WSOP ME Final Table to be delayed...

KingCurtis · May 1, 2008

aliengenius said:
Yes, I find it hard to believe that "getting out of a heater, or somone getting out of a losing streak" is an actual real argument.

Surely you don't actually believe that 'heaters' and 'losing streaks' are actually real tangible things (do you?!), or even if they were, that these are the elements that should determine the champion.

As to the reads and coaching argument, oh well, the meta-game is one level deeper, guess you'll have to adjust (you know, kinda like... poker).

yes i understand the heater and loosing streak, but more reads by having more time to research is something you couldn't have done before but like you said adapting by switching gears so others cannnot do this and get confused or actualy do research yourself . But thanks for being so direct sometimes i need someone to tell me im not making sense, mainly because i think to fast, or speak/type before im done thinking about it through......btw i havent read the rest of the post but what are you arguments for it being good?

robwhufc · May 1, 2008

aliengenius said:
Attempted refutation of the potential negatives:

1. "I spent all this time getting good reads, now they are gone" is just silly, imo. Reads should IMPROVE for all players, as you will be able to see (some) of your opponents previous play on tv, etc.

This is good? It's now not Man against Man (or Woman), it's the Man that does the best research that wins? How can this be good, I really don't get this one

2. No one is going to be able to drastically change their personality/playing style, even with conscious effort. Everyone learned that Jamie Gold defaulted to telling the truth about his hand during his table talk, and he knew that everyone now knew!, but he was unable to stop himself from continuing to fall into this pattern in later play, even for huge stakes (HSP). To the degree that anyone is successful at this, oh well, I guess the player who can adapt the best and/or get reads the fastest will have an edge (you know, just like in... tournament poker).

Whatever

3. Someone might die or not be able to make it. This is silly as well. Someone might die the night before the final table too. But come on, we, as poker players, are supposed to be able to deal with percentages and statistics fairly well-- do you really thing that an additional three months increases your chances of death a statistically significant amount such that it is a real reason to not delay the final table? I guess if the odds are that high for an individual they probably are not going to get to enjoy their millions for very long if they win anyway... As to conflicts of interest that's just lol.

Might die, might be ill, might be a military man called to the front line, might have a spouse or child that is ill, might be in jail, might be banned from returning to USA.

4. Coaching. Oh no, the quality of play might be higher now at the final table. I for one welcome it, after the relatively horrible display last year.

So? What has the standard of play got to do with it? 6-8,000 people will enter and pay $10K and someone will win. Everyone who plays poker to some standard thinks they can be Chris Moneymaker or Jerry Yang given the right run of good fortune, that's the appeal of the event.

5. Everyone wont have access to equal levels of the above new available information. I just disagree completely. Sure someone will get coaching from Phil Hellmuth, and someone will get it from Chris Ferguson, but everyone came into the event with different skill sets to begin too.

Again, what is wrong with playing from start to finish using your own wits? If the final table is decided by who can afford the best coaching than that is wrong (and who is it that has agreed to this delay? The same people that will be putting themselves forwards as coaches? No conflict of interest there! (i'm being sarcastic if you are American).

6. The ME should be an endurance contest. This is total bs. Players have long complained about the format of the days being too long. This eliminates poker skills, the opposite of what the ME should be doing (ostensibly trying to crown the world champion). Sure you can argue that endurance IS a poker skill, but do you really want to make it THE defining skill? I think it was Doyle Brunson himself who stated that the winner will never be over x (can't remember exactly-- 45?) age again, because of the current format.

Fearless predication - an over 45 year old wont win Wimbldeon or an Athletic Gold Medal at the Olympics either. And this is bs anyway, how old was Raymond Rahme or whatever his name was - 60+ and he reached final table. Event gos from 7,000 down to 1, how does having a break when it gets down to 9 help older people. I like the analogy above about stopping a marathon 1 mile from the finish and running the last mile later - that would probably mean someone different would win, how can that be good?

On the other side of the coin:

1. Better for ALL players as far as endorsements. Obvioulsy the winner is set for life as far as sponsorship deals, but the delay allows EVERY final table player negotiation time for lucrative deals.

