. Good luck to everybody in the satellite events, if you should be fortunate enough to get on the show you'll have a great time. Meeting the other players and production crew was a blast last year. And winning money is always fun and everyone on the show will be getting at least $1,000. plus free room and food during filming. And don't forget you possible could win $500,000 if you win it all.
Facial recognition I agree that few blackjack players are readily recognizable to the public. But I do think GSN was smart to bring in expert players with great credentials. For example, no one who qualifies through a satellite tournament will have the type of back story that someone like MIT Mike has. So even if Mike's face is not well known, his credentials and accomplishments make the show more credible and should resonate with viewers. However I totally understand the decision by GSN to open it up this year. Everything that they have done so far has been great for the game of blackjack.
So far the turn out for these satelites has been pretty poor. The casinos are going to lose big. The Cherekee casino near Tulsa has been getting a fair turn out. At least you get two chances a week there for a small fee. The prize money might be small but that ain't what you're competing for ( $50000 GSN entry ). If this keeps up no more casinos this year or next will want to waste their money on this. GSN made this way too expensive for the casinos.
WSOB qualifing (GSN) I wouldn't be surprised if this is the last year of an "Open to the World" WSOB, GSN has done little to my knowledge to promote this event for potential players. Some casino's published on this site as holding qualifing satellite tournaments state they have no knowlege of WSOB qualifing tournaments. Maybe thats why 2 casino's had only 21 and 22 entrants and I suspect they won't be interested next year if they paid $25,000 to $50,000 per seat as reported. I emailed GSN 2 weeks ago for information regarding location of qualifing satellite tournaments with no response.
