NYTimes article

[LittleOldLady]

NYTimes article

The NYTimes view on poker and its prospects....

They predict blackjack as the next big thing.

[Holden97]

Fixed Your Link

[LittleOldLady]

[ QUOTE ]
Fixed Your Link

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks. Sorry I didn't doublecheck to see if it worked. It's an interesting article, although knowing a bit about the poker industry, I might pick a bone or two. That planned Fox show seems rather on the shark jumping side....

[dankhank]

pretty good article. it has some decent analysis of how poker is a skill game as well as information about the industry. at one point the article said there were 2,400 online poker sites. but like most articles it took an outside-in approach to the poker world - it looks at TV shows and buyins to major live events as being the main part of the poker world, whereas some might contend that casino cash games and online games are actually where the heart of the poker world lies. not sure which area is more important for sustained growth though.

[LittleOldLady]

[ QUOTE ]
pretty good article. it has some decent analysis of how poker is a skill game as well as information about the industry. at one point the article said there were 2,400 online poker sites. but like most articles it took an outside-in approach to the poker world - it looks at TV shows and buyins to major live events as being the main part of the poker world, whereas some might contend that casino cash games and online games are actually where the heart of the poker world lies. not sure which area is more important for sustained growth though.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's one of the areas where I would pick bones. Having perhaps started the poker boom, how important are the tv shows in sustaining the poker boom? One way to look at it--the more involved an individual becomes in playing poker online or live, perhaps the less interested that player is in watching Phil Hellmuth's antics on TV. So it is possible that lower tv ratings may mean less interest in poker and a smaller poker audience--or it may mean a more mature poker audience more interested in playing than in watching overrated fools cavort for the cameras.

Also in the time that I have been involved in the poker world, it seems to me that an increasing number of newer/younger players are coming to poker (and especially online poker) through their history as "gamers," rather than having been attracted by televised poker. People who are already adept at online gaming see online poker as yet another game, with the bonus that good players can make a whole lot of money.

One thing the article does not mention is the push in some quarters for legislation to curtail online gambling. The author of the article may have judged the possibility of unfavorable legislation to be sufficiently unlikely that it could safely be ignored in a discussion of the future of the poker industry....

[dr3amer]

They also quote Aaron Brown.

[Wynton]

I was interested in the discussion of the new show
called Poker Dome Challenge, which will be broadcast live starting next month on Fox.

According to the article, the show will involve the players encased in a soundproof, glass-walled stage. "Microphones will capture game chatter and pulse monitors strapped to the gamblers will track their heart rates. Robotic cameras will scrutinize every nervous tic **** New to the mix will be an NBA like shot clock that gives gamblers only 15 seconds to bet, check or fold, an innovation that Fox says will increase the rate of play to 80-100 hands an hour from the usual 15 to 20. 'It's poker on triple espresso,' Fox boasts in a 'Poker Dome' news release."

[sushijerk]

Ultimate Blackjack Tour? Wtf?

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
an NBA like shot clock that gives gamblers only 15 seconds to bet, check or fold,

[/ QUOTE ]

Now HERE is a rule that needs to become popular.

[MJC1977]

From what the Review Journal reported a couple of weeks, the NV gaming commision is thinking of holding up the debut of the "Poker Dome". We'll see what happens.

MJC