[JackTenOffSuit]

Wow. You sir, are why the term LOL DONKAMENTS was created. Do you have any idea how infinitely more interesting a cash game is then a tournament, at least strategically? You do realize that tournaments are played with imaginary money, right?

I took the liberty of correcting your post below...

[ QUOTE ]

I haven't had much chance to watch HSP because my cable company doesn't carry GSN. But I've seen a couple episodes, and I really have no desire to watch more. It just doesn't seem important. Because I think Jamie Gold and Chris Moneymaker's victories are very important .

Do you think people would rather watch the Superbowl, or a pick-up football game of NFL all-stars? I would much rather watch the Superbowl, even if everyone playing in the Superbowl weren't actual football players but lucky amateurs off the street because there is history and prestige attached to it, creating much more inherent drama. I mean, the drama involved in a brilliant player like Dmitri Nobles bluffing with fake chips against another genius like George Danzer can't be matched by million dollar pots being played by Barry Greenstein and Doyle Brunson.
Unless people are chasing titles and history, you're not going to attract a mainstream audience of morons who know nothing about poker and just want to see an all-on on every hand . Why would most people care if one poker pro wins some money from another? I'd much rather watch two overly aggressive nobodies battle it out for fake money.

Maybe if HSP actually published some sort of "standings" and awarded a "Player of the Year" or something, I would find it more compelling, because when Tom Schneider finally won Player of the Year in 2007, I nearly shed a tear from how compelling it was but there just seems to be no continuity between episodes or anything at stake besides the result of the current hand. And this last statement shows how much I know about live poker.

[/ QUOTE ]