2010 World Series of Poker running thread

[zagoshe]

UM, just in case you missed it the World Series of Poker got underway last week.

Which leads me to this question -- has the WSOP and televised poker in general finally and officially jumped the shark?

It seems like this event opens each year with less and less fanfare or buzz.

 

[JackReacher]

I used to LOVE watching poker on TV. Can't remember the last time I did, though. The year Gold won it, I bought the PPV package for like $25 and watched from 5 p.m. to 7 a.m.

 

[TheSportsDish]

Yeah it might be one of those things we look back on in 20 years as just a short phenomenon.

I think the problem is that the WS is a crapshoot. The biggest names rarely make it to the final table. I know there was huge buzz last year when Ivy reached, but we need that every year and it will never happen.

Sports needs superstars to survive, WS of poker just doesn't give them to us on a regular basis.

 

[Pancamo]

Michael Mizrachi won $1.56 million the other night. He needs it since he owes the IRS $340K and had his house foreclosed in May.

 

[ucacm]

Michael Mizrachi won $1.56 million the other night. He needs it since he owes the IRS $340K and had his house foreclosed in May.

I'd be interested to see how much of that $1.56 mil he actually gets to keep, because I'm sure he had a large percentage of his buy-in staked by other players. I wouldn't be shocked after taxes and the cuts that his stakers take, he doesn't see a dime of the money.

 

[Inky_Wretch]

Michael Mizrachi won $1.56 million the other night. He needs it since he owes the IRS $340K and had his house foreclosed in May.

Was that the $50k mixed game?

 

[ucacm]

Michael Mizrachi won $1.56 million the other night. He needs it since he owes the IRS $340K and had his house foreclosed in May.

Was that the $50k mixed game?

Yes, and as I suspected, Patrik Antonius had 50% of both Mizrachi brothers, who both made the final table:

http://www.pokerroad.com/video/blogfessional/195 (warning, annoying video blog)

 

[Buck]

The high water mark for poker as a pop culture fad is past, but I don't think that means it jumped the shark.
There are still millions of people in the U.S. playing poker, watching poker and reading about poker.
There's no way it could maintain it's steep rise in public interest, but as NASCAR is finding out and even the NFL will find out some day - there is always a saturation point.

 

[old_tony]

The Poker boom started with the Travel Channel's initial use of pocket cam that turned the WPT telecasts into a phenomenon. That, in turn, made the WSOP a phenomenon.

Problem is, poker is still quite popular but now so many games are on TV -- Poker After Dark, High Stakes Poker, Heartland Poker Tour, etc.

Another problem is that the WPT tried to capitalize on its boom and went from Travel Channel to Game Show Network to its current home on FoxSports. And it also went from showing the full two-hour final table show of a tournament to showing one hour a week over two weeks.

While every system (cable, Dish, DirecTV) has Travel Channel on its normal tier of programming, in a lot of places the FoxSportsNetwork requires a sports tier addition to the programming. I still record it in my DVR and eventually watch it, but I honestly have no idea when it's actually on because it's not on the same day and time any more.

I would think that for the World Poker Tour to return to more prominence it has to get back to a full national network, not buried and hard to find on FoxSportsNet.

 

[HanSenSE]

I would think that for the World Poker Tour to return to more prominence it has to get back to a full national network, not buried and hard to find on FoxSportsNet.

Agreed. I find the WSOP coverage on ESPN too hard to follow, hopping from table to table all the time. And at least I knew it was on when WPT was affiliated with Travel Channel or GSN.

 

[proudpittsburgher]

I would think that for the World Poker Tour to return to more prominence it has to get back to a full national network, not buried and hard to find on FoxSportsNet.

Agreed. I find the WSOP coverage on ESPN too hard to follow, hopping from table to table all the time. And at least I knew it was on when WPT was affiliated with Travel Channel or GSN.

And I really lose interest in these hour-long segments of WPT on foxsports. If I care enough to sit down and watch a final table, I will watch it for the two hours. I want to know who won, not have to wonder when part two is airing. It works in a cash game setting like High Stakes, not with a tournament. That's part of why I liked it when they televised the events leading up to the main event. I sit down for an hour, and I see the winner.

 

[old_tony]

I would think that for the World Poker Tour to return to more prominence it has to get back to a full national network, not buried and hard to find on FoxSportsNet.

Agreed. I find the WSOP coverage on ESPN too hard to follow, hopping from table to table all the time. And at least I knew it was on when WPT was affiliated with Travel Channel or GSN.

And I really lose interest in these hour-long segments of WPT on foxsports. If I care enough to sit down and watch a final table, I will watch it for the two hours. I want to know who won, not have to wonder when part two is airing. It works in a cash game setting like High Stakes, not with a tournament. That's part of why I liked it when they televised the events leading up to the main event. I sit down for an hour, and I see the winner.

That's exactly it. When poker was biggest, every telecast ended with a winner with the exception of the 10 weeks or so of the Main Event, and that was darn good and worthwhile viewing in its own right.

I just don't care to watch an hour of WPT, only to be left with three players and a week of waiting to find out who won.