So? Maybe alien to Americans but not everyone is an endorsement whore. Some people have principles (and besides, loads are sponsored anyway). Didn't someone play unsponsored on the final table last year, despite offers?

2. Better for the game as a whole as far as the marketing of poker. I don't have a problem w ESPN promoting it and hyping it for months. That's a good thing. Mainstreaming of poker needs to continue (no, it's not completely there yet).

I'm going to cut and paste a post from The Hendon Mob's WSOP reporter, taken from their version of this thread.

Having observed the behaviour of ESPN's staff first hand, literally pushing players at the table out of their way so they could get their cameras into the places they wanted them, it's no surprise that their corporate staff display a similar contempt for the tournament.

Thought you'd be on the other side of this arguement for some reason AG?

KingCurtis · May 1, 2008

nvm once again i spoke before i read and thought

aliengenius · May 1, 2008

Ranger390 said:
Aliengenius: Some of your points are well taken. But, to me, holding the final tables months later somehow changes the very nature of the WSOP title and the nature of the game in terms of how the final table would have played out had it been held immediately, as usual. Whoever wins will always have an "asterisk" by their name, at least in my mind. Although I am not certain that I completely agree with Likminutz's marathon analogy, it does make some sense to me. Maybe even closer to the point, Robwhufc's last point about "momentum" or being on a rush, or more precisely a player being in the "zone" will be broken with the interruption in play. Being in the "zone" is something that even the best players just can't "will" to happen.

Who knows how it "would have" played out. This, to me, is akin to a blackjack player criticizing another player's choice to hit or stand because the opposite decision "would have" caused the dealer to bust. You just can't know if the card will help or hurt you, just as you can't know if the three month delay will help or hurt you. Maybe someone will be able to get some psychological help with their 'stage fright' issues so they can play better on camera, maybe someone will die in a train crash, maybe maybe maybe..

How is someone being "in the zone" in July any more deserving of winning than someone who will be "in the zone" in October? You have put an artificial construct on it. In fact, you are supposed to think of poker as one long game, with individual start and stop times are arbitrary and capricious-- so continuing again at a later date should be totally irrelevant to you.

On a related side note, ALL winners have had to endure different conditions on their way to victory, sometimes drastically different from their predecessors. We don't put an asterisk by Stu Ungar's name because he had to beat Doyle Brunson heads up instead of David Williams. We don't put an asterisk by Amarillo Slim's name because Pearson and Brunson basically ceded the title to him because they didn't want name recognition at the time. We don't put as asterisk by Jack Strauss because the field he had to beat in 1982 was so much smaller. Etc.

OzExorcist · May 1, 2008

aliengenius said:
2. No one is going to be able to drastically change their personality/playing style, even with conscious effort.

This is probably true for the pros, but I don't know if it holds true as much for the amateurs.

A pro isn't going to make any huge changes to their game in the space of three months. But an amateur could spend those three months devouring every poker book they can get their hands on, and it'd potentially make a huge difference to their play. Good for the amateur, not so good for the pro.

I think the bottom line is that this would be:

- Good for the amateur players who make the final table
- Good for the casual poker-viewing audience
- Good for ESPN
- Bad for the professional players
- Bad for the serious fans (I follow all the major tournaments on the net, for example - having to wait three months to find out who wins is likely to hack me off)

But like I said, it's all academic because the actual gap between playing down to nine and the final table starting is only one day.

CfPoker · May 1, 2008

If I was playing in this and got to the final table then the few months gap waiting to win that kind of prize would kill me. I'd rather jump straight into it.

arahel_jazz · May 1, 2008

I'm pretty much against a 4-month delay. Then again, something has to be done to bring the Main Event into a sense of reality. What are they up to now, 4 days of the first flight?

What needs to happen is a series of kockout satellites during May-June where the top 50-100 of each go to the Main Event. A player could only enter one. Think of it as anybody that would be normally ITM of the Main Event would come back and play a two-day event to determine the ultimate winner. This would allow even more players to negotiate deals with sponsors, give a better atmosphere to the final event, and provide a more manageable setup for all.

zachvac · May 1, 2008

First started reading this, thought it was kind of dumb but didn't see much difference. Basically I agree with what AG is saying. Arguments about coaching? People get coaching already. If an opponent is getting coaching from a well-known pro it's likely I've already outlasted that pro. This is akin to people complaining about the world series being delayed because the two world series teams would be getting coaching. But Jamie Gold got coaching from Johnny Chan. Was this a problem? Basically the argument of some seem to be "change bad, it will be different, different bad".

