Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

Am I the only one who thinks that slogging your way through 5000+ entries is no way to crown the world champion? Especially since many (most?) of the entries came from online qualifiers and are essentially freerolling? Here's my idea for a fair tourney that would give us a great champion:

1) Limit field to 250 entries

2) Everyone who enters must buy in for $25,000 cash in person the day before.

3) Automatic qualifiers include all former WSOP main event winners and (or up to if that is a better option) top 200 NL players based on point system (to be determined what that is later). ALL qualifiers still must put up the $25,000. (my reasoning is that this will give old timers like Doyle Brunson, Amarillo Slim and others the opportunity to enter as I doubt they want to go through the points qualifier every year).

4) The final 50 spots are open to the public but anyone who wants to enter must have $25,000 in cash at the entry cage the day before. In order to make it fair they could hand out wristbands and hold a lottery to determine the 50. Each of those 50 would then have to pony up all the money right then and have their drivers license (or passport) scanned and it would have to match when they sat down the next day. (this would be good for local B&M satellite's).

With these rules you'd have a WSOP with fantastic star power and 50 (or maybe more if all 200 qualifiers didn't enter) open entries to spice things up. At $25,000 per that would be $6,250,000 total prize. 40% grand prize would be $2,500,000 which is still a hell of a lot of money. Of course they could increase the entry fee even more. ESPN would still get a good show because they could focus more on each episode.

Let the fun begin. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one who thinks that slogging your way through 5000+ entries is no way to crown the world champion? Especially since many (most?) of the entries came from online qualifiers and are essentially freerolling? Here's my idea for a fair tourney that would give us a great champion:

1) Limit field to 250 entries

2) Everyone who enters must buy in for $25,000 cash in person the day before.

3) Automatic qualifiers include all former WSOP main event winners and (or up to if that is a better option) top 200 NL players based on point system (to be determined what that is later). ALL qualifiers still must put up the $25,000. (my reasoning is that this will give old timers like Doyle Brunson, Amarillo Slim and others the opportunity to enter as I doubt they want to go through the points qualifier every year).

4) The final 50 spots are open to the public but anyone who wants to enter must have $25,000 in cash at the entry cage the day before. In order to make it fair they could hand out wristbands and hold a lottery to determine the 50. Each of those 50 would then have to pony up all the money right then and have their drivers license (or passport) scanned and it would have to match when they sat down the next day. (this would be good for local B&M satellite's).

With these rules you'd have a WSOP with fantastic star power and 50 (or maybe more if all 200 qualifiers didn't enter) open entries to spice things up. At $25,000 per that would be $6,250,000 total prize. 40% grand prize would be $2,500,000 which is still a hell of a lot of money. Of course they could increase the entry fee even more. ESPN would still get a good show because they could focus more on each episode.

Let the fun begin. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a great dream, but I don't think its plausible in reality. I just dont see how any points system can viably determine the top 200 players in a game where the real score is money won and you can't trust anyone on their true stats in that regard. Sure, you can accurately guage the top 200 performers of the past year in NL HE MT tourneys IF you organize the world into one recording body where each tournament is reported, but even then, a guy like Chip Reese won't get an invite because he's not interested in playing many tournaments.

On top of that, Harrah's isn't going to do anything to dissuade people from coming to Vegas. I'd love to see a select entry $25K tournament with a panel of experts selecting the competitors, but even then, the logistics are a nightmare: Who chooses the panelists? Can any panel really paint an accurate picture without local biases coming into the picture? Man, I'm getting depressed just thinking about this...

Gary

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one who thinks that slogging your way through 5000+ entries is no way to crown the world champion? Especially since many (most?) of the entries came from online qualifiers and are essentially freerolling? Here's my idea for a fair tourney that would give us a great champion:

1) Limit field to 250 entries

2) Everyone who enters must buy in for $25,000 cash in person the day before.

3) Automatic qualifiers include all former WSOP main event winners and (or up to if that is a better option) top 200 NL players based on point system (to be determined what that is later). ALL qualifiers still must put up the $25,000. (my reasoning is that this will give old timers like Doyle Brunson, Amarillo Slim and others the opportunity to enter as I doubt they want to go through the points qualifier every year).

