|
|
#12
07-15-2005, 06:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ESPN can\'t be too thrilled about this final table
ESPN has a product which will sell no matter what. They will tell a story as they see fit and judging from the action so far, they'll have no trouble painting the picture as they desire. I wouldn't mind seeing an online qualifer winning this thing because it will keep the "dream" alive and result in more fish coming into the game.
|
|
#13
07-15-2005, 06:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: ESPN can\'t be too thrilled about this final table
[ QUOTE ]
If been rooting for Matusow this entire tournament. What's wrong with a wacked out, spent some time in jail, poker pro, who if he wins will blow the all the money on drugs and hookers and likely do more time down the road for tax evasion and if he busts out first and only make a million, will curl up in a ball and cry for the cameras??? [/ QUOTE ] Where's the grammar guy when you need him??? "If been"? Either go with, "I've been . . ." or "If Ben . . ." but don't get greedy and combine the two. John -The grammar police are coming, quick, hide in Paul Phillips's vagina.
|
|
#14
07-15-2005, 06:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: ESPN can\'t be too thrilled about this final table
[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one who thinks they don't care at all? It's not like someone is tuning out because Ivey didn't make the final table. 2003 and 2004 didn't have many huge players either. [/ QUOTE ] Check over the 2003 players again.
|
|
#15
07-15-2005, 06:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: ESPN can\'t be too thrilled about this final table
I don't think it will matter either. There are a couple 20 something guys in there with good looks and a $160 buck satellite win on stars to get there. There are a couple grizzled veteran pros, though not big names. And there are a couple 30 something amateurs with good paying day jobs. There is a good smattering of several types here for the casual poker player and tv viewer to get excited about.
|
|
#16
07-15-2005, 06:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: ESPN can\'t be too thrilled about this final table
[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one who thinks they don't care at all? It's not like someone is tuning out because Ivey didn't make the final table. 2003 and 2004 didn't have many huge players either. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah 2003 had some names dude.
|
|
#17
07-15-2005, 06:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: ESPN can\'t be too thrilled about this final table
You're looking at it as someone more interested in it.
TO the masses, any 9 will do.... You got some info off a bit, but who am I to be a nit. >TW<
|
|
#18
07-15-2005, 07:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: ESPN can\'t be too thrilled about this final table
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah 2003 had some names dude. [/ QUOTE ] IMHO, ESPN has done a great job over the past couple years building stories around players who were unknowns prior to the broadcast. That's right ... unknowns. I'm as big a poker geek as anybody, but while Dan Harrington, Vahedi, David Grey and Sam Farha may have been "names" by 2+2 standards in 2003, they were not "names" by the standards of ESPN and their advertisers. If you truly believe they were, you need to turn off your computer and go outside sometime.
|
|
#19
07-15-2005, 07:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: ESPN can\'t be too thrilled about this final table
[ QUOTE ]
ESPN has a product which will sell no matter what. They will tell a story as they see fit and judging from the action so far, they'll have no trouble painting the picture as they desire. I wouldn't mind seeing an online qualifer winning this thing because it will keep the "dream" alive and result in more fish coming into the game. [/ QUOTE ] Exactly. I don't care about ESPN ratings or overall public perception of the game. I do know the relate to what I really care about. But not enough to make any single thing matter that much. What I really care about is more fish and their $$ coming into the game. That is what is +EV for me.
|
|
#20
07-15-2005, 07:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: ESPN can\'t be too thrilled about this final table
[ QUOTE ]
Check over the 2003 players again. [/ QUOTE ] As I understood it, 2003 was the major year for the poker boom as a result of the World Series. I wasn't involved in poker in 2002 and didn't witness the result of Varkonyi's win first hand. I understand that 2003 had big poker names, but not majorly known people. Perhaps we're talking about different spectrums? I don't think Amir Vahedi was a huge name. He's not even a huge name now. Especially not to the casual watcher which ESPN is hoping to reel in. Tomer Benvenitsi wasn't a big name. Sam Farha became famous from this appearance, not before. Dan Harrington is the biggest name in the poker world at the table, but I really doubt many people watching knew him in 2003. I don't think David Grey was either. Moneymaker and Singer defintely weren't big names.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
