Re: Mike Sexton Article
 

"How are you promoting growth in the game, by implementating limitations in order to decrease the number of people in the WSOP main event?
Isn't that what you WANT? bigger and larger tournaments? It'll show the staying power of poker. More and more "average joes" will get enthralled to play in this tournament." - CD

I agree completely. By the way, who was the main event winner at Tunica, AC, Foxwoods, etc. this year? How about last year then? The majority of people don't know. Period! But everybody knows who won the 2003 and 2004 WSOP Main Event. Higher buy-in requirements are not going to add more prestige to this tourney.
If Greg is right and say someday 10,000 people play this tourney, that's $100 million in prize money for one tournament. That's a unbelievable figure. And to think that a poker player with some decent skills could cash and play against professionals in this format is, well for me, the best part about playing poker. Everybody can have a dream, but this allows some the chance to live their dream. Don't take this away. You do and people will leave the game.

DaveC

Re: Mike Sexton Article
 

Higher buyins will not increase the prestige, but they might keep the main event from taking 2 weeks to complete.

Re: Mike Sexton Article
 

[ QUOTE ]
Higher buyins will not increase the prestige, but they might keep the main event from taking 2 weeks to complete.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you, just as long as I can continue to try and qualify through internet satelites at a reasonable price.

Re: after mike sexton\'s CP article....he needs to STFU
 

Yes it's a stupid idea. Simply raising the entry to $25K will solve the "problem" of a huge field - if that really is a problem.

Mike is locked into an old-skool mindset where poker belongs to a small cadre of players [who wouldnt have to qualify of course] and all the Internet wannabes are lucky to even be at the same table. Using the US Open golf as an example betrays this as of course only a tiny, tiny number of amateur players actually make it through the qualifying to join the pros.

Sexton:

[ QUOTE ]
Bigger is better only in terms of larger prize pools and more players wanting to participate in the game we love — and compete at the highest level. However, in terms of players being taken care of better today than yesteryear, I wouldn’t consider it an improvement. Give me Jack Binion’s hospitality, comps to the players, and the lavish buffets back in the ’80s any day.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK so there's 100X more players, more money, more media interest but no full steak dinner comps like the few dozen players got in the 80s. Waaaaaaaaaah!!!

I find it difficult to waste any further time on Mike's views if he genuinely feels this is a legitimate analysis of the state of the WSOP.

Re: after mike sexton\'s CP article....he needs to STFU
 

I'm too tired to read anyones opinion, I only feel like spouting my own, but isn't he kind of financially tied (ie getting rich) as the competitor of the WSOP.

When I managed a business, we tended not to take too seriously advice that was given to us by people who owned competing businesses that would profit by our failure, because, like, it just didn't make sense.

Re: after mike sexton\'s CP article....he needs to STFU
 

So, the idea is basically having a day 1/Day 2 Event run simultaneously in different areas of the world. The people who survive get to go in the ME with their remaining chip stack.

That's it, right?

But what happens when one area gets 5000 people, and the other gets 500?

Re: after mike sexton\'s CP article....he needs to STFU
 

I'd be in favour of raising the buy in. The main event at the wsop should be something people aspire to play in, not something that's easier to play in than the cheaper events.

Re: after mike sexton\'s CP article....he needs to STFU
 

[ QUOTE ]
Can you imagine a much larger venue than the Rio had this year? And staffing an event that could be twice as large next year will be very difficult, if not impossible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did the Rio lose money by hosting the World Series this year? I didn't think that was the case, and I certainly don't think they (or the other hotels/resorts in LV) would be upset with more people entering the WSOP in the future, spending more money in Vegas on food, lodging, and recreation, and bringing them even more "free" advertising on major international cable networks. That's my biggest problem with this argument--if you want to say that the huge fields take away from the skill factor required in winning the ME (true) or turn the WSOP into more of a carnival atmosphere than a major championship, fine. But don't base your argument on faulty premises. Believe me, if they have 15,000 entrants in the ME next year, they'll figure out a way to run the tournament.

I also don't think you can really limit the number of slots available in the ME. Part of the allure of the WSOP is that anyone can play in it, even more so now in the days of internet qualifiers. It's something that poker novices and small stakes players the world over dream about, and a huge part of the popularity explosion the game is enjoying. If you cut down on the number of entrants allowed to participate, invariably people are going to be left out and the event loses some of its luster. And besides, it makes for great television (and is great for the game) when a relative unknown scores a big WSOP victory.

I can definitely see raising the entry fee. I can also see cutting down on the number of other events played at the WSOP.