I like the idea. If this had been in place last year then Skalie would've had a few months before the final. He's a down to earth lad but would have definately done some sort of Video Diary/ reality tv show making himself a nice extra chunk of cash and he would have also been able to sort out a proper sponsorship deal instead of having to wait almost a year before he was picked up by a site. I would say any marketable player would be able to secure an extra million or so in those few months which can't be a bad thing.
for the degenerate gambler type player (there are plenty out there) it gives them a second chance. I know plenty players who have won huge ammounts and been broke a few months later- this way if its their first biggie and they blow the lot at least they go back to the final table with a chance of winning a few more million to "reload". Hell if I was chip leader I would probably blow the million or so and go back hungry and ready for battle
what if I am dead before the final table (probably screwed myself to death with young bimbo money hungry slut types) ? then it wouldnt really bother me because I would be dead. Blind me away and if I ladder a few slots pass the money on to my exwives/ family whatever- either way it ain't really gonna effect me is it?
for all those sayng bad influence and pressure put on by gangsters etc I would say you watch too many movies. There's mllion dollar tourneys every month now and how many poker players get kidnapped/ money extorted from them after a big win?
it's done now so lets just on with it. It's their tournament and they have set the rules along with an advisory board of players (ok mainly media whore players)- we can go with their rules or not play. It really is that simple.
So Howard is basically saying that it's worth the hassle, the many potential dangers, the loss of momentum, the further break with tradition, the removal of the opportunity for people who played the main event to stay and watch the final, etc., because it means more media attention?! There's not enough media attention on poker already?! The WSOP isn't already making enough mistakes by changing itself to suit television rather than inviting television just to cover what it is (eg. incredible delays during the hand-for-hand when everyone has to wait for the cameras) ?
Vicky:
I am surprised to read what you have written given that you work in the TV industry and you know how the TV business works, with cruel and unforgiving decisions made by executives who are slaves to statistical metrics data that, despite their imperfections, are treated as gospel and are used to make decisions with millions of dollars on the line.
Most rank-and-file poker players, in North America and especially in Europe, are completely out of touch with the reality that is painted by the latest metrics that are used by entertainment executives to judge the current state of the TELEVISED poker business in the U.S. market.
The health of televised poker in the U.S. as a rights fee and product sponsorship driven sports entertainment television product is currently in critical condition after 6 years of inertia and neglect by poker television producers.
High Stakes Poker on GSN was officially cancelled a few weeks ago.
The future of WPT on GSN and NBC Heads-Up beyond 2008 have not been decided yet. However, the latest television viewership data for both are not good.
Only about 30% of the viewers of WPT on GSN are in the all-important ages 18-49 demographic used to judge the health of sports entertainment television programming. The median viewer of WPT on GSN is now a lady in her mid-50s. That kind of audience skew will NOT allow GSN to sell advertising in the following categories: beer, soft drinks, energy drinks, mobile telephone service, sports cars, pickup trucks, and even play-for-free online poker (PokerStars.net stopped sponsoring players at WPT TV final tables after the Reno event on March 28 once the first TV ratings data point for WPT on GSN became available.)
Audience for the 2nd episode of 2008 NBC Heads-Up was off 25% compared to the same episode in 2007, and off a whopping 54% compared to the same episode in 2006. NBC Heads-Up was among the top 10 weekly televised sports products during the spring in 2005 and 2006. In 2008, viewership of NBC Heads-Up has fallen well out of the top 10, below products such as Ladies pro golf, minor league auto racing, and the Mexican League soccer match of the week airing on a Spanish-language broadcast network.
The reality (that some people inside the industry will never admit in public): the WSOP organization of Caesars Entertainment has gone "all in" to try to fix the WSOP Main Event TV product in 2008 in order to save the ESPN rights fee contract and the Miller Brewing (Milwaukee's Best Light Beer) sponsorship fee.
Either the "November" Main Event Final Table show on ESPN will be able to re-energize televised poker in the U.S. and bring back the young viewers who have stopped watching, or the whole concept of televised poker as a rights fee and sponsorship-driven sports entertainment television product will be dead and poker on TV will become nothing more than infomercials for casinos and online poker websites during late nights and "dead" TV time.