4) The final 50 spots are open to the public but anyone who wants to enter must have $25,000 in cash at the entry cage the day before. In order to make it fair they could hand out wristbands and hold a lottery to determine the 50. Each of those 50 would then have to pony up all the money right then and have their drivers license (or passport) scanned and it would have to match when they sat down the next day. (this would be good for local B&M satellite's).

With these rules you'd have a WSOP with fantastic star power and 50 (or maybe more if all 200 qualifiers didn't enter) open entries to spice things up. At $25,000 per that would be $6,250,000 total prize. 40% grand prize would be $2,500,000 which is still a hell of a lot of money. Of course they could increase the entry fee even more. ESPN would still get a good show because they could focus more on each episode.

Let the fun begin. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a great dream, but I don't think its plausible in reality. I just dont see how any points system can viably determine the top 200 players in a game where the real score is money won and you can't trust anyone on their true stats in that regard. Sure, you can accurately guage the top 200 performers of the past year in NL HE MT tourneys IF you organize the world into one recording body where each tournament is reported, but even then, a guy like Chip Reese won't get an invite because he's not interested in playing many tournaments.

On top of that, Harrah's isn't going to do anything to dissuade people from coming to Vegas. I'd love to see a select entry $25K tournament with a panel of experts selecting the competitors, but even then, the logistics are a nightmare: Who chooses the panelists? Can any panel really paint an accurate picture without local biases coming into the picture? Man, I'm getting depressed just thinking about this...

Gary

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, the points qualifier would have to be the circuit events in the year leading up to WSOP. To be fair there would need to be at least 25 events in order to "shake out the deadwood".

The Chip Reese thing is why I included the auto bids for all past WSOP main event winners. This wouldn't help CR but it would help guys like him but who have won the event and that's a fair trade off IMO.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

In general, too many people talk about raising entry fees, citing inflation. I don't think enough people realize that when the WSOP first started, it was primarily rich businessmen and high rollers. Is that what we want the WSOP to be like now? We have more satellites now, but the higher the entry fee, the higher the satellite fee, and it's going to become less and less possible for the average college kid to have a shot at the big events, which makes poker less profitable as a whole.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

No, it hasn't gotten too big.

Ken

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

The WSOP never was and never will be a process whereby the best player in the world is determined. This is just silly.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one who thinks that slogging your way through 5000+ entries is no way to crown the world champion? Especially since many (most?) of the entries came from online qualifiers and are essentially freerolling? Here's my idea for a fair tourney that would give us a great champion:

1) Limit field to 250 entries

2) Everyone who enters must buy in for $25,000 cash in person the day before.

3) Automatic qualifiers include all former WSOP main event winners and (or up to if that is a better option) top 200 NL players based on point system (to be determined what that is later). ALL qualifiers still must put up the $25,000. (my reasoning is that this will give old timers like Doyle Brunson, Amarillo Slim and others the opportunity to enter as I doubt they want to go through the points qualifier every year).

4) The final 50 spots are open to the public but anyone who wants to enter must have $25,000 in cash at the entry cage the day before. In order to make it fair they could hand out wristbands and hold a lottery to determine the 50. Each of those 50 would then have to pony up all the money right then and have their drivers license (or passport) scanned and it would have to match when they sat down the next day. (this would be good for local B&M satellite's).

With these rules you'd have a WSOP with fantastic star power and 50 (or maybe more if all 200 qualifiers didn't enter) open entries to spice things up. At $25,000 per that would be $6,250,000 total prize. 40% grand prize would be $2,500,000 which is still a hell of a lot of money. Of course they could increase the entry fee even more. ESPN would still get a good show because they could focus more on each episode.

