Don't bother emailing ESPN.

They won't read it. They are too busy high-fiving each other.

ESPN is a buisness. More people are watching thier broadcasts of WSOP then ever. They are trying to appeal to the masses. The masses want to see all in hands and AA vs. QQ and AK vs JJ etc. etc. etc. They want to see brutal river cards and people win when they are drawing to one card. It sucks, but people are watching. Look at the card rooms. Look at all the sunglasses.

Let's be honest. Tuning in to ESPN WSOP to watch poker is like getting your news from tabloids. You get all the all-in hands with a ton of B.S. like "The Nuts." If you want the Wall Street Journal (to continue with my brutal analogy), you are not going to get it from ESPN.

Personally, since we are discussing the subject of televised poker, I want to go back to the old days where WSOP was like an obsurd carnival. I saw the WSOP '95 on ESPN Classics and some other one from (I think) '91. Totally outrageous. Harrington had a mini fan set up in front of him, and he turned it on when the guy to his right lit a cigarette. There was like four guys smoking at all times. The table looked like they were playing a home game. There was [censored] strewn all over the place. And you can't beat the outfits. Every guy was wearing a Members Only jacket dude. And it is all about the brown polo shirt with oversized collars and huge pocket (obviously for cigarettes and large glasses). Then there are the commentators. No pocket card cams. Big raise over the top and we get, "Oh boy, I think were looking at a full house here, possibly quads." Just great. I could watch that all day long. I say lets drop the card cameras. It was more interesting when we could put people on hands.

Finally, I want to point out that ESPN does a decent job with popular sports, but with things that they are not familiar with (like hockey and poker), the game just isn't enough. Take hockey. We can't just have the game. I was at a Rangers game (when there was hockey) and it was on ESPN. Suddenly we have smoke machines, pregame starting lineup presentations, interviewing players during the game while they are on the bench, etc. They have to sensationalize everything. The sport is never good enough. Same thing with poker.

WPT tries to do a good job. The HU championship was so watered down I couldn't even watch it. WSOP on ESPN is nothing short of a joke. Fast Freddy and the gang on NY vs Boston is brutal. Celebrity poker, speed channel poker, comedians vs. the pros poker, it goes on and on. We play a game that absolutely sucks on television and it is going to take much more than a couple of emails fired from 2+2 to change it.

[Easy E]

We play a game that absolutely sucks on television and it is going to take much more than a couple of emails fired from 2+2 to change it.

I think it can be more "valuable" with some adjustments. Some things like the commentary by Lederer and others, mixed in with the newbie-rousing babbling. Something similar to that WPT analysis show (they did it once and dropped it- what happened to that?) could be mixed in. Possibly a better version of the Celebrity Poker 'hidden hand- how would you play it' feature, with better and more in-depth analysis. "The Nuts" features on poker analysis, rather than only stupid sideshow freakadeeks.

Poker as reality show will never be a "watchable" event, except to us diehards. But the current mindless tripe could be vastly and easily improved to appeal to all levels of expertise (well, except for the most experienced big-game pros, maybe)

[Kevmath]

[ QUOTE ]
Something similar to that WPT analysis show (they did it once and dropped it- what happened to that?) could be mixed in.

[/ QUOTE ]

It didn't get the ratings they expected. Problem was they did it after the 2nd or 3rd run of the program which lessened any chance of getting a good rating.

[Kevmath]

I guess you didn't see the thread where ESPN admitted missing hole cards at times and "trusting" the player to tell the truth. That was the result of someone emailing ESPN.

Regarding your other points about smoke machines, laser lights and other things like that, it's called progress. If that technology was available back in the day, you'd have seen all that stuff back then.

[garyg1]

couldn't disagree with you more here when you say:

"We play a game that absolutely sucks on television and it is going to take much more than a couple of emails fired from 2+2 to change it."

If it really "sucked on television" we wouldn't have the fantastic poker boom we have going on right now. The fact that it IS a great sport to watch if done properly is what got it so popular with the players and non players alike. But the present WSOP one hour shows is a big disgrace to the sport and a large number of players and non players alike, are not watching it now. I do in home computer servicing full time and while waiting for the computer to run diagnostic programs I have lots of time to talk poker to my customers and I found virtually everyone mesmorized by the great new poker on tv with two hour, great personal interest stories, more non all in hands shown, etc, etc, etc, etc. we had before. From the almost don't care at all about poker to the full fledged serious player, I found all these people with great liking of watching these WSOP coverage before. Again, that is what got our sport so popular with the masses and is getting all the new poker rooms open in Vegas. But now I get the opposite response from the same range of poker fans, the coverage so far of the 2005 WSOP is not entertaining to watch. Many who wouldn't miss a show last year, refuses to even turn it on this year. And again I find this universal with all different degree of interest in poker. They watched the first couple nights this year, then tuned out. Even the casually interested fan knows poker is far more than just going all in before the flop and getting lucky or unlucky to win the pot. They DO NOT only want to see only these hands. They do want to see the skill of after flop play too!!!! I get to work with hundreds of people from all walks of life, all different financial means, all different degrees of interest in poker, etc. etc. and I make it a point to talk poker with them sometime during my service calls, and I find it pretty much universal what I state above. So I can't help but disagree with your post more. The masses do not want to see only all in hands, the cards in the hole cam is great for the tv show giving us great statistics on percentage of each player chances to win each hand right on the screen making it much more interesting for those that do not fully understand the dynamics of the game, people are not watching like they were with better coverage before this only "all in" 9 players out in one hour madness.

[ QUOTE ]
smoke machines, laser lights and other things like that, it's called progress.

[/ QUOTE ]

"I'm old school."

[dlk9s]

I was at the WSOP and watched most of the final tables. Trust me, as much as I like poker, it's boring as hell. 8, 10, 13 hours of mostly fold'em poker. I mean, as a poker fan, it's still fun, but to 95% of the viewers, televised poker would be excruciating if they didn't edit it down to the highlights.

[Easy E]

Agree with much of your post, but associating "sport" and "poker" is just way off.

It is a game. It may be a game you can make a career at, but it is not a sport.

Unless you're making chess, dominos, backgammon, Scrabble and bridge sports as well.

"And now, the heavyweight Old Maid champion of the world.."

[Easy E]

Agreed, but we're dumming things down way too much (of course, that's usually a redundant statement when "television" is in the sentence)


There has to be a simple way to make smarter broadcasts, and it's not as if production costs would be that much higher.

[KDawgCometh]

[ QUOTE ]
I was at the WSOP and watched most of the final tables. Trust me, as much as I like poker, it's boring as hell. 8, 10, 13 hours of mostly fold'em poker. I mean, as a poker fan, it's still fun, but to 95% of the viewers, televised poker would be excruciating if they didn't edit it down to the highlights.

[/ QUOTE ]


while this is true, its not like we are asking for the 8 hour uncut final table. It really wouldn't be hard to make a two hour program with more post flop play, its really not that hard. Have a two hour program on tuesdays and have a two hour program on mondays or thrusdays. I'd be willing to bet that one of their highest rated shows was the three hour TOC last year. We got to see tons of play, and it was just fine, and that was a two day event. One of the best shows that ESPN put on was the Rio Circuit event and that was cause they gave it 2 hours. If we continue bombing them with emails and tuning out on shows that are one hour highlight reels then they will probably get the clue