Harrah's is diluting the WSOP brand - my proposal for the WSOP

[Shoe]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A simple answer for you: Jamie Gold.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who? Never heard of him. What's next, the Toronto Argonauts winning the Superbowl?

[/ QUOTE ]

So you had already heard of Moneymaker, Raymer, or Hachem before they won?

[HSB]

[ QUOTE ]
We talk about the WSOP producing a "world champion of poker" each year, but is Harrah's diluting the value of that championship?

A simple question for you: who is this year's world champion of poker? The guy who won the NL Hold'em bracelet? Which one? Harrah's handed out 25 bracelets in NL Hold'em this year! This includes events such as shootouts, short-handed, rebuy, ladies, seniors, and casino employees. What's next, Hold'em with jokers wild? And "championship" bracelets, which should be the highest honor in poker, were handed out for winning events with buyins as low as $1500.

I believe that as Harrah's hands out more bracelets, for more obscure niches of poker, the value of each bracelet goes down (those of you who understand economics will see that this is bracelet inflation).

If Harrah's wants to maximize the WSOP brand, and if all of us want the WSOP to be the true championship of poker, I propose that:
- there only be one championship event for each major type of poker; and
- each event be the highest-buyin event of its type in the world. For the Main Event, for example, that would mean a buyin in the $25,000-100,000 range.

I question if forms of poker like NL Hold'em shootouts need a championship event. If the WSOP is the shootout championship, where are the regular season and the playoffs? It's just not a major form of poker. NL Hold'em, pot limit Omaha, HORSE, etc. deserve championships, but some others on Harrah's current list should be cut out, and the total number of events should be drastically reduced.

- Self

[/ QUOTE ]

Please move to New York.

[boc4life]

Here's what's amazing to me

People with these ideas want an elite, high buyin event where a "true world champion" can be named. They say this would increase the popularity of poker.

Ironically, the closest thing that exists to what these people want is Poker Superstars on FSN...Which as far as I know, doesn't really have a huge following, and wouldn't even if the structure was improved

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
Surely the most accurate measure of the 'champion' is the player of the year award....the points dont lie and that is what determines POTY.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is a dubious points system a better measure than $$$ won?

Look at Card Player's POTY standings. Why should John Hoang with $478,181 in winnings be ranked 6th when the 7-17th are have coniserably more $$$ won than him? 6 of those 11 players have won more than twice as many $$$. Players with bigger winnings than Hoang are ranked at least as low as 201st.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A simple answer for you: Jamie Gold.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who? Never heard of him. What's next, the Toronto Argonauts winning the Superbowl?

[/ QUOTE ]

So you had already heard of Moneymaker, Raymer, or Hachem before they won?

[/ QUOTE ]

I had heard of Raymer.

[Self Made]

Well, at least I found one person that seems to agree with me:
Q: You've been quoted on a few occasions speaking of ways to improve poker as a whole. What are your suggestions, and how do you think they can be implemented?
A: ...Most importantly, though, we have to put a stop the dilution of the WSOP and other prestigious tournaments that are doing away with other forms of poker in favor of no limit hold'em. The WSOP schedule in 2006 was appalling in every way. More needs to be done to protect the history and integrity of the game. I mean, what's next? A $20 buy in no limit hold'em sit n' go for a bracelet next year? The buy ins are smaller now than they've ever been, and that only helps to weaken the brand.

[ruken]

I think one of you guys should tell Doyle Brunson that his $600 mixed doubles bracelet that he won with Starla Brodie is watered down and that it's diluting the brand.