Too many bracelet events at the WSOP

[Johan Ramstedt]

What does bracelet mean?

[oddsock]

It means Harrah's are laughing their cash stuffed asses off.

[samsdmf]

No bracelets = less prestige = less fish

If it means keeping the schools of fish flowing in each year I dont mind if they give every event winner a 4 foot trophy and a Parisian hooker

As far as other non WSOP events go (circuit etc) they should give cufflinks and tie pins- way more balla than a gowddamn ring

[fatshaft]

[ QUOTE ]
Last year after the main event started there were at least 5 or 6 "meaningless" $1500NLHE tournaments that had very short fields. Phil Hellmuth played in EVERY ONE OF THEM. I didn't hear him complaining then about the cheapening of the meaning of a bracelet. Hey Phil: Shut up!!!

[/ QUOTE ]No, he's quite happy for more bracelets to be played in Vegas, but don't add any around the World. Sorry guys but this is so typical American - World = USA. It's 3 events for Christ's sake!

[marty_palin]

[ QUOTE ]
agree

I dunno why the winner of some $1500 event gets the same bracelet as the winner of 50k horse or ME

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesnt this statement imply that a higher buyin = higher skill. Which I cant possibly agree with sorry based on what I read about the ME. Ram Vaswani won the shootout event (£1500) and IMO provided the most skillfull display of NLHE in this years whole series.

[CincyLady]

I for one wouldn't be opposed to making any event that costs less than a 5k buyin a 'ring' event, and have at least one (higher level) 5k event for each type of game (Omaha, Stud, Limit, Texas hold 'em no limit, ect) being ran

In other words, the winners of those (lesser) events where that the buy in is less than 5k, would get a ring instead of a Bracelet.

[MarkGritter]

I fail to see what the point is here. "Too many bracelets"? WTF? Who is being harmed?

Are we going to retroactively downgrade some of Phil Hellmuth's bracelets because they weren't in the biggest-buyin event of that type?

In 2003 there were 35 bracelets awarded, and many of the preliminary events had 200 to 400 people. In 2007 these events were anywhere from two to ten times larger. I think if somebody deserves a "bracelet" for beating 200 players in 2003, then beating 800 players in a similar event in 2008 is worth a "bracelet" too, even if there are more tournaments.

I welcome the addition of more events. It gives me more flexibility to find time to visit Las Vegas and play in an event I'm excited about. There is absolutely no point in denying me the chance to win a bracelet just because I can make a $2000 event but not a $3000 event.

There is no problem that having fewer "bracelet" events will solve. There is no point to mucking with a tradition; it is not like we are in danger of seeing every random slob in your poker room sporting a WSOP bracelet.

[pokergrader]

Hellmuth is obviously just trying to protect his record here.

Using the incredibly low estimate that 10,000 unique players played in the WSOP this year, that means 55/10000 = Just over half a percent of people win bracelets over the course of the series.

0.5% (or a little lower) to me sounds like a perfect balance for scarce, but at the same time within reach.

[Iron Tigran]

Hellmuth won #11 playing in a $1,500 event! If he was so concerned about cheapening the WSOP, why did he play in one of these less prestigious events?! He should have sat out as a matter of principle.

So, he got his "cheap" bracelet, and is now all worried about others doing the same? Hmm...

[NickMPK]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
agree

I dunno why the winner of some $1500 event gets the same bracelet as the winner of 50k horse or ME

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesnt this statement imply that a higher buyin = higher skill. Which I cant possibly agree with sorry based on what I read about the ME. Ram Vaswani won the shootout event (£1500) and IMO provided the most skillfull display of NLHE in this years whole series.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought Vaswani's bracelet was in Limit HE.