MyTurn2Raise
08-14-2006, 06:43 PM
I have recently heard the argument put forth by some pros that there are too many holdem events and too many events after the start of the main event. Some pros even suggest winners have an asterik next to the bracelet.
I, OTOH, can only laugh at such a notion. These very same pros talk about how tough it is to get a bracelet through the huge entry fields and the number of above average holdem players that now participate.
It seems to me some 'pros' want to have their cake and eat it too. The bracelets mean less, yet bracelets are tougher to get if I am following their statements correctly.
Basically, I think that, though there are more events, there are bigger fields and more talented players than ever in tourney poker. If anything, bracelets are now going to an even smaller % of qualified players than just 3-4 years ago. Also, the core group of poker players and magazines and whatnot can rightfully discriminate the level of prestige that goes with each bracelet.
What am I missing?
I, OTOH, can only laugh at such a notion. These very same pros talk about how tough it is to get a bracelet through the huge entry fields and the number of above average holdem players that now participate.
It seems to me some 'pros' want to have their cake and eat it too. The bracelets mean less, yet bracelets are tougher to get if I am following their statements correctly.
Basically, I think that, though there are more events, there are bigger fields and more talented players than ever in tourney poker. If anything, bracelets are now going to an even smaller % of qualified players than just 3-4 years ago. Also, the core group of poker players and magazines and whatnot can rightfully discriminate the level of prestige that goes with each bracelet.
What am I missing?