WPT Final Tables are a Joke

[xDiamond_CutteRx]

I could not disagree more with any of Sexton's points. There is no competition in the world that is "better served" by having bad players beat good players. All that does is frustrate the good players, who draw the audience. I want to see creative and good players make great moves on TV. Not a bunch of donkeys push all-in pre-flop and luck out with 2-outters on the f*cking river.

WSOP somehow manages to film the entire 12+ hour show, keep the audience in the crowd interested, AND condense the material to less than a 2 hour show. So all I'm led to believe here is that WPT management is full of cheapskates.

"Good players don't bitch about structures. They adapt to them." Bullshit. Complete and utter bullshit. Turning the game into a move-in fest is not "adapting." It's like playing roulette.

I recognize that WPT has done a lot for Poker, and in the first three seasons they did a lot to build Poker up. But with the start of Season 4, they seem to be doing everything possible to degrade the game.

[Miss_J]

I just think it's tough for the newbies out there who are "learning" from this.

this doesn't bother me!

[BeerWench13]

Good point, Miss J.

[flafishy]

Then how do you guys explain the continued success of WSOP broadcasts? The hands they show have the same retarded "excitement" factor as any WPT broadcasts, but they don't have to change their structure to screw the players.

The WSOP is not a made-for-TV event. The WPT is.

WSOP somehow manages to film the entire 12+ hour show, keep the audience in the crowd interested, AND condense the material to less than a 2 hour show.

What audience? There is no studio audience at the WSOP.

And ESPN spends months editing that material, which doesn't air until half a year after the event. And ESPN does one event a year.

The WPT turns things around in a couple of weeks about what, 14 or 15 times a year?

Big difference.

[zinn0]

What audience? There is no studio audience at the WSOP.

I beg to differ. There IS an audience around every ESPN/WSOP featured table.

[xDiamond_CutteRx]

WPT was not originally "made for TV." It was merely a televised series of tournaments like the WSOP.

A few other points of fact. Including the Circuit events, WSOP aired 24 episodes last year. That "one event" including about as many tournaments as the entire WPT. Also, the WPT just aired three events in the last three weeks--The Mirage Poker Showdown, the Legends of Poker, and the Borgata Open. Those three events took place in May, August, and September of last year, respectively, so I don't buy for a minute that they didn't have enough time to edit.

I'm not trying to get in anyone's face. I simply cannot stand what WPT is doing, and I think it's horrible for Poker.

[flafishy]

What audience? There is no studio audience at the WSOP.

I beg to differ. There IS an audience around every ESPN/WSOP featured table.

I didn't say there is no audience. I said there's no studio audience. The audience at the WPT events are part of the manufactured environment, while at the WSOP, they're incidental to the TV production.

It was the appearance of the WPT and its table camera (it was indeed a creation for TV) along with the movie Rounders and Moneymaker's WSOP title that spawned the current poker explosion. All of them were equally responsible.

You might not like what the WPT is doing, and that's fine. You're entitled to your opinion and you can choose not to watch if you want. But to say it's bad for poker is an absolutely ridiculous statement that flies in the face of reality.

[TxShadow]

I'm not trying to get in anyone's face. I simply cannot stand what WPT is doing, and I think it's horrible for Poker.

Now don't get me wrong, I completely relate to most of the things you're saying. I would personally rather see great players make amazing reads and plays and the tournament be decided by who the best player is. However, I don't think it's fair to say that what the WPT is doing is horrible for poker.

Again, the structure that they use makes for good TV. Maybe not necessarily for you and me, but for the majority of people who may or may not be as in to poker as some of the people on this forum. Perfect example: I talk to plenty of people at my office that don't play poker at all, but they love watching the WPT. However, I can almost assure you that they couldn't tell me who won the last 3 main events in the WSOP. They don't know what "pot odds" are. They probably couldn't even name 3 top pros.

Love the WPT or hate it, but I don't think you can say that what it's doing is bad for poker. It gets people into poker that otherwise wouldn't be. The more people that are in to it, the more of it we get to watch (some good quality, some bad). Not to mention, the more people that get hooked on poker, the more profitable card rooms everywhere become. :p

[galderon]

Love the WPT or hate it, but I don't think you can say that what it's doing is bad for poker. It gets people into poker that otherwise wouldn't be. The more people that are in to it, the more of it we get to watch (some good quality, some bad). Not to mention, the more people that get hooked on poker, the more profitable card rooms everywhere become. :p

Just look at Celebrity Poker. A lot people say, "Yeah, I'm into poker...I love watching Celebrity Poker on TV!" Of course, Celebrity Poker is far from we consider "poker". Still, it generates interest and educates people on what hands beat what, and that's usually the first stumbling block for people getting into it. WPT is kind of in-between WSOP and Celebrity.