If you could devise your own PS 3?

[jstnrgrs]

I would use a slightly different macro structure (I'm sure that everyone agrees that it would be better to raise the blinds more slowly in each game).


In all rounds points would be the reverse of order of finish. Points do not carry over from one round to the next. Ties would be broken with a playoff with all players involved playing at one table and starting with equal chip stacks.

Round 1: 25 players, five player per game. Each player would play 6 games in which they would play all players once and only once.

Round 2: 16 players (players start all games with a chip stack proportional to the number of points earned in round 1), 4 player per game. Each player would play 5 games in which they would play all remaining players once and only once.

Round 3: 9 players (players start all games with a chip stack proportional to the number of points earned in round 2), 3 player per game. Each player would play 4 games in which they would play all remaining players once and only once.

Round 4 (The finals): 4 players (players start all games with a chip stack proportional to the number of points earned in round 3), 2 player per game. Each player would play 3 games in which they would play all remaining players once and only once.

The player who has the best record in round 4 would be the champion.

The obvious problem with this is that it could be to many games (65), so maybe it would be better to start with 16 players (35 games).

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If I were a producer, I'd need Moneymaker on the show.

[/ QUOTE ]

Disagree. Chris's spotlight has waned enough that his presence isn't needed to bump up ratings. He seems like a nice guy but he's done very little since his 2003 WSOP win. His showing at PS2 was pretty awful. It seemed like he was in awe of the big names playing with him. Understandable but his game really suffered in that oddly structured tourney.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, but see, you're commenting as an educated player who is familliar with the goings on of the poker community. The producer in me would know I'm getting you as a viewer and concentrate on the everyman who thinks watching a little poker on TV might be fun. For them, Moneymaker's the hero. While I agree he'd likely be out of his league here, doesn't mean that mainstream America understands or cares. All they need to know is that a guy like them with a perfect name won the WSOP one year.

Gary