World Champ?

[Slingshot]

With the World Series of Poker approaching, there will be plenty of posts regarding bracelet winners and scrutiny of their victories. Mostly that of the $10K NL tournament which is obviously the one that all entrants want. Correct me if i am wrong but "is it official that the winner of this event is crowned WORLD CHAMPION ?". I havent seen in any archive that it is official but several posters of late regarding the 2002, 2003 winners have used the term.

The entrants are a mixed bag but any poker player with an earned reputation will be there to compete/play. You could assume then that the field will be elite.

I can only relate this to the recent Masters in Augusta. Phil Mc came through an elite field to post the major that all players want. He is having fun gloating at the moment but the event is not rated as "world champ" and i highly doubt he will ever declare himself as such.

Now the WPT have a structure in place that the champions of the individual events throughout the year get together and duke it out. Champion of Champions seems a fair description of the victor to me after an earned seat.

With the most interest of late being with MM & RV, i dont recall them declaring themselves as World Champs (anarchy on here if they did in most opinions), they just happened to be victorious in an "elimination event". With no rebuys, most players will feel hard done by on their elimination whether they be proffessional, amatuer, online earned or general rich folk. Declaring the winner world champion of 1 single event is debatable IMO. This has been in my head and this is a forum.

[TomCollins]

Maybe you misunderstand the WPT Championship event. It is just a $25K tourney that ANYONE can buy into. The champions from earlier events just get a free ticket. A complete unknown has the same chances of winning that tournament as WSOP.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
"is it official that the winner of this event is crowned WORLD CHAMPION ?".

[/ QUOTE ]

Who or what has the authority to make it "official"?

The short answer is "Yes" anyway. The main event at the WSOP is regarded by most players as the World Championship and has been for decades.

It's very valuable for any sport or game to have a Champion, even if there isn't an ideal way to crown one. For a game like poker which is trying to grow, the existence of a player recognized as World Champion is critical.

Remember, there's a difference between being Champion and being the best. They aren't necessarily the same thing.

[SossMan]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe you misunderstand the WPT Championship event. It is just a $25K tourney that ANYONE can buy into. The champions from earlier events just get a free ticket. A complete unknown has the same chances of winning that tournament as WSOP.

[/ QUOTE ]

He was talking about the Tournament of Champions. It is the one that was shown on SuperBowl Sunday (Ron Rose won).

[kobeman]

anyways, what is so great about the way that they do it on the tournament of champions? Many people have beaten more people and outlasted more competition than those guys to win a title. Consider the online qualifiers who make final tables. They most likely had to win online and then beat tens of top pros to make the final table. Also, even in the WSOP, the field has grown to over 800 in the last few years and i am expecting to break 1100 this year with increased exposure. How can you say that a player who has maybe beaten 250 players in the first tourny and five more in the tourney of champions is more of a world champion than the WSOP winner. I think that this year we may have another amateur champ but if a well known pro wins we will see the true caliber of his game in the biggest game possibly ever. This is a true champ.