Ranger390 · May 1, 2008

AG: I understand your position and respect it. But, I am still on the other side...especially due to the "being in the zone" issue. To me, and I suspect to most serious players, this will be viewed as two tournaments, not one. I have never viewed poker as one continuous game...maybe I missed that paragraph in my poker books! Getting in the zone for the competitive activities that I do as serious hobbies (for money) is tough enough, let alone attempting to reproduce that zone experience after a time lapse. Admittedly, maybe it's my bias against ESPN and how their marketing geniuses almost single handedly destroyed the leading professional bass tournament organization. But, I do not want the same thing to happen to the wsop.

OzExorcist · May 1, 2008

zachvac said:
First started reading this, thought it was kind of dumb but didn't see much difference. Basically I agree with what AG is saying. Arguments about coaching? People get coaching already. If an opponent is getting coaching from a well-known pro it's likely I've already outlasted that pro. This is akin to people complaining about the world series being delayed because the two world series teams would be getting coaching. But Jamie Gold got coaching from Johnny Chan. Was this a problem? Basically the argument of some seem to be "change bad, it will be different, different bad".

The difference between, say, Jamie Gold getting coached by Johnny Chan and a situation like this is that even with a coach like Johnny Chan, an amateur player can't make a radical change to their game overnight - and even if they did, the other players in the game would be able to observe it.

Over a number of months, however, they could make serious improvements to their game with coaching / study / whatever.

Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing depends entirely on your point of view. As an amateur or average player, it can only be a good thing. As a pro or good player sure, you can make your reads again, but why would you want to give up that edge?

And I reiterate: this discussion is 100% redundant, as it's about a rumour that's 100% incorrect.

robwhufc · May 1, 2008

aliengenius said:
What does 9th place get, $500K+? That may not be a lot of money to Daniel Negreanu and the other morons that have signed off on this, but that's a hell of a lot of money to me. You are supposed to wait 4 months for it, and then play live on ESPN for free? And this is a good idea?

right, which is why the bread would benefit the ninth place finisher-- they now have time to negotiate a deal that will potentially give them more money long term than they actually win.

ESPN will decide what deals you can or cannot negotiate. Someone who has made a final table has zero marketable value unless the sponsor can get the logo on the telly. ESPN will decide that - they have paying advertisers who will not want competitors to be shown on people's logos. And a lot of players are sponsored anyway, is a Pokerroom player going to be able to accept a lucrative offer from Full Tilt? What do you think?

aliengenius said:
Things change in 4 months. What if you are in a coma? What if your wife is? What if you are in jail? What if you don't want to come to America twice? What if you lose your form?

See above. Probability of this is so low as to be statistically moronic to consider, imo.

I considered it, so i'm a moron? Why is it a low ridiculously low probability that someone who is able to play the 14th day of a 2 week event in July could be unable to play in both July and November? From my own personal experience, I was told a couple of years ago that my (then) 4 year old daughter had Cancer. Had I been told that on July 13th or whatever, of course I would have been devasted, but being a thousand of miles away from home with a flight booked a couple of days later, I imagine I would have played on. Had I been told the same a day before I was due to fly back out in November? I don't know, probably not. People do get hit by buses, they do contract illnesses. And what about people stranded at airports due to a Airline strike?

What about people that have got jobs that don't enable them to take holidays at 4 month's notice? Surgeons? Policemen? Armed Forces? Maybe they can pack the job in if they are refused permission, and wreck their career? Is this better than having it played out in one go? I don't really know what you do (House Husband?), but not everyone can drop and go like you. I don't think that overseas players have been considered for one second (and if you read the views from European pros regarding the WSOP, they never really have been).

This change is supposed to be for THIS year isn't it? The main event is early July, it's May now, so that's 2 months. Absolutely scandalous to propose a change this massive, when numerous qualification events have already been held. I hope the entries will be way down because of this.

