Recently, at some mysterious location in greater Las Vegas, almost 100 of the world’s best blackjack players and other gaming professionals, along with dates for some of the guests, met for the Twenty-First Annual Blackjack Ball. I’m always grateful that host Max Rubin allows one video poker pro to attend, and this year Bonnie was allowed to be there as well.
In addition to being invited and accepting the invitation early enough to get one of the coveted seats, guests are required to bring one bottle of premium champagne — preferably comped. This year getting two comped bottles wasn’t possible for me, so I went to Lee’s Discount Liquor Store and forked over $340 for two bottles of Dom. More than I usually spend for an evening out, but I was NOT going to miss the ball, especially the 21st.
There is pretty tight security surrounding the event — both because there is a significant amount of money in the pockets of the attendees, but also because there are only so many seats. If extra people get admitted, somebody is going to have to stand up. Some guy named Phil Ivey and his date crashed the party. Seems this guy plays a little poker. These gate-crashers were allowed to stay and, in fact, found seats right up front.
Guest speaker was Professor Edward O. Thorp, whose seminal Beat the Dealer was the book that allowed the career of “blackjack professional” to exist and whose equally seminal Beat the Market basically created the profession of Wall Street quants. Each gambling professional at the ball received an autographed copy of A Man for All Markets, Thorp’s newly released autobiography. Professor Thorp referred to himself as a pebble thrown into a lake, whose ripples became a tidal wave. A video of Dr. Thorp’s speech was posted by Richard Munchkin on January 31 at gamblingwithanedge.com.
There was a musical duet by Megan Riordan, who happens to be Max Rubin’s daughter and starred in the Dublin production of Once: The Musical and Blackjack Hall of Fame member Darryl Purpose. I wasn’t familiar with the haunting and lovely Academy Award winning song, “Falling Slowly,” but Bonnie and I had worn dance shoes “in case” such a moment occurred. We had scoped out the best nearby dance floor (off to the side so it wouldn’t interfere with the performance) and we danced our quiet two step while Megan and Darryl did their rendition. It added to our night without subtracting from anybody else’s.
One feature of the Blackjack Ball each year is the induction of a new member into the Blackjack Hall of Fame. This year’s winner, Don Johnson, arguably the most famous blackjack player in the world after his well-publicized $15 million win in Atlantic City, is both highly qualified and very popular. It could be argued that he stacked the ballot box, so to speak. Both this year and last, Johnson donated HUGE bottles of champagne to the ball for the winners. This year’s winner of the blackjack ball competition, who I will keep secret for a few more paragraphs (but you have heard of him), says the bottle was the Nebuchadnezzar size, containing 15 liters of the bubbly.
The ball is primarily about like-minded folks who don’t get to see each other that often, getting together and partying. They have a skills competition, preceded by an “impossible” test to get the final table number of contestants down to five. I call it impossible, but there is significant correlation between who ends up at the final table every year. This year Anthony Curtis made it there for something like the seventh time out of the 21 balls and two guys who were on the MIT Blackjack team (John Chang and Andy Bloch) also made it back to the final table. I made it to the final five one year — kind of like a Slumdog Millionaire situation where I just happened to know the questions asked that year. This year it took 12 correct answers out of 21 and I only got nine correct. That might sound close, but there were probably 40 others in the competition with nine, 10, or 11 correct. I was definitely an also ran.
Although I have been known to submit questions to Max for the ball, and I was really proud of my question this year, Max decided not to run it. There was one video poker question submitted by somebody else. I’m glad I got it correct because it would be embarrassing for me to miss the only video poker question. Let’s see how you’d do:
At the Casino Snoqualmie, you are playing Double Double Bonus and are dealt 9TJQA, all of the same suit. Choose your best play from these five choices:
- Hold all five cards for a flush
- Throw the A away and draw to an open-ended straight flush
- Throw the 9 away and draw to a royal flush
- Throw all five cards away
- It doesn’t matter what you do. Your EV is the same whatever play you make.
I’m pretty sure all of my readers know the right play in Nevada would be “c.” Going for the royal is much the better play when the game is dealt fairly. But if you know that Snoqualmie is in the State of Washington and games there are rigged by the state, you have a chance to come up with the correct answer of “e.”