(Those of you in Europe who are still experiencing the poker boom in Central and Southern Europe are not noticing the danger signs yet. In two to three years, you will see the same TV ratings erosion problem in Western, Central, and Southern Europe that we are now encountering in the U.S.)
There are tens of millions of dollars and dozens of jobs and careers (including mine) at stake here.
Howard Lederer and Daniel Negreanu (among a handful of other players) understand this and are solidly behind the WSOP organization on this effort. I, along with many of the players I represent in product endorsement activities, stand in solidarity with Howard and Daniel.
I've been reading the various forums and several e-mails in regards to the WSOP final table delay and so many people are completely off base in their thinking that I wanted to set a few things straight.
The bottom line is this: if Harrah's and/or ESPN doesn't profit handsomely from the WSOP... then we are all screwed. If they don't make enough money to justify the headache of trying to accommodate thousands of sometimes, demanding poker players, then who will run this thing?
We need to take a step back to the Becky Behnen era circa 2004 and realize that the WSOP was almost a thing of the past. The tradition, the history, all of it could have disappeared if Harrah's didn't buy the Horseshoe along with the rights to the WSOP.
As more and more people attend the WSOP, that means more and more profit for Harrah's, but at the same time, it also means a heck of a lot more overhead.
I don't have any idea how much money Harrah's makes off the WSOP. I'm guessing, though, that the number people assume is far greater than the actual amount.
As a poker community we need to wake up a bit and realize the situation we are in, specifically in the U.S. Attendance is down in most tournaments, ratings for the premiere poker shows has also dipped. Poker is no longer seen as this "gold mine stock" amongst the mainstream public. There has been a lull in mainstream interest (a lot of that can definitely be credited to the UIGEA to some degree).
The poker players DON'T hold all the cards, despite the fact that many of us would like to believe that. We don't have a ton of well funded companies chomping at the bit to get in on the poker craze at the moment.
I am assuming that both Harrah's and ESPN are sensing that, and this is an attempt to inject some life, and some buzz back into the game. Their goals are obviously monetary at the core, but we should all realize that our goals are aligned. If Harrah's and ESPN can't make a decent buck off the WSOP, where would that leave the WSOP? Seriously, do you guys think about that sort of thing?
I should add this: I am no "company man," I am no "yes man," and I've had my fair share of shouting matches in the past with management. You should know this from seeing my past video blogs and written blogs as well. I don't give Harrah's a free pass by any means, but things need to be put into perspective here.
Harrah's is a business. They have to make money. If they don't make money, well, that's not a very good business is it! This delayed final table could go either way, it might work out extremely well, or it may not create the buzz and interest that they'd hoped for.
If you are a poker player and love the WSOP, you should actually be rooting for this idea to work because it is in your best interest.
As I said in the other blog on the topic, if the idea doesn't work, we go back to the original way of doing things, what's the harm in that? In 1997 someone had the bright idea of playing the final table on Fremont street in 110 degree heat! Stu Ungar won that year, and the next year they went back inside (thank goodness).
The sky isn't falling and the WSOP will be just fine...
Joined: 17 Feb 2006 Posts: 1853 Location: Hastings
Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 4:02 pm Post subject:
olivertse wrote:
Vicky C wrote:
So Howard is basically saying that it's worth the hassle, the many potential dangers, the loss of momentum, the further break with tradition, the removal of the opportunity for people who played the main event to stay and watch the final, etc., because it means more media attention?! There's not enough media attention on poker already?! The WSOP isn't already making enough mistakes by changing itself to suit television rather than inviting television just to cover what it is (eg. incredible delays during the hand-for-hand when everyone has to wait for the cameras) ?
Vicky:
I am surprised to read what you have written given that you work in the TV industry and you know how the TV business works, with cruel and unforgiving decisions made by executives who are slaves to statistical metrics data that, despite their imperfections, are treated as gospel and are used to make decisions with millions of dollars on the line.
Most rank-and-file poker players, in North America and especially in Europe, are completely out of touch with the reality that is painted by the latest metrics that are used by entertainment executives to judge the current state of the TELEVISED poker business in the U.S. market.