Effexor · May 1, 2008

OzExorcist said:
It's all completely academic, of course, because the official structure sheet for this year's Main Event has them playing the final table on July 16...

It's been changed officially:

World Series of Poker - Official Tournament Coverage and Results

robwhufc · May 1, 2008

OzExorcist said:
And I reiterate: this discussion is 100% redundant, as it's about a rumour that's 100% incorrect.

It's in USA Today (I looked at their website, not the OP poker news site). It's on 2+2 forum (and was rumored there early April). It may not be agreed yet, but it's no way 100% incorrect.

ESPN is the tail that is wagging the WSOP dog.

robwhufc · May 1, 2008

Oh, and it's been officially announced on the WSOP site.

World Series of Poker - Official Tournament Coverage and Results

Guess that makes you 100% wrong!

Ranger390 · May 1, 2008

Well, Daniel is in favor of this change, which shocks me, quite frankly. I would have bet that he would have led the charge on the "anti" side.

robwhufc · May 1, 2008

Ranger390 said:
Well, Daniel is in favor of this change, which shocks me, quite frankly. I would have bet that he would have led the charge on the "anti" side.

Daniel will be pimping his ass out to the finalists as a mentor / trainer for the 4 months. He is looking out for number 1, not for average Joe.

aliengenius · May 1, 2008

robwhufc said:
ESPN will decide what deals you can or cannot negotiate. Someone who has made a final table has zero marketable value unless the sponsor can get the logo on the telly. ESPN will decide that - they have paying advertisers who will not want competitors to be shown on people's logos. And a lot of players are sponsored anyway, is a Pokerroom player going to be able to accept a lucrative offer from Full Tilt? What do you think?

I considered it, so i'm a moron? Why is it a low ridiculously low probability that someone who is able to play the 14th day of a 2 week event in July could be unable to play in both July and November? From my own personal experience, I was told a couple of years ago that my (then) 4 year old daughter had Cancer. Had I been told that on July 13th or whatever, of course I would have been devasted, but being a thousand of miles away from home with a flight booked a couple of days later, I imagine I would have played on. Had I been told the same a day before I was due to fly back out in November? I don't know, probably not. People do get hit by buses, they do contract illnesses. And what about people stranded at airports due to a Airline strike?

What about people that have got jobs that don't enable them to take holidays at 4 month's notice? Surgeons? Policemen? Armed Forces? Maybe they can pack the job in if they are refused permission, and wreck their career? Is this better than having it played out in one go? I don't really know what you do (House Husband?), but not everyone can drop and go like you. I don't think that overseas players have been considered for one second (and if you read the views from European pros regarding the WSOP, they never really have been).

This change is supposed to be for THIS year isn't it? The main event is early July, it's May now, so that's 2 months. Absolutely scandalous to propose a change this massive, when numerous qualification events have already been held. I hope the entries will be way down because of this.

lol

HELLO, they are not asking you to come back months later and play your 'Day 2' !!

It's the final table.

You know, where MILLIONS of dollars are at stack, and you know MONTH in advance that you'll be playing.

Guess you probably can't get off work, huh?

So, yes, it's totally idiotic to say that you'll have some sort of scheduling conflict, or that this is some ludicrous and outrageous thing that you have to do at "the drop of a hat".

As to some traumatic life altering/ending event occurring to you or your family members, yep that could happen. It could also happen the night before the final table in July too. It is my contention that there is statistically no significant change in the chances of this happening over any given three to four month period.

robwhufc · May 1, 2008

aliengenius said:
So, yes, it's totally idiotic to say that you'll have some sort of scheduling conflict, or that this is someludicrous and outrageous thing that you have to do at "the drop of a hat".

No, it is not idiotic to say you have a scheduling conflict. The WSOP schedule was announced months ago. People that want to play in the Main Event have already made plans based on that schedule, they have booked hotels, they have booked flights, they have booked time off work, they have arranged work cover etc.

Now 2 months before the event, they have changed the schedule and have added days in November. Can you really not think of NOTHING that you could possibly have planned for November which you wouldn't want to miss? Your wedding? Your daughters wedding? Birth of a child? An operation? A round the world cruise? Christening? Visit of a relative from overseas? An important work visit / meeting /trip? You can't think of anything that would create a difficulty?