One of the rules of the quiz was that you had to take it in ink and if there were any double answers, blanks, or scratch-outs, you were automatically disqualified. I was grading the test sheet of someone whom I didn’t know before the ball, a young man who calls himself Loco. He got 12 correct, which would put him at the final table, but there was a scratch-out. The scratch-out, however, was at least contributed to by Max misreading the question.
Max had a question regarding who said, “Sentence first — verdict afterwards.” Was it Joseph Stalin, the Queen of Hearts, or Attorney General nominee Jeffrey Sessions in his confirmation hearing? Unfortunately, Max said Robert Sessions, not Jeffrey Sessions. Loco, who guessed it was Sessions (as did I — we were both wrong because the correct answer comes from Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland) wrote down “Robert Sessions” and then crossed out the “Robert” when Max corrected the question.
There was no debate that Loco missed that question — but should he be disqualified for Max’s unintentional misreading? Other than briefly meeting Loco an hour previously, I didn’t know him from Adam and had not bet on any player winning. Still, I thought that applying the “no scratch out” rule in this case wasn’t fair and took it up front for Max and his assistants to make an official ruling. It was decided to not penalize Loco for this scratch out and he was in the final five, along with the three players I’ve already named and a player named David Spence. I had seen David at an earlier ball but had never met him.
There were four questions at the final table, each question eliminating one player. The first player out doesn’t get any of the prize pool, but the approximately $14,400 pool is shared among the other four, as $7,200, $3,600, $2,160, and $1,440. That prize pool was generated by everybody anteing $20 at the door and then bidding on who they thought was going to win. My apologies to Munchkin, who has “owned” me for a couple of balls and has yet to receive any return on his investment.
The first and last questions were both, “How fast can you count cards accurately?” For the first test, each player was given a well-shuffled single deck and was asked what counting system he used. If he used the Hi-Lo system, the cards 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 are considered low; cards 7, 8, and 9 are considered neutral; and T, J, Q, K, A are considered high. Some players used this, some didn’t, but whatever count you used had to be announced up front. Max then removed one card from each deck and set it face down on the felt in front of the deck.
Players were told to turn the deck over and start counting — slamming the deck down on the table when they were finished. When asked in order from slowest to fastest, the player needed to tell whether the card removed by Max was high, low, or neutral. First guy wrong was out. If everybody got it correct, the slowest guy was out. From fastest to slowest, the order of finish was John Chang, Anthony Curtis, David Spence, Andy Bloch, and Loco. All players correctly identified the missing card, so Loco was eliminated.
The second test was that you were given 10 seconds to estimate and write down the number of cards in a discard tray. Max put out 135 cards. Anthony estimated 136. David 131, and both Andy and John 124. They basically cut cards to see who stayed on, but with a twist for blackjack professionals. Max let them examine a well-shuffled single deck for about 15 seconds. Max then lightly riffled the cards once and let them use a cut card to cut to, hopefully, a high card. John cut to a deuce, effectively eliminating himself. Although Andy could have also cut a deuce, ending up in a tie which would require a re-cut, Andy cut to a ten and John was out.
The third test was to cut exactly 22 cards from the bottom of a single deck in less than ten seconds. Anthony missed by one, David by two, and Andy by three. So, Andy was eliminated and we were down to two players, David Spence and Anthony Curtis. Since I’ve already told you that you’ve heard of the winner, and David is not that well known to my readers, the actual winner won’t be a big surprise. But there was some drama still to unfold.
The last test was similar to the first, except this time it was a double deck and also, it only mattered what the faster counter said. That is, if the faster guy answered correctly, he was the 2017 Grosjean Cup for the World’s Best Blackjack Player winner. If he answered incorrectly, the slower guy was in.
I was standing at Max’s right shoulder throughout the competition — taking notes for this column and an upcoming radio show. As David and Anthony raced through the double decks, it appeared to be very close. As they slammed down their cards at the end signifying they were through, for me it was actually too close to call. Instant replay would have been useful! Max wasn’t sure either so he asked the crowd. The consensus was that David was first. Anthony didn’t dispute this, so it became official that David was the faster one.
Unfortunately for David, he miscounted. He said it was a neutral card removed (7, 8, or 9) and it turned out to be low. So, Anthony Curtis was our winner! I told Anthony that it didn’t affect whether he won or not, and he wasn’t required to answer, but did he think the removed card was high, low, or neutral?
