Internet Series of Poker

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Dog:

The reason this thread got sticky is that I was getting asked in person and via email about what this was. Then I noticed the thread where it was being well explained. So I made it stick. In a couple of days we'll unstick it.

Best wishes,
Mason

[La Brujita]

My two cents: hell its Twoplustwo's site and if they want to sticky their own promotion more power to them.

They don't really owe us an explanation.

That being said I did enjoy the irony pointed out.

[jasonHoldEm]

Hi Mason,

Just my .02, I think you should leave this stickied until the ISOP forum launches. Doing so will prevent multiple threads on the same subject (and this one already has a lot of answers provided).

Has anyone else realized that the ISOP final is very likely to create the internet's first millionaire tournament winner?

J

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]
this community pours a crap load of dollars into the party poker holes every day, so it would probably be EV- for them to snub the tourney.

we certainly are hoping that party realizes this and is involved, but who knows...

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

are you serious? who the F said anything even remotely like this? of course nobody would boycott party over deciding not to be involved! we would not want that!

your credibility on contributing here just took a nose dive with that melodramatic statement. why would you even suggest something that smacks of adversity? have you been trolling all along here?

yes freudian, i realize that nobody will boycott any site that turned us down. for you to suggest that is even how we think makes you a trouble maker imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

How could I ever interpret the first quote as you even implying that Party could be hurt by not participating?

I require a certain intellectual honesty from those I discuss with and your personal outburst is not ok with me. I think you should be very careful about accusing others of of making a "melodramatic statement" when you start swinging madly around yourself accusing others.

Feel free to clarify how it would be -EV for Party to "snub" the community if you don't expect their player base to be affected at all.

[MrDannimal]

If it helps, start a thread titled "Post here if you'd like to see Party host an ISOP event", and then when you've got a ton of replies just forward the link to them.

I'd like to see Party host one because I have an account there and it's one less account to create/interface to learn/deposit to make for me to take part in an event there.

[adanthar]

Hey Granny,

One very, very good reason for Party to host an event:

What's the promotional value of holding The Biggest Championship Event With The Biggest Prize Ever in Online Poker?

Sell it this way. Don't give them a regular event...give them the final.

I guarantee you that if someone wins a million dollars online playing a 5,000 buyin poker event they'll get *network news* coverage if nothing else.

[fnord_too]

It seems to me that the upside to PP is simple: There will be a core of people who follow the tour. Not all of them currently play on party. Most of them (even the ones who currently play on party) will be checking out the competition even if only to play in the ISOP. Why would party not want the people who don't currently play there but who are intending on playing the ISOP events not be forced to play at part (lot of negatives in that sentence, but I think I got it right).

Basically, there exist people who do not play on party but who will play ISOP events. By party hosting an ISOP event, these people will be exposed to party.

Also, there are people who play at party but not at all the ISOP sites, these people will be exposed to the competition.

Basically, party is probably viewing this as something that will cannabalize their own tournaments. That is the wrong way to look at it, since tournament players will go to where the best tournaments are. Party is in a position of either diverting some of the tournament market they already have to new events they are hosting versus having them diverted to other sites. I'm kind of shocked that there marketing department hasn't realized this.

[Freudian]

I guess one reason for Party not to participate (should they choose that route) would be that PokerStars (who I assume won't take part) has their own event in WCOOP that is bigger in scope. So it would be possible that Party would prefer to flesh out the Party Poker Million events to get a series of tournaments to rival PokerStars.

Anyway, we don't know until everything is announced.

[jek187]

[ QUOTE ]
A large portion in the enjoyment of watching events such as WPT and WSOP on the TV is you recognize a lot of the players, and can follow them through multiple events and see how they do over the course of a year or so. With internet poker, people could be using different usernames for different sites, and of course a player can be totally anonymous if he so wishes. Will it be in the interest of you guys (as I assume you will be managing this whole apparatus somehow?) to encourage players to have their real life name available to the public? Or do you not consider this to be a very interesting point as most of the people "in the game" will know anyway who everyone of the top players are?

[/ QUOTE ]

You bring up a good issue here. Basically, we have a thin line to toe here.

On the one hand we have those players who value their privacy and will want to remain completely anon (I personally would like to be known as the Internet's best player, but some poker players are strange, or maybe I'm just strange, anyways...) This is the Internet, and anonimity is a part of that, like it or not.

On the other hand, we have players such as yourself that will want to know exactly who everyone is, and you are the sort of player that will form the backbone of this event.

So, here is what we're going to do here:
Notable players ("names" and those who move to the top of the leaderboard) will be encouraged, but not be required to give up their real name. Those who decline to have their real names revealed, will still have to have their site username's associated with each other. For example, if I were to play 3 tournies and somehow make the leaderboard, and I didn't want my name released, my leaderboard entry would look like this:

jekSiteA/jekSiteB/jekSiteC XXXX Pts

However, if someone like Mason made the leaderboard, it would simply read:
Mason Malmuth XXXX Pts

I think most people will reveal their true names, although we'll still have a couple I'm sure that won't. I think this is the fairest way to deal with this issue. I welcome any thoughts on the subject though.

[GrannyMae]

PokerStars (who I assume won't take part)

why would you assume this? just curious?