|
It’s hard to argue with the WSOP’s blueprint for success, but the glory days of poker are apparently over. No longer is poker on the tip of the populace’s tongue, televised poker is once again sporadic and harder to find, and even the WSOP has seen the number of televised events dropped to four.
Sports figures have a saying: “It’s easy to be a leader when things are going good.” And this is the quandary poker now finds itself in; what is the next step?
In this article I will discuss three ways the WSOP could improve; not just financially, but also improve for the players and the fans.
Sponsorship: It recently came to light that poker sites were offering $10,000 to anyone sitting at the ESPN featured table. The WSOP needs to ban site representatives from the floor, and disallow players from making on the spot sponsorship deals.
You’re probably asking two questions at this point: Why am I against this? And how will it improve the WSOP?
I am against these types of sponsorship because they go against everything poker stands for. Poker is the ultimate meritocracy; players should not be rewarded for drawing a certain seat assignment. Additionally, by basically refunding these players’ buy-ins you set up a free-roll situation where the pressure of playing in the WSOP –and risking $10,000—no longer is a consideration.
How will removing these sponsorships help the WSOP? First and foremost it will get rid of the current WWE atmosphere that currently exists at the WSOP. What made those first years of the hole-card era stand out was the everyday appeal of the game. Now it seems every player is wearing some silly patch, hat, and jersey from a poker site, and we find out the sites are giving them $10k on the spot to wear it! These players are being prostituted by the poker sites.
The WSOP also needs to do away with the entourages: No more Phil Hellmuth entrances dressed in some rented Halloween costume with UB logos all over it, with 10 hired models in tow. It’s time for the WSOP to take back control of their event from the online poker sites.
Event length: There is no reason for the preliminary events to take more than a day or two to complete. I like the old format where each preliminary event lasted a single day. The reason this will improve the WSOP is to create more buzz for each tournament.
The way the tournaments play out now, the public loses interest over the course of the event. The reason is quite simple, either there is a final table going on somewhere, or a Championship tournament starts the same day the final table for another tourney is being played, or after all the fan’s favorite players are eliminated the tournament becomes inconsequential.
Another problem is simply space. With three tournaments running at the same time some tournaments have sold out. By playing fewer tournaments per day the WSOP could accommodate more players into each event.
Duplicate Events: This is perhaps my biggest pet peeve with the current WSOP. How many $1,500 No Limit Hold’ Em tournaments do you need ??? In 2009 there was SEVEN, S-E-V-E-N, $1,500 No Limit Hold’ Em tournaments (and that doesn’t include the shootouts and 6-handed events).
Talk about a watered down version of a bracelet event. The WSOP should only award bracelets in the championship events. All other tournaments should be played as non-bracelet events (players could still receive a trophy of some sort) since the prize money alone will entice the same number of players.
While the idea of winning a bracelet might attract a few extra players; I think the WSOP is better off in the long-run by creating more prestige in its ultimate accomplishment; not handing out 50+ of them a year. |
