Quote:
Originally Posted by Frenbar
This is a straw man argument and tremendously idiotic. Why is it so hard for you to understand that poker players are interested in watching all the final tables? How do you view it as some sort of attitude of entitlement that we would like to watch these final tables? It was the WSOP and Pokergo who set up the $10 fee - not poker players. The fact that we are left with an extremely substandard service that shows only a fractions of the final tables and blacks out the rest of them due to their exclusive license to show the games is (and should be) insulting to poker players. I'd rather pay $10 per final table and actually be able to watch all the tournaments (especially the non-holdem tourneys that are almost entirely missing this year) than have jackasses keep saying that I should be happy that I'm offered the opportunity to watch a fraction of them.
If they want to engender some goodwill why not sent out an intern with a webcam to stream the non-covered final tables without commentary? Pretending that poker fans don't have a valid reason to be upset when a huge portion of the final tables, including the vast majority of high buy in mixed games, are blacked out, is ridiculous, no matter how many times you repeat it.
I fully understand that poker players want to watch all of the final tables. Probably because I'm a poker player too and I would much prefer to see them all too.
I fail to see how the WSOP have any say in how much PokerGo charge. Much as The Premier League have no say in how much Sky charge for their subscription.
They bought the rights. They charge what they feel the can get away with.
The fact is the previous coverage was paid for by the players rake. Most of the viewers had contributed nothing to that rake. The only valid complaint is that the rake wasn't reduced to reflect the removal of that particular overhead to the WSOP.
Just because you don't agree with an argument, it doesnt make it a straw man.