#21
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NYTimes article
[ QUOTE ]
The growth of the poker industry, meanwhile, has led some television executives to bet that darts, dominoes or blackjack will be next. [/ QUOTE ] I have an even better idea. Use dice to determine whether or not to play a single dart, dominoe, hand of blackjack or poker in 2.98 seconds. The caveat being that you must be a certified professional speed player at each game and under the influence of mushrooms. I call this show Super Gamble Dome Extreme IV! How does one apply to become a TV exec? See you squares later! I'm headed to the top floor! |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NYTimes article
next up on espn:
I'm bout to go from ashy to classy. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NYTimes article
[ QUOTE ]
I have an even better idea. Use dice to determine whether or not to play a single dart, dominoe, hand of blackjack or poker in 2.98 seconds. The caveat being that you must be a certified professional speed player at each game and under the influence of mushrooms. I call this show Super Gamble Dome Extreme IV! How does one apply to become a TV exec? See you squares later! I'm headed to the top floor! [/ QUOTE ] Awesome. "GET ME THE PRESIDENT OF TELEVISION!" |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NYTimes article
I had a long talk to Tim O'Brien, the author. He wrote a gambling book, Bad Beat, which I have just bought but not read yet. It was a good talk, but it got edited down to one quote that makes me sound anti-tournament poker. Then Steve Lipscomb's response to me made it sound like I was complaining about my low World Poker Tour ranking. For the record, I'm not anti-tournament, although I don't play many, and I have no beef with the World Poker Tour.
To me, the key quote was "darts, dominoes and blackjack" will be next. That says the promoters think poker is doing well because lots of drunk guys do it, but a few sober people are really good (how'd they leave sex and arguing out of their list?). Or maybe it's "sports fat guys can win that aren't football or sumo." I think poker is doing well because it's a great game. It's strength is its genuineness. The players risk their own money (for the most part), and didn't get in to the game to be celebrities. Almost all are really bad celebrities, too independent (that's a euphemism in some cases) and raw (another euphemism in some cases) to dance the E! dance. If you're tired of whiny soft millionaires pouting about who's best, or games run by and for rich slimeballs, poker is a refreshing alternative. However, like golf, chess and tennis, it will never appeal much to people who don't play it. A major sport has car and insurance commercials, because people who never played will watch and care. The minor stuff has ads for equipment to play that sport. |
|
|