ESPN Has Power…Too Much Maybe?

As I type this, the bubble is about to burst in the $50,000 HORSE game at the 2009 WSOP in Las Vegas.  This year, they decided to keep the format to all HORSE, even on the final table, unlike last year where it was decided to make the final table all No Limit Hold’em.  Why?  Answer is very simple…RATINGS!

HORSE is a limit mixed game.  It consists of playing several different limit games all in one tournament…Limit Holdem, Omaha, Razz, Stud, and Stud Eight or better.  Every round is a different variant and players must be solid all around poker players if they hope to make it to the final table.  Its probably the one game that requires the most overall skill to succeed and win at, and that’s why the pros love to play it.  Its a true test of their skills on the most broad arena of poker one can think of to professional play.  And at a $50,000 buyin, its sure bring in only the highest of high rollers and only the best players.  But, its boring as hell to watch.

Last year, it was decide to make the final table all No Limit, effectively changing the tournament, all for one reason.  No Limit gets ratings on television.  And because of that one factor, sponsors were more than happy to pony up the buyin for their pros to play the game, all on the condition that if they made it to the televised final table, their pros would wear the appropriate appreal supporting the sponsor.  Its all about getting their product in front of the TV cameras.  Still, because sponsors were willing to risk the buyin for the added exposure, the field last year was massive for this event, with 148 entrants compared to only 95 this year.

When the decision was made this year to make the final table HORSE instead of NLHE, ESPN choose to not tape the final table.  In TV land, No Limit generates a far larger audience than any limit game could, thereby generating more revenue for the station.  They can turn their noses up at any limit game in favour of adding another no limit to their line up, even without all the skill and pros at the final table, because no limit is just more exciting, even when played by amateurs.  And excitement sells on television.

So will the organizers change it back to a No Limit final table next year?  Most likely yes.  One of the key professionals pushing for it is Daniel Negreanu, who has been a huge influence in a lot of changes to the WSOP over the past few years.  He pushed to have it changed last year because he realized that limit games don’t sell like no limit games, and he knew the ESPN coverage would get more players to the game.  Obviously he was right as shown in this years stats.  But should the game be changed for that reason?  Should rules and formats be adjusted by an outside organization that really shouldn’t have any bearing on a sport whatsoever, just to generate a larger audience?  (It kills me to watch a hockey game on television, and coming back from a commercial break, the camera is targeted on the referee, waiting for his cue to drop the puck).

There’s no doubt poker went from rags to riches a few years ago with the addition of the hole cameras, and that poker on television exploded in popularity.  Honestly, would YOU be playing today if ESPN didn’t capture the thrill and excitement of the game and brought it to you in your own living rooms?  Goes to show you just how much power the media has in our lives, but should this power go so far as change the basic rules of a game we play?

I don’t have an answer, as I’m sure there truly is no right answer.  On the one hand, I want to see the game played as it was meant to be played, and keep the final table of an event the same format as the rest of the game was played by.  But on the other hand, I would like to see more attendance and larger prize pools, and that means catering to the media and the sponsors and changing the rules.

Similar Articles on Fuzion Poker

• Trashing the WSOP Main Event Bracelet?
• Player’s Snooze…and Lose!
• Pro Frustrated with WSOP Donkament!
• Joe Cada Wins 2009 WSOP