The health of televised poker in the U.S. as a rights fee and product sponsorship driven sports entertainment television product is currently in critical condition after 6 years of inertia and neglect by poker television producers.
High Stakes Poker on GSN was officially cancelled a few weeks ago.
The future of WPT on GSN and NBC Heads-Up beyond 2008 have not been decided yet. However, the latest television viewership data for both are not good.
Only about 30% of the viewers of WPT on GSN are in the all-important ages 18-49 demographic used to judge the health of sports entertainment television programming. The median viewer of WPT on GSN is now a lady in her mid-50s. That kind of audience skew will NOT allow GSN to sell advertising in the following categories: beer, soft drinks, energy drinks, mobile telephone service, sports cars, pickup trucks, and even play-for-free online poker (PokerStars.net stopped sponsoring players at WPT TV final tables after the Reno event on March 28 once the first TV ratings data point for WPT on GSN became available.)
Audience for the 2nd episode of 2008 NBC Heads-Up was off 25% compared to the same episode in 2007, and off a whopping 54% compared to the same episode in 2006. NBC Heads-Up was among the top 10 weekly televised sports products during the spring in 2005 and 2006. In 2008, viewership of NBC Heads-Up has fallen well out of the top 10, below products such as Ladies pro golf, minor league auto racing, and the Mexican League soccer match of the week airing on a Spanish-language broadcast network.
The reality (that some people inside the industry will never admit in public): the WSOP organization of Caesars Entertainment has gone "all in" to try to fix the WSOP Main Event TV product in 2008 in order to save the ESPN rights fee contract and the Miller Brewing (Milwaukee's Best Light Beer) sponsorship fee.
Either the "November" Main Event Final Table show on ESPN will be able to re-energize televised poker in the U.S. and bring back the young viewers who have stopped watching, or the whole concept of televised poker as a rights fee and sponsorship-driven sports entertainment television product will be dead and poker on TV will become nothing more than infomercials for casinos and online poker websites during late nights and "dead" TV time.
(Those of you in Europe who are still experiencing the poker boom in Central and Southern Europe are not noticing the danger signs yet. In two to three years, you will see the same TV ratings erosion problem in Western, Central, and Southern Europe that we are now encountering in the U.S.)
There are tens of millions of dollars and dozens of jobs and careers (including mine) at stake here.
Howard Lederer and Daniel Negreanu (among a handful of other players) understand this and are solidly behind the WSOP organization on this effort. I, along with many of the players I represent in product endorsement activities, stand in solidarity with Howard and Daniel.
The (unlikely) chances of a player dying could be said for any sports event that takes place over a period of time. People could die in the Premiere League (football, not that awful PartyPoker show).
And seriously how many events are there that could make you "unavailable in November"? There is nothing I had pre-planned that I wouldn't cancel to play for that amount of money. It would have to be some freak occurrence and that same risk is again applicable to any other sporting event.
The WSOP has boomed in recent years entirely because of the rise in internet poker. Any decline is related to funding problems in the US and until this issue is resolved poker will continue to decline in the US. At $600 juice per player, I can absolutely assure you that the wsop main event will never be cancelled by Harrahs.
As far as TV ratings are concerned, lets look at the two different species of TV program. First, the type that tries to compete with other forms of entertainment on its own attributes and attract advertising revenue based on audience. There might just be a few poker events which are able to do this, the WSOP final being one. Whether this change improves the ratings or not, will make no difference whatsoever to the rank and file player, it will just make Harrahs more money. Moreover, the motivation is not to attract new players to the game, it is just to make Harrahs more money, please realise this.
The second type of poker tv is subsidised by an internet poker site in some way. This kind of program is motivated by a desire to bring players into the game and will pretty much always exist in some form or other. Look at ept live, where pokerstars are putting on free live tv solely to market poker.
You have to ask yourself as a rank and file player which type of motivation and type of tv program is more likely to be in your interests. Do you think that an organisation that has in the past treated its customers with disdain and actively discouraged entries from internet sites really has any interest in the growth of poker?