Anthony had the confidence to announce that the removed card was low. We turned it over. We’ll tell you whether he was correct or not on the February 9, 2017 podcast of Gambling with an Edge, which will be all about the Blackjack Ball. Richard and I will be joined by Max, Anthony, and newest Blackjack Hall of Fame member Don Johnson. Should be fun!
Outstanding synopsis of the Blackjack Ball, it was very detailed and enjoyable to me. I originally thought gambling writers such as yourself got the invitation to this private event (not sure if you pledged not to play blackjack at Barona casino if that matters), but did not know it was due to the one video poker player gets an invite. It must have been extra special since it was the 21st event, and I really enjoy how Professional Thorp expresses his thinking/thoughts from the limited parts I read in the book; such a very gifted intelligent man, looks in good health for his age on the video, and a true pioneer to the core.
Congrats to Anthony for winning the skills competition at least by virtue of the rules of the final round. I will catch the podcast to hear the conclusion of the event.
Bloomberg did a video documentary of Mr. Johnson, but was somewhat misleading since he was portrayed as a Vegas whale. A past episode of GWAE with Don Johnson clarified a lot. A worthy Hall of Famer to come up with ingenuity to negotiate against the house, when card counting was the most common approach taken by the winners.
I wonder if the vpFREE Video Poker Hall of Fame inducted anyone recently.
Forgot to mention, I’ll admit I got that video poker question wrong as I guessed C. It was meant to be somewhat of a trick question, but I did not read the question carefully. I know I ask myself what pay schedule am I playing before making the decision, but 4 to a royal (except for Decues Wild if the 5th card is a wild deuce) is normally a slam dunk decision in most cases.
I took some license with the “one video poker pro” phrase. I’m sure that is NOT one of the actual rules.There are several gambling writers invited — and even more not invited. This is Max’s party, after all, and he sets the rules — although he does listen to suggestions from longtime attendees such as Richard Munchkin, James Grosjean, Anthony Curtis and others.. I guess it mostly comes down to:
1. Does Max like you?
2. Does Max respect you as a gambling professional?
3. Did you bring Dom Perignon last time or the cheap stuff?
We taped the radio show for this week yesterday. It was LOTS of fun. I’m willing to bet the listeners will find it more entertaining than most of our shows. And if you thought the video poker question was tricky, wait until you hear the quatloo question!
Very entertaining description of the Blackjack Ball. Must have been lots of fun for you and your wife. In one of the other comments, the person mentions VP Poker Ball. Any chance you will start this annual event. I would be honored to attend and or support.
The actual question did not specify what type of video poker, which was actually intended as an additional hint that the correct answer is (5) or (e), since the paytable does not even enter into the analysis. If anyone at The Ball had asked what type of video poker to apply, Max would have said, “Whichever type is most prevalent at Snoqualmie Casino” and that would be the “Mystery Bonus Card” variety. I’m not sure how we worded that question at The Ball, but choice (e) actually should say that the actual PAYOFF is the same no matter what, not just the EV. Also, we don’t really consider something like this to be a trick question. As pros who are in the trenches, this is part of our working knowledge of targets at casinos nationwide. I don’t know the answer to this question just because of an abstract knowledge of the laws of Washington state; rather, I know the answer to this question because I’ve been to Snoqualmie and tried keeping just a pair of Aces after getting dealt AAAA5! It’s crazy! Thanks to Bob for the detailed party round-up.
I think the reference was to the vpFREE Hall of Fame — not VP poker ball. I think vpFREE will vote for a new hall of fame member this year. My vote will be for the late Liam W. Daily.
I don’t think video poker lends itself to a ball like blackjack does. A high percentage of blackjack players, by necessity, are “road warriors” meaning they play all over the country. They keep running into other pros all over the place.
In video poker, there is a large community of players who basically only play in one city — or maybe a few cities. I have no idea how you’d rank players. Do you consider quarter players and $25 players both? They certainly never are playing at the same machines and never see each other.
At the Blackjack Ball, a couple of years ago there was a question about the percentage of invited guests who had earned more than $1 million gambling. The correct answer was something like 70% of the invited guests. I know maybe 20 video poker players who I believe are ahead more than $1 million — but I’m not sure. Also, promotions are such a big deal in video poker, does winning a $250,000 drawing count as winnings? Why or why not?