This hasn't been changed for NEXT year, when you can make plans based on what the schedule is. It's been changed for THIS year, TWO months before the event, and two months AFTER original schedule was announced.

And then there are the other things that could happen in 4 months which you DONT know about - i've already posted about that.

Ranger390 · May 1, 2008

Rob: One would have to read the fine print, but it's possible that some lawyer might read the original announcement and an associated rules as a legally binding contract, especially for those who have already qualified or paid their entry based on those rules.

OzExorcist · May 1, 2008

robwhufc said:
Oh, and it's been officially announced on the WSOP site.

World Series of Poker - Official Tournament Coverage and Results

Guess that makes you 100% wrong!

I guess it does - you think they'd update the official structure sheet, huh...

As for Negranu being in favour of it (and the rest of the PAC members), my guess reading between the lines is they're saying "The Main Event is just a donkey crapshoot... and we've got the $50K HORSE event to keep us amused, so do what you like!"

Game-wise, there's no way this change can work in the favour of any pro that makes the final table.

zachvac · May 1, 2008

OzExorcist said:
I guess it does - you think they'd update the official structure sheet, huh...

As for Negranu being in favour of it (and the rest of the PAC members), my guess reading between the lines is they're saying "The Main Event is just a donkey crapshoot... and we've got the $50K HORSE event to keep us amused, so do what you like!"

Game-wise, there's no way this change can work in the favour of any pro that makes the final table.

Sorry but for a pro that makes the final table, they're not exactly worried about a few months of an amateur getting better. If you're a poker pro you truly believe you are the best player at the table. Is a few months of coaching going to transform an amateur to one of the best players in the world? I don't think Phil Ivey's worrying about a Jamie Gold getting good enough to beat him in the time off.

OzExorcist · May 1, 2008

zachvac said:
Sorry but for a pro that makes the final table, they're not exactly worried about a few months of an amateur getting better. If you're a poker pro you truly believe you are the best player at the table. Is a few months of coaching going to transform an amateur to one of the best players in the world? I don't think Phil Ivey's worrying about a Jamie Gold getting good enough to beat him in the time off.

While granted, they may not be wetting their pants in fear at the prospect, they're still giving up an edge. They're not going to improve significantly in the meantime - their opponents might.

Like I said earlier, I suspect this is probably a "Meh, we gave up on the Main Event years ago anyway" move on the part of the pros that were consulted.

JimmyBrizzy · May 1, 2008

I still say 3 months is a little bit of a stretch for it to still be the same event. Maybe a month, but this turns the rest of the tournament into a huge satellite to a one table event.

I also think everyone needs to calm down about this calling people's opinion's idiotic and all that is just immature, because in the end this will hopefully help poker for the exposure and build up. If not they will go back to the original format.

But truely no one here will probaly ever be effected by this decision (but if you are affected then more power to you.)

OzExorcist · May 1, 2008

Likminutz said:
But truely no one here will probaly ever be effected by this decision (but if you are affected then more power to you.)

Actually, that's the thing - I'm more irritated by this as a fan than I am as a player, and that's the way it affects me.

As a fan, this means I've gotta wait three months to find out who wins, just so that a few thousand more average joes will be inclined to watch the TV coverage.

JimmyBrizzy · May 1, 2008

True. I meant more the playing situation of the 9 people at the table.

WSOP ME Final Table to be delayed...

what do u think of this?

it is good for the game

it sucks

i really dont care as im not going to play the main event

bastard!!!!

KingCurtis

Legend

robwhufc

Cardschat Elite

KingCurtis

Legend

aliengenius

Cardschat Elite

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle

CfPoker

Rock Star

arahel_jazz

Unbalanced and Committed

zachvac

Legend

Ranger390

Rock Star

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle

robwhufc

Cardschat Elite

Effexor

Cardschat Elite

robwhufc

Cardschat Elite

robwhufc

Cardschat Elite

Ranger390

Rock Star

robwhufc

Cardschat Elite

aliengenius

Cardschat Elite

robwhufc

Cardschat Elite

Ranger390

Rock Star

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle

zachvac

Legend

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle

JimmyBrizzy

Visionary

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle

JimmyBrizzy

Visionary

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site