|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
WSOP needs Re-vamping
The WSOP needs to take a page from the PGA Masters and have the tournament confined to the top 150-200 players in the world.
To have a tournament that is supposed crown the top poker player in the world, and then allow every slob with 10 grand to participate is simply absurd. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
This is why they have the tournament of champions. The WSOP loses a ton of appeal if you limit it. Poker's appeal is ANYONE CAN ENTER ANYONE CAN WIN.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
Since you brought up golf. Why do you think the US Open has such a great appeal? It's the most democratic golf tournament in the country. Anyone who qualifies can play and anyone who plays can win. Jason Gore (a no-name at the time) and Michelle Wie (a 15 year old ameteur) played in the final group this year.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
What they need to do is up the buy-in to $50,000.
That would help cut the field down. If its your top event, it should have the highest buy-in. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
[ QUOTE ]
It's the most democratic golf tournament in the country. Anyone who qualifies can play and anyone who plays can win. [/ QUOTE ] yeah, and if you've qualified you are a very, very good player. it's not like they just let in every weekend hack that signs up - it's extremely difficult to make. the reason the open has appeal is because it's democractic, yes. but it's not the complete sh*t show that the wsop is - the worst player in the field will still be scary good. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] It's the most democratic golf tournament in the country. Anyone who qualifies can play and anyone who plays can win. [/ QUOTE ] yeah, and if you've qualified you are a very, very good player. it's not like they just let in every weekend hack that signs up - it's extremely difficult to make. the reason the open has appeal is because it's democractic, yes. but it's not the complete sh*t show that the wsop is - the worst player in the field will still be scary good. [/ QUOTE ] Completely agreed, qualifying for the US Open is a million times harder than someone catching two or three nights of good cards in sattelites. Now, golf doesn't have the variance that poker does, fair enough, but the WSOP is in serious jeopardy of making a mockery of itself for the sake of corporate sponsorship... I can hear it now, Lon's voice-over, "Welcome to the 2015 World Series of Poker, we've got a record 46,215 entrants this year"... |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] It's the most democratic golf tournament in the country. Anyone who qualifies can play and anyone who plays can win. [/ QUOTE ] yeah, and if you've qualified you are a very, very good player. it's not like they just let in every weekend hack that signs up - it's extremely difficult to make. the reason the open has appeal is because it's democractic, yes. but it's not the complete sh*t show that the wsop is - the worst player in the field will still be scary good. [/ QUOTE ] Completely agreed, qualifying for the US Open is a million times harder than someone catching two or three nights of good cards in sattelites. Now, golf doesn't have the variance that poker does, fair enough, but the WSOP is in serious jeopardy of making a mockery of itself for the sake of corporate sponsorship... I can hear it now, Lon's voice-over, "Welcome to the 2015 World Series of Poker, we've got a record 46,215 entrants this year"... [/ QUOTE ] That would be so cool. The reason it won't however, is that every "slob" who enters invisions himself winning. Most people can take a week or two off of work, most people couldn't take thirty days off from work. My prediction, entries will level off eventually somewhere in the 12,000-15,000 range. I predict 8300 entrants next year. --Zetack |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
[ QUOTE ]
The WSOP needs to take a page from the PGA Masters and have the tournament confined to the top 150-200 players in the world. To have a tournament that is supposed crown the top poker player in the world, and then allow every slob with 10 grand to participate is simply absurd. [/ QUOTE ] Thank goodness for absurd then! I don't get a big charge out of watching the WSOP on TV, and I certainly wouldn't watch it if it was confined to just 200 players...... [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] Dogmeat [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
The vast majority of those slobs this year didn't even have the 10 grand. They won satellites either in poker rooms or online. So what?
How often did you watch it on TV back when it was limited to the best players in the world? How often do you watch it on TV now that anybody can enter and win? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: WSOP needs Re-vamping
[ QUOTE ]
The vast majority of those slobs this year didn't even have the 10 grand. They won satellites either in poker rooms or online. So what? How often did you watch it on TV back when it was limited to the best players in the world? How often do you watch it on TV now that anybody can enter and win? [/ QUOTE ] The reason why poker has become more watchable on TV is because the player's down are shown. In the old days, this wasn't case. You had to wait for the hand to be over. Now, you can play along at home. It makes a huge difference. |
|
|