Let the fun begin. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

no. the point of the WSOP ME now is that anyone who can afford it, and is of age, can play. Not to showcase old sharks going at it for whatever reason. Also, these professional tournament players have EV higher for the more amateurs who enter the event. Greg Raymer and others have discussed this concept. Also, if you wanted to exclude the average person, make the price $250,000, or $1,000,000. $25,000 isn't going to limit it that much. The tournament of champions is an interesting tournament in which good players spar with eachother, however, they are freerolled into it, so they don't have to pay to play in what is essentially a very hard competitive field, something they would not be apt to do otherwise. If you want to see pros in the WSOP playing in a very small field, with other experts, watch the Kansas City Lowball tournament. Your idea, however, for these reasons, and the massive amounts of money the casino gets from it, will never happen. Sorry.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

Watching the episodes on ESPN tues night, the players looked like the people I see at the Aladdin buffet who jump from their seats excited when more crab legs are brought to the line.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

The main draw of the Main Event is that anyone with ten grand and an age over 21 can enter and have a chance to win. That is the prestige of it. That you're facing the largest field, for the largest prize pool. Its never meant to decide who's the best, because even with your guidleines, you won't get an answer to who's the best. Just who's the best that week.

I think, that limiting the the entries like this would take a lot away from the WSOP, you'd find your average player less and less interested in it, I mean, why bother if you have no chance of playing?

There's nothing wrong with the WSOP as it is. I agree that there should be a cap on the number of entrents, just from the standpoint of what's feasible for Harrah's to accomodate. I mean, a tourney with 10,000 people (which will never happen) would be impossible to run. But fromt he standpoint of who can enter and play? It should be anyone who's over 21 and can produce the buy in, whether through cash or an internet sattelite. Why? This is poker. We're all here to have fuin and try and make some money. There's nothing elitest about what we're doing here. Everyone has a chance to make a lot of money by playing in the WSOP. Everyone. From Doyle Brunson, to that guy sitting next to you in the 5/10 game. That's what makes the Main Event what it is. Not the fact that its This Grand Title. But that anyone can sit down and play for the largest prize in poker and anyone can win.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

No, it hasn't. I think the appeal is that anyone can win. If you are looking to crown a "World Champion", perhaps a point system like Toyota Player of the Year Award or even a 10K H.O.R.S.E event to truly test one's poker abilities.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

the WSOP starts on July 28th this year. it ends August 10, nearly 2 weeks later.

this is going to dissuade a lot of people from coming. a lot of people only get 2 weeks vacation for the year, and they would have accept the possibility of using all of it for this event.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

http://www.worldseriesofpoker.com/2006wsop.asp

2006 ME Schedule

28-Jul-06 Fri 12 Noon Day 1A 2000 play down to 800
29-Jul-06 Sat 12 Noon Day 1B 2000 play down to 800
30-Jul-06 Sun 12 Noon Day 1C 2000 play down to 800
31-Jul-06 Mon 12 Noon Day 1D 2000 play down to 800
01-Aug-06 Tue 12 noon A + B 1600 to 700
02-Aug-06 Wed 12 noon C + D 1600 to 700
03-Aug-06 Thu Day off for main event
04-Aug-06 Fri 12 noon ABCD Play 1400 down to 600
05-Aug-06 Sat 12 noon Play 600 down to 300
06-Aug-06 Sun 12 noon Play 300 down to 150
07-Aug-06 Mon 12 noon Play 150 down to 60
08-Aug-06 Tue 12 noon Play 60 down to 27
09-Aug-06 Wed 12 noon Play 27 down to 9
10-Aug-06 Thu 12 noon Final Table

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

what you're suggesting sounds good for a Tournament of Champions. All previous braclet winners can eneter. the WSOP Circuit events would act as qualifiers to this TOC (Toyota Points leaderboard top 250 or so). field could have 1000 or so players.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

[ QUOTE ]
the WSOP starts on July 28th this year. it ends August 10, nearly 2 weeks later.

this is going to dissuade a lot of people from coming. a lot of people only get 2 weeks vacation for the year, and they would have accept the possibility of using all of it for this event.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're going to have to use all two weeks of your vacation to playin the ME I think you can tell your job to go shove it.

--Zetack

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

There is nothing like the WSOP ME and I think we as poker players should want the huge fields. The buzz surrounding the tournament feeds the poker boom. The huge field creates a lot of excitement. I love it the way it is. Surely it has changed from when it first started. I say it changed for the better.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

I think the tournament should be open to anyone who wants to play, that's what's so great about it. There are other tournaments for only stars.