Also, blackjack is such a grind=it=out affair, if you’re ahead several hundred thousand dollars, that’s a pretty big accomplishment. You can’t really luck into that. In video poker, when royals are $100,000 or more on a $25 or higher machine, it’s very possible to be over-royaled. (During my million dollar run, I was definitely over-royaled on $5 multi-line and $25 and $100 machines. Was my million dollar win 10% luck — 40% luck — 80% luck? who can say for sure?)
Also, comparatively speaking, blackjack teams are a lot more plentiful than video poker teams. Most video poker players play solo.
It just doesn’t add up to some kind of reasonable definition of “video poker ball,” in my opinion.
80%+ for sure!
Good journalism Bob. I wonder if Anthony got the last card right on the double deck. He seemed like he was dialed in on the deck estimation according to your reporting.
When the 5 contestants counted down the single deck I wish you would have posted a video showing the contestants performing this. Only to see the manner in which how each individual did it, to see if all 5 used the same technique or was their differences in how each did it irregardless of the counting method used.
I agree that would have been interesting and informative— but it’s not going to happen.
Remember, many invitees to the Ball are active players and do not wish their faces known to casino personnel. People gather around the final table to watch. If a casino employee saw a face he recognized in the video — he might well 86 the player just because he was at the Ball.
For players to come to the Ball, they have to know it’s a safe place for them.
I should have rephrased the question differently. What I meant to say is that it would have been nice to see a video of only their hands and the single deck of cards being counted down. I only wanted to see their hands in motion and how each individual handled the deck of cards, as well as the method each individual used to accomplish the task, not their faces or their body. I realize exposing their faces is big no no for back-off purposes.
Since you were there Bob maybe you can answer the question for me. Did all 5 contestants use the same method?
I bet there is a good chance Bob has written an article about all of the Blackjack Balls. It would be great to see a book published with all of the Blackjack Ball reports in chronological order with embellishing side stories!
Each did it a little differently — and all at the same time. And quietly. They were facing me when they did it and it wasn’t clear exactly what each was looking at.
In the radio show which will be posted in a few hours, Anthony explains some stuff about what he did. Things I wouldn’t know unless he spoke about them.
I have no chance of accurately describing the differences in the way they did things. Perhaps if I had slow motion video tapes which I could watch over and over again — but that doesn’t exist.
You’d lose that bet.
When the blackjack balls started, I was very slightly above being a nobody in the gambling world. My first video poker reports were out — and I was just starting to write for Casino Player and Strictly Slots. I had built up my bankroll to a couple of hundred thousand dollars — which was a huge increase over the $6,000 I started with — but I wasn’t that well known.
I did get to go to one early party — I knew Max because we both were in the Huntington Press “family” — but then for a dozen years or so I wasn’t invited. At least part of the time I consulted for casinos — and no player knew for sure whether I was outing players or not. (I wasn’t — but how can you prove a negative? Anybody familiar with me for more than a decade knows that lots a players were very anti-Dancer. Much of that has faded away with the radio show. Now people hear me once a week and have more of a sense of who I am.)
When Richard Munchkin started to be a co-host on GWAE about five years ago, he asked if I was still interested. I said absolutely but told him why Max didn’t invite me. Richard, along with Anthony Curtis, believed I wasn’t outing players and by then I was definitely a well-known gambling presence. So I started getting invited and writing about the ball — for either four or five times now.
Each article I write about the ball is vetted by Max and Richard before it gets published because I definitely don’t want to violate any unwritten rules. Each player at the final table is asked whether I can use their real name — or if not, what name do they prefer I use.
My chronicling what happens is now a fixture at the ball — but that certainly wasn’t always the case.
The only guy I have not seen a picture of, is David. The other 3 shouldn’t have an issue hiding their mugs. 🙂
Me and a friend even got to talk to Anthony a couple years ago while picking up our coupon books.
Phil Ivey crashed the door? Seriously? I feel he is getting a bad beat in the courts. He found a flaw in the cards and took the opportunity to beat the house. Period.
No. Not seriously. Ivey had been invited by his friend Don Johnson and it had been approved by Max. Max referred to him over the microphone as a gate crasher — but it was not meant to be taken seriously.
