Negreanu Criticizes the WSOP 's one-dimensional lineup

[ QUOTE ]
The directors of the WSOP don't need to cater to public taste--they shape it.

[/ QUOTE ]I dont think its the WSOP directors per se, but ESPN who shapes the public's taste.

Ill use me and my high school buddies as a representation of young american men in general. Before the 2003 WSOP was shown on tv we couldnt tell you holdem from stud from parcheesi. After seeing it on tv we started playing NL Holdem, and that was all we knew. After the 2004 WSOP was shown on TV we were exposed to some other forms of poker. While we still played mostly NL Holdem at our home games, as that is what we had most experience in, we were all very curious to experiment with Omaha, Omaha 8/b, Stud, and Razz.

If ESPN chose to show many different forms of poker im sure they could make just as much money providing all different kinds of poker tournaments at the WSOP.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]

Can't they give a little back to the Poker Players by building more bathroom facilities and/or adding the events we want to see?

[/ QUOTE ]

They are giving the public what they want to see. They want hold 'em.

I don't have any info on the bathrooms.

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
we were all very curious to experiment with Omaha, Omaha 8/b, Stud, and Razz.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's only been ten years since high school, but back then we were all very curious to experiment with LSD, mushrooms and coke. Funny how times have changed.

It's true that ESPN shapes the public's taste moreso than Harrah's. And I suppose ESPN took razz off the tv schedule this year, because it generated worse ratings than the hold 'em events. Nevertheless, it piqued the curiosity of a lot of players who, like me, having never played razz, decided to enter this year's event. People will enter ANY event as long as its WSOP-related. The only issue as I see it is, after ESPN has its broadcasting quota of HE events set, why can't Harrah's sprinkle in some more variety for the players?

[DarthIgnurnt]

First, as a poker player, I agree with yours and DN's general sentiment, and I wish that, in general, large poker tournaments weren't so NL Holdem-heavy (for me personally, I'd like to see more Omaha in general, as well as mixed games ... SHOE, HOE, HORSE, SORES, WHORE, etc.).

However, as is the tendency on these boards many times ... I think we project the thought processes of the poker purists in ourselves on entities who are driven to make money, and the mass audience that they attempt to address.

Bear with me, young Bob Dylan [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] ... I recognize the point you're suggesting ...

[ QUOTE ]
The directors of the WSOP don't need to cater to public taste--they shape it. Imagine if they televized the 5K/rebuy 2-7 NL. I would guess dozens of new players would be interested in playing. I think it would also make for a great televized event, but that's a different story.


[/ QUOTE ]

They've tried to diversify, and it hasn't worked.

I suspect that the ESPN ratings for non-Holdem events is significantly below those of the Holdem events, and no-limit much higher than limit. The reality is ... 7 Card Stud, Razz, Limit Holdem, Triple Draw, even my beloved Omaha ... just don't make good television.

They haven't replayed these events very often, and my focus group of one (my wife) thinks that these other games are "dumb". Let me try to elaborate on what I think she means ...

Stud and Razz are boring to watch. Unless you're a nut about those games, it really is boring to see these games played ... bet, call, bet, call, bet, call, two pairs wins. And this is after ESPN edits it into the most interesting 42 minutes, something they're pretty good at. All I remember about last year's Razz event is that every player at the table kept saying how much they hated the game.

Limit Holdem plays the same way on TV, and PLO events are a bit too confusing for someone who doesn't play. Hell, a guy at the final table last year tried to make a straight with 3 of his hole cards.

NLHE is easy to understand, it is dramatic, and it lends itself well to a TV format that people watch.

So, I guess my point is that I believe that ESPN has tried to highlight other games, and my belief is that they have found them to be not as successful as what they show in NL events. If I were a betting man, and by definition, I am, I would say that the ratings on these events are significantly below those of the NLHE events. So, if they could truly "shape" public perception and make these events into popular television, then they would have done so.

You yourself suggest that "dozens" of new players would want to play if the NL 2-7 event were shown. While I watched it online and enjoyed it, I would bet you a dollar that it wouldn't get nearly the ratings or interest of a NLHE event. ESPN and Harrah's don't care about "dozens", they want my dad (and millions like him) to watch these shows in rerun 8 times, drink some Milwaukee's Beast Light, and perhaps someday try their hand at the game live. NLHE events have proven to be by far the most effective way to do this.

Never underestimate the ability of a TV network to quickly determine the most profitable way to fill their air time, and certainly never, ever underestimate the ability of a casino to squeeze every half penny out of the public that they can.