I do think the field is to large. The way to make it larger is to increase the buy-in. I think they should auction off the seats in a way that everyone pays the 250th highest bid (if 250 players is what you want). This would allow anyone to enter, but would make to tournament more managable.

Any guesses on what the buy-in would end up being if this system were used?

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the WSOP starts on July 28th this year. it ends August 10, nearly 2 weeks later.

this is going to dissuade a lot of people from coming. a lot of people only get 2 weeks vacation for the year, and they would have accept the possibility of using all of it for this event.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're going to have to use all two weeks of your vacation to playin the ME I think you can tell your job to go shove it.

--Zetack

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the key here is that people should be "in-the-money" by the end of the first week, so they can feel good about requesting the emergency 2nd week off.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

I think the answer would be a 'World Series of Poker Invitational' where the Organizers match the buy-in and limit the field to bracelet winners, and selected others. They could make it clear itsa a PR event, getting all the faces in one tourney together without static, and at the same time leave the main event as is. Seems like a best of both worlds solution. Of course, this sounds an awful lot like the TOC...

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

No matter how you run it, I don't think one tournament could decide who the best player in the world is. Luck does play a part. Anything can happen during that given week.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

WSOP is just a tournament which was able to grab the title "World Champion" at a time when no one cared.

It is the biggest and most prestigious event to win, if you have to win a tournment. Much like Andy North (in golf) only winning three tournaments in his life, two of them being the US Open.

The size of the WSOP will always depend upon (1) market forces (players wanting to play) and (2) the greed of Harrah's.

Harrah's looks at this as a hugely profitable venture balanced against resource constraints. The resources they have to balance are the physical facilities and labor/manpower staffing.

IMHO, the big issue for them is staffing. You need to hire enough dealers for 200 tables and try to keep the tables full from roughly noon to midnight, or at least when you have players there. Dealers from the other casinos will pick up shifts at the WSOP but there is a finite number of dealers available to work Noonish to late night. As the main tournaments break down, the cash games, daily tournaments, and all the other satellites fill in the empty tables. To keep 200 tables full, you need at least 300 dealers plus some swing shifts to keep everything running (forgive me but I don't know how long dealer shifts are - it varies from casino to casino).

For them to expand above 8000 players in 2007 and beyond, they have several options. (1) Go from four Day 1's to six Day 1's, etc. Unlikely because I don't think you can keep up the player census if the tournament lasts more than two weeks. (2) Open up a second auxillary poker room at the Rio to handle a bigger field. Possible but there is a huge cost involved in constructing a secure poker room that you would only be using for a few days. Of course you can use it if, like last year, the $1500 NL buy in filled every single seat and then some. If the capacity of 200 tables is not enough, then it could make sense to do this. Of couse you need a flexible labor force to be able to handle the bubble of dealers needed for the few days where every single table is filled. (3) Create and farm out Day 1's to the other Harrah's properties. Much like the old Bob Hope open where it was a 90 hole tournament but you played four different courses and the cut was made at the final 18 holes, you can use the conference facilities at Caesar's, Paris, whereever and work the field down that way until you can get them in one room. Again, physical costs and labor costs are the constricting factors.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

Daniel Negreanu talks in his latest journal entry about meeting with a bigwig and discussing the WSOP and schedule etc.
Lets hope they bring back HORSE as per Dan's suggestion.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

This would kill poker as we know it.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think the tournament should be open to anyone who wants to play, that's what's so great about it. There are other tournaments for only stars.

I do think the field is to large. The way to make it larger is to increase the buy-in. I think they should auction off the seats in a way that everyone pays the 250th highest bid (if 250 players is what you want). This would allow anyone to enter, but would make to tournament more managable.

Any guesses on what the buy-in would end up being if this system were used?

[/ QUOTE ]

Increasing the buy in would not have much effect because most entries come from online winners anyways. The online casino's would just add an extra satellite or two to be able to qualify. So your initial $40 fee would still get you a seat.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

It's not too big, that's impossible.

I don't like your system, it should stay open. However raising the enterence fee to $20-25,000 isn't a bad idea (inflation would make it like 50,000 today, but I think that's too much).

