|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Why does ESPN even bother with 9 players?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] You just showed why they have more players at the final table. [/ QUOTE ] You are right, since I plan to watch one tournament out of 13 as opposed to all 13 (which I likely would if there were more players), I've clearly proved that point. [/ QUOTE ] Don't you mean you'd watch more with LESS players? [/ QUOTE ] Yes, that's what he meant--fewer players at the table makes curtains happier. In the heat of the moment, curtains clearly mistyped. ESPN does a pretty good job with player-profiles and some of the color surrounding poker. If a 9-player format gives them more flexibility to do that, then I don't mind. Often the peripheral filler is more interesting than NL tourney hands. The WPT is certainly a richer source of pure poker material, but it's somehow stuffier and less appealing. Both productions are leagues ahead of the competition. Poker players complain too much. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Why does ESPN even bother with 9 players?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] You just showed why they have more players at the final table. [/ QUOTE ] You are right, since I plan to watch one tournament out of 13 as opposed to all 13 (which I likely would if there were more players), I've clearly proved that point. [/ QUOTE ] I understand what you meant to type. I also believe you will only watch one more episode. What I do not believe you proved is that more people would watch if there were less players. Where would this end? At six players? Five? Four? Three? Heads-up? On person playing solitaire should be able to make ratings history taking your theory to it's logical conclusion. Perhaps 60 minutes of a dealer sitting with his hand out waiting for a toke might be the highest rated WSOP show of all time. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Why does ESPN even bother with 9 players?
Just think about this logically (assuming that ESPN can't tell the future and won't know who will be entertaining)
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Why does ESPN even bother with 9 players?
i downloaded some old school WSOP final tables that were broadcasted on ESPN. they were all 6 seat tables.
the most recent one i looked at was 93 or so think. maybe later. i have some more downloaded, just havent watched them yet. so you could say, the wpt is ripping off the old wsop coverage. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Why does ESPN even bother with 9 players?
[ QUOTE ]
i downloaded some old school WSOP final tables that were broadcasted on ESPN. they were all 6 seat tables. [/ QUOTE ] The Main Event first had a nine-handed final table in 2002. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Why does ESPN even bother with 9 players?
i seem to remember on one of the wsop updates they stopped at 10 handed (i think omaha) for espn. i think hellmuth was the shortest stack. more players probably means a better chance of having an interesting player to show.
|
|
|