Caesars has been running it for well over a year in AC. Sure, when it hit $800,000 or so a few months back, there was some excitment. But, by and large, I'd rather have a much smaller chance of hitting the "jackpot" of a table share -- in the thousands of dollars, that a greater likelyhood of a room share of $400 or so.
Maybe the thinking is different for people grinding out a living . . . but, if I'm going to play poker a couple of times a month, I'd rather not even hit the BBJ if it means shutting down the games for an hour or two so they can pay out a couple of hundred dollars to everyone seated at 8 or 9 properties . . .
Thanks, Pete. I know there are varying opinions on BBJ's. I think most "serious" players would rather not have them. that said, if ever I had my quads beat, I'd sure as hell want there to be a BBJ! :)
As a recreational player with no great poker rooms in close vicinity, I love playing at properties with high hand jackpots and BBJs. If the Royal I recently hit at Venetian was at my usual home of Bally's, I would have gotten a $2500 bonus. Ah well ...
Gentlemen, I'm not opposed to a BBJ necessarily. I'm opposed to a "room share" like Ceasars has implemented in AC (and now, apparently, in vegas) as opposed to a "table share," i.e., where you have to be at the actual table where the bad beat hits in order to get paid.
The problem with the room share (or, more accurately in the case of Ceasars, the "company-wide share") is that when the BBJ hits, unless you are one of the two players directly involved in the hand, the payout is not that great and it takes hours to get everyone paid, which means the rooms are basically shut down while things get sorted out.
I'd rather te BBJ just pay 10 spots -- the loser getting the biggest chunk, then the winner of the hand, and then the remainder of the table splitting the rest....
Well, they actually told me that, depending on how long it takes to hit and what time it hits, they might anticipate room shares to be more than three figures. I kinda like the idea of sitting in a room in Vegas and an announcement being made that because someone got a bad beat in Lake Tahoe, I'm gonna get some loot. Take a look at the schedule, a lot more of the money than in most BBJ's goes to the property share.
I'm not endorsing it or opposing it, I'm not giving an opinion at all. Just pointing out what they told me. My columns for Ante Up are not opinion pieces, unlike my blog (I don't mention boobs in them, either).
Enjoyed the article Rob. I was interested in reading about playing two hands at a time. Sounds like it would get rather busy at the one table but would be interested in watching something like that being played. Have to agree with Pete about the BBJ. Would prefer each place having their own but if this works for them to get players in that is the way it will be.
Sorry, Ken & Pete, after some consideration, I felt it necessary to delete your comments; I shouldn't have approved them.
My various employers could conceivably have a problem with such comments about, well, you know who, appearing on a blog published by someone they are affiliated with.
I blogged professionally for several years for PokerWorks. I didn't get perks but cash. I was never asked to soft soap or compromise my position. Even at that, I finally felt too constricted to continue. That was on my end as the subject matter was no longer as mainstream as I thought it should be and I didn't think I was worth what I was being paid.
Ken, I'm gonna err on the side of caution. Remember, when I started this blog, I used psuedonyms, not just for people, but for casinos too (hence, "BSC").
I guess I'll have a moral delimma when comes a time I want to personally criticize--by name--an establishment that I need to keep a professional relationship with. I'll deal with it at the time.
Until then, just as I didn't allow another blogger's offensive comments against a certain group of people on here, I feel uncomfortable having pot shots on this blog at an entity that was only mentioned on here because I wrote a column about them somewhere else.
I sort of despise the mult-property BBJ.
ReplyDeleteCaesars has been running it for well over a year in AC. Sure, when it hit $800,000 or so a few months back, there was some excitment. But, by and large, I'd rather have a much smaller chance of hitting the "jackpot" of a table share -- in the thousands of dollars, that a greater likelyhood of a room share of $400 or so.
Maybe the thinking is different for people grinding out a living . . . but, if I'm going to play poker a couple of times a month, I'd rather not even hit the BBJ if it means shutting down the games for an hour or two so they can pay out a couple of hundred dollars to everyone seated at 8 or 9 properties . . .
Thanks, Pete. I know there are varying opinions on BBJ's. I think most "serious" players would rather not have them. that said, if ever I had my quads beat, I'd sure as hell want there to be a BBJ! :)
DeleteAs a recreational player with no great poker rooms in close vicinity, I love playing at properties with high hand jackpots and BBJs. If the Royal I recently hit at Venetian was at my usual home of Bally's, I would have gotten a $2500 bonus. Ah well ...
DeleteGentlemen, I'm not opposed to a BBJ necessarily. I'm opposed to a "room share" like Ceasars has implemented in AC (and now, apparently, in vegas) as opposed to a "table share," i.e., where you have to be at the actual table where the bad beat hits in order to get paid.
DeleteThe problem with the room share (or, more accurately in the case of Ceasars, the "company-wide share") is that when the BBJ hits, unless you are one of the two players directly involved in the hand, the payout is not that great and it takes hours to get everyone paid, which means the rooms are basically shut down while things get sorted out.
I'd rather te BBJ just pay 10 spots -- the loser getting the biggest chunk, then the winner of the hand, and then the remainder of the table splitting the rest....
Well, they actually told me that, depending on how long it takes to hit and what time it hits, they might anticipate room shares to be more than three figures. I kinda like the idea of sitting in a room in Vegas and an announcement being made that because someone got a bad beat in Lake Tahoe, I'm gonna get some loot. Take a look at the schedule, a lot more of the money than in most BBJ's goes to the property share.
DeleteI'm not endorsing it or opposing it, I'm not giving an opinion at all. Just pointing out what they told me. My columns for Ante Up are not opinion pieces, unlike my blog (I don't mention boobs in them, either).
Enjoyed the article Rob. I was interested in reading about playing two hands at a time. Sounds like it would get rather busy at the one table but would be interested in watching something like that being played. Have to agree with Pete about the BBJ. Would prefer each place having their own but if this works for them to get players in that is the way it will be.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Steve, there's a video online of the Multi Action Poker in action, but I'm not sure you get a good feel for it without actually playing it.
DeleteSee here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qYJThbZOA34
Gum
DeleteWalk
Chew
Walk
Ouch, I bit my foot.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteSorry, Ken & Pete, after some consideration, I felt it necessary to delete your comments; I shouldn't have approved them.
DeleteMy various employers could conceivably have a problem with such comments about, well, you know who, appearing on a blog published by someone they are affiliated with.
Hope you understand.
I blogged professionally for several years for PokerWorks. I didn't get perks but cash. I was never asked to soft soap or compromise my position. Even at that, I finally felt too constricted to continue. That was on my end as the subject matter was no longer as mainstream as I thought it should be and I didn't think I was worth what I was being paid.
ReplyDeleteDon't let the lines get blurred too much, Rob.
Ken, I'm gonna err on the side of caution. Remember, when I started this blog, I used psuedonyms, not just for people, but for casinos too (hence, "BSC").
DeleteI guess I'll have a moral delimma when comes a time I want to personally criticize--by name--an establishment that I need to keep a professional relationship with. I'll deal with it at the time.
Until then, just as I didn't allow another blogger's offensive comments against a certain group of people on here, I feel uncomfortable having pot shots on this blog at an entity that was only mentioned on here because I wrote a column about them somewhere else.
Thanks for understanding.