Poker in the US will continue to decline as long as funding problems persist. The best policy for poker sites and non-US players would be just to leave them to it and completely boycott an event that has no interest in them whatsoever.
Last edited by _doubleup on Sat May 03, 2008 5:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
Not sure why you aimed that at me because I don't disagree with anything you say. I couldn't care either way to be honest, but I think the change is good from a TV and showcase perspective.
Not sure why you aimed that at me because I don't disagree with anything you say. I couldn't care either way to be honest, but I think the change is good from a TV and showcase perspective.
Sorry mate - it was rmacc - I should have addressed.....
And seriously how many events are there that could make you "unavailable in November"? There is nothing I had pre-planned that I wouldn't cancel to play for that amount of money.
A baby? You'd cancel the birth of your child?
Your wedding?
Your daughter's wedding?
An important operation?
An important business trip?
This changed was announced 3 months after the WSOP dates were realeased, and 2 months before the Main Event was due to start. They have been accepting $10K entries for weeks - is there not one single person that has entered or would have entered, that would be severely inconvenienced by this change?
And these are things that have been preplanned. Aside from the chances of death what about a severe illness? Or an illness to a family member? My (then) 4 year old daughter was diagnosed with cancer a couple of years ago (thankfully has made a full recovery) - It would have been a hell of a decision (and a probable marriage breaker) if I had to make a decision between staying with her or going back to US for the big bucks.
None of these things have been thought about - it would be different if this was announced as a change for next year (i'd still be against it), but it isn't - it's this year. Plans have already been made, time off booked, flights and hotels booked. To change dates at this time shows complete disdain for the average player.
Most rank-and-file poker players, in North America and especially in Europe, are completely out of touch with the reality that is painted by the latest metrics that are used by entertainment executives to judge the current state of the TELEVISED poker business in the U.S. market.
So?
olivertse wrote:
The health of televised poker in the U.S. as a rights fee and product sponsorship driven sports entertainment television product is currently in critical condition after 6 years of inertia and neglect by poker television producers.
and?
olivertse wrote:
High Stakes Poker on GSN was officially cancelled a few weeks ago.
Was it?
olivertse wrote:
Only about 30% of the viewers of WPT on GSN are in the all-important ages 18-49 demographic used to judge the health of sports entertainment television programming. The median viewer of WPT on GSN is now a lady in her mid-50s. That kind of audience skew will NOT allow GSN to sell advertising in the following categories: beer, soft drinks, energy drinks, mobile telephone service, sports cars, pickup trucks, and even play-for-free online poker (PokerStars.net stopped sponsoring players at WPT TV final tables after the Reno event on March 28 once the first TV ratings data point for WPT on GSN became available.)
Really? (p.s. LOL at all the forum posters on this and other sites saying these 9 people will make a fortune from advertising and be household names. Phil Ivey isn't a household name - ask your mother or your next door neighbour who he is and see what they say).
olivertse wrote:
Audience for the 2nd episode of 2008 NBC Heads-Up was off 25% compared to the same episode in 2007, and off a whopping 54% compared to the same episode in 2006. NBC Heads-Up was among the top 10 weekly televised sports products during the spring in 2005 and 2006. In 2008, viewership of NBC Heads-Up has fallen well out of the top 10, below products such as Ladies pro golf, minor league auto racing, and the Mexican League soccer match of the week airing on a Spanish-language broadcast network.
Has it really?
olivertse wrote:
There are tens of millions of dollars and dozens of jobs and careers (including mine) at stake here.
Oh dear!
Oliver, i know i'm probably wasting my time and you've probably already made the only posts you'll ever make here, but you've got to understand that 99% of poker players couldn't give a shit about poker's tv ratings. Do you not understand that? If i had the money and the inclination to enter the main event, why do you think i would do that? To put on a show for the cameras? to give Poker TV a shot in the arm? No, it seems bleedingly obvious to me, but maybe i'll have to explain it to you. I'd enter because I WANT TO WIN MONEY. Simple as that. ESPN wouldn't pay me, you wouldn't pay me, i'd be playing for my opponents money - if people are going to make a few bob on the back of that then so be it, but I just cant see how, if TV doesn't contribute 1 cent to the pot or the players how they can have been allowed to take over the running of poker's big event.