If there truly was a way for either ESPN, Harrah's, or the combination of the two to build a buzz (read: more money) out of non-NLHE events ... believe me, they'd do it.

[Dynasty]

Turnouts for this year's WSOP events.

6/17 $1,000 7 Card Studd High-Low 8/B: 595
6/17 $1,500 Limit Hold 'em Shootout: 450
6/18 $1,500 No-Limit Hold 'em Shootout: 780
6/19 $2,500 Limit Hold 'em: 373
<font color="red">6/20 $2,000 7 card Stud High-Low 8/B: 279 </font>
<font color="red">6/20 $1,500 Pot-Limit Omaha: 291 </font>
<font color="red"> 6/22 $5,000 Pot-Limit Omaha: 239 </font>
6/23 $2,500 Omaha High-Low 8/B: 359
6/24 $1,500 No-Limit Hold 'em: 2,013
<font color="red">6/25 $5,000 7 Card Stud: 192 </font>
6/26 $2,500 No-Limit Hold 'em: 1,056
6/26 $2,500 Pot-Limit Hold 'em: 425
6/27 $1,000 Ladies No-Limit Hold 'em: 601
<font color="red">6/28 $5,000 Pot-Limit Omaha: 134 </font>
<font color="red">6/29 $5,000 Limit Hold 'em: 269 </font>
6/30 $2,000 No-Limit Hold 'em: 1,072
<font color="red">6/30 $1,500 Seven Card Razz: 291 </font>
6/30 $5,000 No-Limit Short Handed (6/Table): 301
<font color="red">7/2 $5,000 Omaha High-Low 8/B: 224 </font>
7/3 $3,000 No-Limit Hold 'em: 1,010
7/3 $1,000 No-Limit Hold 'em Seniors: 825
<font color="red">7/4 $10,000 Pot-Limit Omaha: 165 </font>
7/4 $3,000 Limit Hold 'em: 406
7/5 $1,000 No-Limit Hold 'em: 1,584
<font color="red">7/6 $5,000 No-Limit 2-7 Draw Lowball: 85 </font>
7/11 $1,500 No-Limit Hold 'em: 863
7/12 $1,000 No-Limit Hold 'em: 971
7/13 $1,000 No-Limit Hold 'em: 758
7/15 $10,000 No-Limit Hold 'em Championship: 5,619


Events which drew less than 300 players are highlighted in red. None of them are no-limit hold 'em and only the $5,000 event is limit hold 'em. Meanwhile, just two non hold 'em events were able to draw more than 300 players.

Even when you exclude the Championship Event, the open no-limit tournaments drew an average of 1,166 players.

I think the players have spoken very clearly to Harrahs about what they want.

[Ghazban]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Can't they give a little back to the Poker Players by building more bathroom facilities and/or adding the events we want to see?

[/ QUOTE ]

They are giving the public what they want to see. They want hold 'em.

I don't have any info on the bathrooms.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure there's a witty remark in here about "hold em" and waiting in long lines for the bathroom....

[shaniac]

I'm not arguing that hold' em does and will attract many times more the players than any of the side events, but it has nothing to do with Daniel's point.

The other events deserve some representation at the WSOP. If Harrah's spread a HORSE and another lowball event, you wouldn't hear players complaining that there wasn't enough hold 'em at this year's series.

Also, since my point is that people are interested in playing WSOP tournaments no matter what the game, I'm curious how those numbers in red compare to the numbers from the same events in years past. Care to look it up Dynasty?

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
Care to look it up Dynasty?

[/ QUOTE ]

It was your idea. I volunteer you to do the research.

[Kyo Souma II]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the players have spoken very clearly to Harrahs about what they want.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but it still sucks that money talks so much louder than tradition that the latter cannot be heard.

-kyo

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
we were all very curious to experiment with Omaha, Omaha 8/b, Stud, and Razz.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's only been ten years since high school, but back then we were all very curious to experiment with LSD, mushrooms and coke. Funny how times have changed.

[/ QUOTE ]oh, dont worry times havent changed [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
It's true that ESPN shapes the public's taste moreso than Harrah's. And I suppose ESPN took razz off the tv schedule this year, because it generated worse ratings than the hold 'em events. Nevertheless, it piqued the curiosity of a lot of players who, like me, having never played razz, decided to enter this year's event. People will enter ANY event as long as its WSOP-related. The only issue as I see it is, after ESPN has its broadcasting quota of HE events set, why can't Harrah's sprinkle in some more variety for the players?

[/ QUOTE ]exactly, we dont need tons of non-HE tourneys, but at least have one of each one including HORSE and SHOE, which carries some prestige among pros.