We talk about that on the most recent radio show — which has now been posted
First of all, I think you have to include drawing wins in your calculations, since for so many VP plays, it’s only the shot at the drawing that makes the EV positive. But it does add a crazy amount of variance. There are obviously a lot of poker players up over $1 million lifetime, but that it partially because big tournaments are so top-heavy.
I have been curious in your estimation how many primarily VP players in the US average over $100K/year over the last 5 years? Over $50K? Over $25K?
Any numbers I came up with, Sammy, would be wild ass guesses.
I don’t know even semi-accurate figures for ANY player other than myself. (Not actually true. I know for Bonnie. and her score in 2016 based on her own play was $0 coin-in and $0 coin-in. I’m so smart I can figure out her net profit in my head!)
I know some of the better players in Las Vegas, but not all. Each of us are restricted from different casinos — so there are lots of strong players I don’t run into at all simply because we’re never at the same place at the same time. Or if we are in the same And even if I run into them, none of them say such things as “I won $15K in January, lost $8K in February, . . . .”). It’s just not what I talk about with players.
Gambling cities other than Vegas? I don’t have a clue. Yes I make some out-of-town trips each year to a very few other places, but one or two weekends a year doesn’t give me a good feel for who the best players are there..
And when you include drawings (Which I agree you should)? How could I possibly know who wins at every casino and how much they spent earning the drawing tickets? Winning $10K at some obscure casino I’ve never heard of counts just as much as winning $10K at a big casino.
Some players play on multiple cards — often against casino rules. How do you include them? Do you put an asterisk by their name because they are breaking the casino rules?
And you’re talking five years worth of data? Ha! I don’t have the data for one month!
LC wrote: The only guy I have not seen a picture of, is David. The other 3 shouldn’t have an issue hiding their mugs. ?
You’re referring to Anthony Curtis, John Chang, and Andy Bloch. Those three in particular are very famous, with Andy and Anthony being on television numerous times for reasons other than blackjack. Many of my readers don’t know what John Chang looks like. Often the final table includes two or three people who are relatively unknown.
“Loco” was also at the final table this year. Last year “Cody” won, and earlier “Smoke,” “Mr. Yuk,” and “MRX” were at the final table with two of them winning. How many of them did you know?
A rough rule of thumb is that if they want to use some sort of pseudonym in my write-up they probably don’t want their picture published.
And the undisputed best at these contests, James Grosjean and Richard Munchkin, have been forbidden to play because they are so good. They should be the ones you would want to see “do their thing.” And I know for a fact that both of these guys are VERY camera shy. And “Diamond Mike,” who has “only” won twice so is still allowed to compete doesn’t want his face exposed either.
True, you’d most likely have to be a somewhat serious blackjack player to know who Chang is. If I were there, I’d use a pseudonym as well…Just as I do here 🙂
Virtually all civilians, upon hearing the name “Johnny Chang” of MIT Blackjack fame, will confuse him with “Johnny Chan” (the master) of WSOP and Rounders fame. But Johnny Chan does have a role in the world of blackjack, but that’s another story …
I always feel honored when ExhibitCAA (aka James Grosjean) drops a line into this forum.
When Grosjean referred to Chan as “the Master” I thought that was a mistake because I’ve heard Men Nyugen referred to as “the Master.” So, I Googled it. Turns out both of these poker pros have the same nickname.
Bob, that was a major tell right there. Have you not replayed the classic scene from Rounders–where Matt Damon replays Chan trapping Seidel–over and over?? Watch that scene and listen closely. That’s where the reference comes from, of course! hahaha. (Sorry for going off topic)
Apology accepted. And no, I haven’t replayed that scene from Rounders. Now I will.
Two points if you know (without watching the video) the name of the announcer that called Chan “The Master.”
He’s also famous for saying,…”And Hellmuth wins the championship.”
That’s a bit surprising that all 5 counted down the deck a little different from each other. It would have been nice to see a video of all 5 contestants hands going thru the deck at full game speed, to see if one method was more efficient over another. That is what I wanted to see. If we could see hands and cards in motion that would offer a small glimpse into the mind of the 5 contestants.
I listened to the podcast and heard that Anthony got the last card right in his double deck countdown, the competition sounded fierce. It was nice to hear Anthony’s thoughts on how he planned to win and that he planned on hitting the table before his competitor no matter what and was willing to take an educated guess if need be.