 

[Inky_Wretch]

The offshore wire transfer ban has had to have really hurt as well. The gambling sites aren't sending nearly as many people to the WSOP these days.

 

[old_tony]

The offshore wire transfer ban has had to have really hurt as well. The gambling sites aren't sending nearly as many people to the WSOP these days.

That definitely has hurt the size of the Main Event field, but I don't think it would have much to do with ratings for the televised stuff.

 

[Buck]

The offshore wire transfer ban has had to have really hurt as well. The gambling sites aren't sending nearly as many people to the WSOP these days.

That definitely has hurt the size of the Main Event field, but I don't think it would have much to do with ratings for the televised stuff.

The attempted online gambling ban hasn't affected it as much as many people thought.
Look at the main event field:
In 2003, the year Moneymaker won, the field was 839.
In 2004, the year of the 'poker boom', there field was 2,576 - three times the size of the previous year. That's a huge jump.
In 2005, the field was 5,619 - twice the size of 2004 and six times the size of 2003. That is explosive growth, but you can't maintain that kind of growth.
In 2006, the field was 8,773 - almost 10.5 times the size of 2003 but only 1.5 times the previous year. There's a saturation point here. There's a plateau. The fad is dead but the popularity is not declining.
In 2007, the field was 6,358. Smaller than the previous year but larger than 2005.
In 2008, the field was 6,844.
In 2009, the field was 6,494.

There's a plateau, but the field is still almost eight times the size it was just seven years ago. Of course it couldn't maintain that explosive rate of growth.
839 in 2003, to 2,576 in 2004, 5,619 in 2005 and nearly 8,800

 

[BB Bobcat]

I just got back from the WSOP. Still a ton of people there playing, not only at the WSOP, but at tourneys all over town. I don't think it was possible to sustain the huge growth from immediately post-Moneymaker (growth which actually began just pre-Moneymaker), but it's holding pretty steady, I think, despite the problems caused by the changes to the law.

By the way, I busted out of two WSOP tourneys without cashing, but I finished 16 of 840 at a Venetian event.

 

[Birdscribe]

I would think that for the World Poker Tour to return to more prominence it has to get back to a full national network, not buried and hard to find on FoxSportsNet.

Agreed. I find the WSOP coverage on ESPN too hard to follow, hopping from table to table all the time. And at least I knew it was on when WPT was affiliated with Travel Channel or GSN.

And I really lose interest in these hour-long segments of WPT on foxsports. If I care enough to sit down and watch a final table, I will watch it for the two hours. I want to know who won, not have to wonder when part two is airing. It works in a cash game setting like High Stakes, not with a tournament. That's part of why I liked it when they televised the events leading up to the main event. I sit down for an hour, and I see the winner.

That's exactly it. When poker was biggest, every telecast ended with a winner with the exception of the 10 weeks or so of the Main Event, and that was darn good and worthwhile viewing in its own right.

I just don't care to watch an hour of WPT, only to be left with three players and a week of waiting to find out who won.

Well said. OT and Pitt. I find myself stumbling upon the WPT telecasts almost by accident and more often than not, stumbling upon the same episode on another FoxSports affiliate a couple days later. I have no idea whats on or when it's going to be on -- a sad change from the TravelChannel days when Wednesday nights at 9 was appointment TV.

Speaking of the WPT, my tolerance for Vince Van Patten and his inanities is just about up. He adds nothing to the telecast and everything he says subtracts from something useful Mike Sexton could add.

 

[Birdscribe]

I just got back from the WSOP. Still a ton of people there playing, not only at the WSOP, but at tourneys all over town. I don't think it was possible to sustain the huge growth from immediately post-Moneymaker (growth which actually began just pre-Moneymaker), but it's holding pretty steady, I think, despite the problems caused by the changes to the law.

By the way, I busted out of two WSOP tourneys without cashing, but I finished 16 of 840 at a Venetian event.

I was wondering when you were going to chime in with an update, BB. Sorry to hear you didn't cash. Any good stories?

 

[BB Bobcat]

I just got back from the WSOP. Still a ton of people there playing, not only at the WSOP, but at tourneys all over town. I don't think it was possible to sustain the huge growth from immediately post-Moneymaker (growth which actually began just pre-Moneymaker), but it's holding pretty steady, I think, despite the problems caused by the changes to the law.

By the way, I busted out of two WSOP tourneys without cashing, but I finished 16 of 840 at a Venetian event.

I was wondering when you were going to chime in with an update, BB. Sorry to hear you didn't cash. Any good stories?

Played with Greg Raymer briefly. He came in with a short stack and busted in about 45 minutes. I didn't play a hand with him. Otherwise nothing of note in the WSOP events. I had a lot of unknown good players with me in my first event and a lot of unknown bad and annoying players in the second.

The Venetian was pretty awesome, getting close enough to smell that $54K -- I was 8th after Day 1 -- but I busted in 16th on a KQ<AK all-in preflop.

<a href="http://moby.to/265ir2" target="_blank"><img src="http://img.mobypicture.com/19fc1e65cc219ef87fbb2ee731eb7740_view.jpg" alt="Posted using Mobypicture.com" /></a>

 

[Birdscribe]

Did you cash at the Venetian, BB?