And I have to agree with a poster above (Dean Letham i think). I'm an avid poker player, and have been for 2 years, but i dont think i've seen more that 20 minutes of poker on TV. It isn't a spectator sport, it doesn't matter how it is presented it simply doesn't appeal to me (and I certainly couldn't give a shit about watching the main event final table).
For those saying as a poker player I don't care about poker on tv you should, poker is a huge driving force behind getting players into poker without TV the poker boom would certainly not have been anywhere near as big.
Fish bust out, you need a constant of new ones coming in or you will just be left with all the TAG nits playing, try and play on sites like crypto where you can see the consequence of not enough fish coming in.
Not sure whether I agree with the gap in the main event approach however, live final tables seem to get a good reception and cash games aren't exactly a ratings loser but they've fallen by the way side.
And seriously how many events are there that could make you "unavailable in November"? There is nothing I had pre-planned that I wouldn't cancel to play for that amount of money.
A baby? You'd cancel the birth of your child?
Your wedding?
Your daughter's wedding?
An important operation?
An important business trip?
This changed was announced 3 months after the WSOP dates were realeased, and 2 months before the Main Event was due to start. They have been accepting $10K entries for weeks - is there not one single person that has entered or would have entered, that would be severely inconvenienced by this change?
And these are things that have been preplanned. Aside from the chances of death what about a severe illness? Or an illness to a family member? My (then) 4 year old daughter was diagnosed with cancer a couple of years ago (thankfully has made a full recovery) - It would have been a hell of a decision (and a probable marriage breaker) if I had to make a decision between staying with her or going back to US for the big bucks.
None of these things have been thought about - it would be different if this was announced as a change for next year (i'd still be against it), but it isn't - it's this year. Plans have already been made, time off booked, flights and hotels booked. To change dates at this time shows complete disdain for the average player.
Aren't these things (where unplanned) equally likely to disrupt your final table whenever it is played? Looks like complaining for the sake of it.
You might not care about poker on TV - but as you also say that you are only interested in making money from poker - really you should care about it. Televised poker has led to the huge increase in leisure poker players - resulting in increased profitability for serious players.
If no large numbers of new leisure players enter the poker pool - what will happen? The prize money for the WSOP and all other tourneys will certainly be hugely reduced through fewer entrants. Those who are left playing in tournaments and playing online will be experienced and probably hardcore, not just the "what the hell lets have a shot, it looks easy on TV" crowd."
I think its a shame that this delay is happening - but TV and commercialization shouldn't be seen as the root of all evil. Modern poker needs TV and therefore needs to appeal to wider audiences if its to continue to attract new players and be profitable. Olivertse's interesting facts about ever decreasing TV audience figures is bad news.
So Howard is basically saying that it's worth the hassle, the many potential dangers, the loss of momentum, the further break with tradition, the removal of the opportunity for people who played the main event to stay and watch the final, etc., because it means more media attention?! There's not enough media attention on poker already?! The WSOP isn't already making enough mistakes by changing itself to suit television rather than inviting television just to cover what it is (eg. incredible delays during the hand-for-hand when everyone has to wait for the cameras) ?
You have to bear in mind, Howard is coming at it from the point of view of being one of those people who has chosen heavy self-promotion and a big TV push - nothing wrong with that, but for a lot of people the media spotlight is actually a down side of modern poker, and many would argue that it's in some ways better to come 2nd or 3rd in the WSOP than win it, because you still get a few million but you don't have to be recognized everywhere you go!
Personally I think it's an annoying and stupid change, breaking the essential nature of what a poker tournament IS. It's like the Olympic Committee deciding that, in order to maximize coverage, they were going to run the first three legs of the 4 x 100m relay and then stop, put marks on the track, and the final runners would come back and sprint the last 100m six months later after everyone else had gone home.
perfectly summing up how I feel - well said Vicky at last some common sense....
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
We use cookies to make your experience on our website better. To comply with the new e-Privacy Directive, we need to let you know about this. By using our site with cookies enabled in your browser, you agree to their use. You can read more about this on the cookie information page. You can hide this message.
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
