Question about ME size

[neverforgetlol]

i was wondering, i understand they will probably have 8000-10000 people this year. with a field like this, it really seems to be a complete crapshoot. due to this, do you think the event size in the future will stagnate eventually because people won't want to play in an event of say 15K people, or will it continue to grow? maybe it will get smaller even? i have a hard time seeing how even the most skillful player can navigate this field without a [censored] of luck as well.

[tourney guy]

1) ME will stagnate, and eventually shrink.

2) The reason won't be because of the luck element - it will be fear of the law if an internet ban is signed, making it criminal to play on the internet.

3) Luck means less in the ME than you might think.

[neverforgetlol]

in regards to #3, i obviously can't come up with an "amount" of luck won would require, but we can look at some of the following things you need to avoid:

ugly situations like QQ/KK vs. a higher pair of someone who has you covered.

set over set, straight over straight, flush over flush, etc.

winning your coinflips... you'd have to do this a lot to get to the end, even if it's just say 4 coinflips, that's a 6.25% chance.

coming back from the dead.. harrington says at least once (and probably a few times in this tourney) you'll be down and need to make a big comeback, or win a big pot when you put a bad beat on someone.

[Solitare]

[ QUOTE ]
2) The reason won't be because of the luck element - it will be fear of the law if an internet ban is signed, making it criminal to play on the internet.

[/ QUOTE ]
You seem to be under the impression that it is currently legal to gamble over the interent in the United States.

[henrikrh]

ME will stagnate because poker's popularity is fading. Might still be 3 or 4 years off though. ME is not a crapshoot, you start with 200 BBs and the levels are all an hour long. It is much less crap-shootish than a wpt event or any other televised event. Crap-shoot, atleast in my understanding, is when the average stack is 10 BB or some [censored] like that, it's not in reference to there being so many entrants that an individual has a low chance of winning.

[ravenfan1733]

Actually, blind levels are 2 hours long.

I agree with you - I don't think its as much a crapshoot as you see on TV.

Look how many good players went really deep last year - Hachem has a prev. top 10 finish in WSOP, Barch close with Layne Flack, Andrew Black, Matusow, Ivey, Ming Ly, Tim Pham, John Juanda, Raymer, Alsanchak, and I'm probably forgetting some other good players.

There will always be a few lucky people who get deep but they took some big chances to get there, imo (Williamson, etc.)

[WSOPChump]

it is a great stucture because of the 2 hr levels and some early in between rounds. I think time has shown that the best tourney players have a bigger edge than previously thought (maybe 600 - 800 percent ROI from Harrington). People managed to bust fast fast last yr despite the deep structure

[Greg Miller]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2) The reason won't be because of the luck element - it will be fear of the law if an internet ban is signed, making it criminal to play on the internet.

[/ QUOTE ]
You seem to be under the impression that it is currently legal to gamble over the interent in the United States.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ultimately, it's up to the Supreme Court to interpret the law. A few years ago, it might have been illegal, but Bush nominated strict constructionists to the USSC, so it's pretty unlikely that they'll favor locking people up on such a weak legal argument. The Justice Dept. might as well ask a dog not to lick its own butt as ask strict constructionists to make up their own laws--it's simply against their nature.

[neverforgetlol]

given you play less hands per hour, how would a 2 hour blind level correspond to blind levels for an internet tournament?

[HSB]

I think the main event is going to have to change somewhat if it is going to continue to grow. We've got four Day 1s now and if they get enough people trying to register I imagine they will go to five. There's only so many days you can make it before the working stiffs who have jobs won't be able to play just because they won't be able to take that time off and the pros won't want to be sitting around that long. If there were seven Day 1s and you're playing on 1A it's a week until you play again. That would be just insane.

Rather than do that, I would like to see them have a Day 1 at each of the circuit event stops. This expands the player base to those who can't make it out to vegas for the whole thing but might be able to make plans for it if they make it past Day 1 and more of those who do it on a whim.

It also opens up the possibility for the pros who follow the circuit to play more than once. I don't mean as a regular rebuy kind of thing but starting over at each stop. I think it makes for an interesting strategic element. Say you finish Day 1 with half the average stack. Do you pony up another ten grand to play if it means forgoing the chips they already had and knowing you could bust out and not make Day 2 at all?