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

[ QUOTE ]
No matter how you run it, I don't think one tournament could decide who the best player in the world is. Luck does play a part. Anything can happen during that given week.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe not but in my scenario the main body of entrants would be those who qualified from the circuit events. If you get 190 of those qualifiers - people who have played and been successful in up to 25 events during the last 6-9 months then you can say that you have a real good field. Add the past WSOP ME winners and an additional 50 or so "regular Joes" and it should be a great event.

Personally I'd rather see the ME winner be someone who has put in the time at the game OR someone who came from nowheres to knock off 200 or so of the top players in the world.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

Hi Rottersod:

I disagree. Having all these people show up chasing a dream is what makes Las Vegas Poker and poker in general the great game that it is. If the tournament was limited, there wouldn't be any Chris Moneymakers or Greg Raymeys, and they have simply been great for poker.

On a more pragmatic side, I can't imagine Harrah's doing something that would limit the huge number of people who come to town. You're talking about thousands of hotel rooms, lots of action on their other gaming tables, etc.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one who thinks that slogging your way through 5000+ entries is no way to crown the world champion? Especially since many (most?) of the entries came from online qualifiers and are essentially freerolling? Here's my idea for a fair tourney that would give us a great champion:

[/ QUOTE ]

It's never been about finding a great champion.

What is a great champion anyway? A name player?

For me, in an ideal world, people should aspire to play in the main event. So, I think it should be harder to get into. But buyin has to be the only barrier to entry.

There's always the cheaper events for someone that can't afford the main event, and that would feed the dream of one day playing the main event.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

You would also have to change it to a Pot Limit Tournament.

Like it the way it is 10,000 a dream and a shot.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

Right now, a $40 online satallite with 1250 entries would awary 5 seats. If the buy-in were increased to $25,000, then that same tournament would only award 2 seats, so increasing the buy-in would reduce the number of entries.

Even if increasing to $25,000 doen't reduce the field much (and I think it would), there is certainly some buy-in that is high enough to reduce the number of entries. (If the buy-in was a bajillion dollars, then there would be 0 entries). So if you want 250 entries, there is a buy-in ammount somewhere between $10,000 and a bajillion dollars that would result in 250 entries. I just din't know what that number is.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

[ QUOTE ]
You would also have to change it to a Pot Limit Tournament.



[/ QUOTE ]

NH

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like your system, it should stay open. However raising the enterence fee to $20-25,000 isn't a bad idea (inflation would make it like 50,000 today, but I think that's too much).

[/ QUOTE ]

But hardly anybody besides the big pros, celebrities, and rich people are putting down the cash out of their own pockets, and if they can afford $10K, they can afford $25K. How will raising the entry fee limit the thousands of players who are getting in on satellites?

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

I don't pretend to be a economic whiz in these matters, but I would imagine that the demand for playing in the ME can't go anywhere but down. To amateurs, NL hold'em can only be interesting for so long. To sites offering to stake seats, the economics will ultimately catch up to them. The dot-com bubble will burst once again.

That's not to say that poker retreats to pre-Moneymaker levels, but it can't sustain itself at this level for so long, and I think there will be a balance met that will make the WSOP a major thing, but not the circus that it has become the last two years.

Just my opinion.

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

It seems reasonable to say that pokers popularity will eventually flatten out(I still think it will be at least 2-4 more years on the rise), but don't you think that with 50+ million poker players in the world that at least 10,000 of them will make their way to Vegas for a shot at ~$10,000,000 and a World Championship bracelet?

I think the WSOP will become as big as Harrahs wants it to get. It's all about the benjamins - poker players and casions love big money.

Does 20,000 entrants seem impossible?

-TripKings

Re: Has WSOP gotten too big?
 

[ QUOTE ]
It seems reasonable to say that pokers popularity will eventually flatten out(I still think it will be at least 2-4 more years on the rise), but don't you think that with 50+ million poker players in the world that at least 10,000 of them will make their way to Vegas for a shot at ~$10,000,000 and a World Championship bracelet?

I think the WSOP will become as big as Harrahs wants it to get. It's all about the benjamins - poker players and casions love big money.

Does 20,000 entrants seem impossible?

-TripKings

[/ QUOTE ]

Poker popularity has leveled off and probably going to fall a little bit but probably not totally die off. I really cant see that many entrants happening ever.