Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
 

[ QUOTE ]
What makes people think the WSOP is supposed to pit the best against the best?

That's in your own mind.

What is happening is that the WSOP is becoming the monster field tournament. If you want the best against the best, play in the WPT champsionship with it's $25,000 buyin. Only 452 entered and clearly Tuan Le is the best of the best.

But the bottom line is this. It's not your tournament. If you don't like it, don't play.

[/ QUOTE ]

you are correct rasputin.

you need an avatar.

here are two suggestions.

1) http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v7.../rasputin4.jpg

2) http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v7...s/rasputin.jpg

Barron

Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
 

I think the appeal of the WSOP is that anyone can enter. I know that I can never play in a Super Bowl or PGA championship but the "dream" of being able to play in the premier poker event in the world is real. All I need is $10,000. Someday I plan on playing in it. I own my own business but right now all my profits go to paying off the bank that holds my business loan. In a few years when that note is retired I'll be able to afford to play in the WSOP. Think of how many people like me there are out there. Poker wouldn't be nearly so popular if that dream weren't there for the average guy. There are plenty of big money tournaments out there that you don't need to limit the big one. I started playing on-line and reading books for the sole purpose of making my game better so I can do better when I do get to play in a major tournament. For years I had consistently won money in home games and the thought of taking poker to a higher level had never crossed my mind. Keep the dream alive for the average Joe out there and it will attract a lot more people to the tables.

Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
 

I think what they need to do is do a big qualifier tourney prior to the WSOP main event. So that in the main event you have good players who made it past the big qualifier. Like for all world series and championship events like superbowl etc.., teams go through alot of qualifying matches. I think it should be this way. Have the people qualify for the WSOP. Run qualifier tourney all over the world that have buyins of like $2k. Then get all the qualifiers together into binions. This will eliminate the Joe Schmo's who just want to be on TV, and get some good players in the game, making it exciting to watch.

Also i think they should televise big cash games. like the 1000/2000, they dont have to show their hands in the pocket cam, since most pros will not like this idea anyway. I think it would be good tv.

Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
 

[ QUOTE ]
What makes people think the WSOP is supposed to pit the best against the best?

That's in your own mind.


[/ QUOTE ]

The name of the tournament is "The World Series of Poker." Clearly, the name was taken from baseball. You don't see any bar league softball teams playing in the baseball World Series.

Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
 

[ QUOTE ]
The vast majority of those slobs this year didn't even have the 10 grand. They won satellites either in poker rooms or online. So what?

How often did you watch it on TV back when it was limited to the best players in the world? How often do you watch it on TV now that anybody can enter and win?

[/ QUOTE ]

The reason why poker has become more watchable on TV is because the player's down are shown. In the old days, this wasn't case. You had to wait for the hand to be over. Now, you can play along at home. It makes a huge difference.

Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't get why you have a problem with the format.

Regardless, if the better players are really better than the no-names, then either their superiority in skill will bring them victory consistently, or the format does not provide for sufficient influence from skill, and it's more of a lottery. In either case, allowing no-names in the game is reasonable.

[/ QUOTE ]

You inadvertently brought up an interesting point. I've noticed that many of the no-names take crazy chances, hoping to get very lucky, when heads up against a pro. IMO The amatuers do this not so much to win the tourney, but to tell their friends back home about knocking a pro out of the competition.

Howard Lederer commented that every time he made a bet, he had to defend his stack.

That's one more reason to limit the competition.

Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think the appeal of the WSOP is that anyone can enter. I know that I can never play in a Super Bowl or PGA championship but the "dream" of being able to play in the premier poker event in the world is real. All I need is $10,000. Someday I plan on playing in it. I own my own business but right now all my profits go to paying off the bank that holds my business loan. In a few years when that note is retired I'll be able to afford to play in the WSOP. Think of how many people like me there are out there. Poker wouldn't be nearly so popular if that dream weren't there for the average guy. There are plenty of big money tournaments out there that you don't need to limit the big one. I started playing on-line and reading books for the sole purpose of making my game better so I can do better when I do get to play in a major tournament. For years I had consistently won money in home games and the thought of taking poker to a higher level had never crossed my mind. Keep the dream alive for the average Joe out there and it will attract a lot more people to the tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's stopping you from becoming one of the best players in the world?

The dream is still there regardless. That's the beauty of poker. You don't have to be big, strong, fast, young, male, white, rich etc.

Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
 

[ QUOTE ]
You don't have to be big, strong, fast, young, male, white, rich etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

But it helps [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
 

[ QUOTE ]


You inadvertently brought up an interesting point. I've noticed that many of the no-names take crazy chances, hoping to get very lucky, when heads up against a pro. IMO The amatuers do this not so much to win the tourney, but to tell their friends back home about knocking a pro out of the competition.

Howard Lederer commented that every time he made a bet, he had to defend his stack.

That's one more reason to limit the competition.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is that one more reason to limit the competition? That is one more reason to keep it as it is. Do you think the pros DON'T like it that idiots are making terrible plays against them? They know in the long run they'll make oodles of money because of it.

OH NO SOMEONE BLUFFED HOWARD LEDERER WE BETTER BAN ALL THE DONKEYS.

Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
 

People are foolishly forgetting that all of these "pros" were nobodies once too. They all started with a chip and a dream and eventually made it big. They made it by winning one of the big buy in tournaments and winning a lot of money, along with their fair share of fame. Almost every famous player was a nobody until they won a big tournament or made a couple televised final tables. There are plenty of other tournaments around the world, so griping about the WSOP ME is pretty pointless.