$50K WSOP HORSE Tourney

[grapabo]

FYI, here's a link for the blind/ante structure for the WSOP events.

http://www.worldseriesofpoker.com/2006wsop.asp

I can understand the television producers (assuming there will be such coverage, given the NLHE at the final table) getting antsy about putting on an hour of a game that many people don't know about as well as hold'em. I do anticiapate that even if the final table doesn't have the mixed games, there will be segments explaining the other games and/or showing key hands prior to the final table. It could be a good opportunity to keep people who might be burned out on hold'em interested in other poker games.

[Dromar]

I'd prefer if they kept it HORSE all the way through. I'd also want to watch it. Not the dumbed down version that ESPN puts on, but I'd want to watch the entire final table. Do they even have unedited final table coverage for sale?

[ChuckyB]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What if the WSOP forgot about the TV broadcast for one event and just gave something to the players? A big-buy-in HORSE event, HORSE all the way through. That would create a lot of goodwill.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really think the players don't want it on TV?

[/ QUOTE ]

Who wouldn't want to be on TV? But I think they might be willing to sacrifice it to get a true HORSE tournament at the WSOP.

[MicroBob]

The players might be willing to do that.

But I really think that if they did then ESPN might be willing to find a way to televise it anyway (because $50k will catch people's attention...and it won't exactly be a table full of nobodies)

[Bill Murphy]

I also thought the Razz televised very well, better than the High. Everyone can relate instantly to "worst hand wins".

Why, oh why haven't they televised the NL27? On top of everything else you're usually guaranteed big names at the FT. Barry v Jesus in '04, c'mon. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[MicroBob]

I liked the Razz episode as well. And they made such a big deal out of what a headache it is to play Razz.

there were even a couple of split-hands and other semi-complicated situations that the announcers had to explain but i thought it went fine.


With HORSE there could be a heavy angle on how confusing it is for Norman Chad to keep up with it all when they're constantly changing games...and that they are having a battle of best 'all-around' player as opposed to just 'best hold-em' player.

Thorw in the fact that the young-kids don't even really know some of these games....but 'back in the day' the old-timers played WAY more than just hold-em...and this is harkening back somewhat to the good old poker-traditions.


And THEN you could even do a feature when hold-em wasn't allowed in the california rooms so games like 2-7 were extremely popular.

And now you fast-forward to today where everything seems to be all hold-em, hold-em, hold-em....but the biggest of the WSOP events?
The only one with a monster $50k buy-in??
It's a more old-school format.
and the type of stuff that they play in the bigger 'rotation' games.


Man, I gotta tell ya. I'm liking the direction ESPN could take with this broadcast more and more.

Will somebody please tell them that I AM available for hire as creative consultant for their poker-programming?

[roundmound]

Bob and others

You guys are really confusing what you poker players want to see and what 95 percent of ESPN's audience wants to see. I work with a bunch of guys who want to see HE. We play dealers choice games but they really don't understand things like omaha. They understand wild cards, acey duecey, things like that. While you and I may think someone value betting two pair in STUD for 4 streets is exciting, average joe doesn't. I don't think ESPN wants hardcore pokerplayers telling them what Bill Simmons readers want to see. WE already decided that bill doesn't really know much about poker but he thinks he does. Same goes for the average ESPN viewer.

[MicroBob]

Actually, I wouldn't think the 2-pair in stud would be very exciting either.


I think a departure from hold-em in the form of a HORSE game would give some needed verve and variety to their broadcasts which seem to be getting more and more stale as we go along.


It's an amazing $50k buy-in!!!
and to complicate matters they are changing the game every single orbit!!!
Watch the fireworks FLY and see if they can keep their games straight as they battle in the largest buy-in tourney in World Series history.


I've actually been finding ways for this to be appealing to the non-expert.


Personally, I am not a fan of the stud games and am perfectly content watching another hold-em table.

But I think it's ridiculous to change formats of such a big tourney just for the televised final-table...and I believe it would be in ESPN's best interests to mix things up a bit for their viewers.

I think a situation where the game is constantly changing could bring the novice player into it even more.


Ratings are down ESPN. Take a chance.

[Bill Murphy]

[ QUOTE ]
It's an amazing $50k buy-in!!!
and to complicate matters they are changing the game every single orbit!!!


[/ QUOTE ]

Changing every 40 minutes actually, then every 90 at FT.

I think the $50K, big names, change of pace, and "best all-around" aspects would appeal to the "guys at home". 1st non-championship event w/over $1KK for first, etc.

[MicroBob]

it wouldn't change every 90 at the FT since they aren't changing at all on the FT.

But I stand corrected on the 'every orbit' part.

Obviously I'm unfamiliar with HORSE events.