In terms of projecting poker as a sport, and not some glitzy luck-fest, this is clearly the way to go. The fact that some people found it boring is totally expected, and doesn't mean the format itself is a bad idea. There are lots of sports which people find boring the first time they watch it. There are plenty of people who have switched off a football game, or golf, and then as they've slowly gotten into the sport, have become die-hard fans. Furthermore, who cares if recreational Americans are turning off their television sets during live coverage? Firstly, even if they watched the whole thing start-to-finish, it isn't as if they are going to jump onto Pokerstars any time soon. Secondly, it isn't live coverage itself which attracts people to start playing poker, its the stories of people playing for huge sums of money - of people winning close to $9 million in a tournament. The Moneymaker effect wasn't sparked by people watching Moneymaker win, it was sparked by the coverage after he'd won.

I thought it was awesome. I watched most of it with one person that hadn't played a single hand of Holdem, and one that plays home games. They both loved the ambiance and the ESPN coverage(although i hated the crowed noise). I had to do a bit of teaching, but it was fun cause they were guessing hands and other dynamics and not even close, so I don't really see not seeing the hands as a problem. The only thing we were all pissed about was the commercial breaks, that **** was almost unbearable.

To be more popular to the public it would need the Aussie Millions timed action structure. With the 30 second timebank added. I enjoy watching all the hands if there is good commentators like Antonio or Negreanu

http://wickedchopspoker.com/breaking...ds-big-rating/

The ratings were pretty good given the length and time of the broadcast.I don't know if there will be a breakdown of the figures by time but it wouldn't surprise me if the early part of the broadcast was comparable to last years highlight show.

It took so long because Pius Heinz had to Hollywood almost every frigging hand! That was what tilted me. I had it on Tivo and just double-speeded it every time it was Heinz's action and even then it was too long.

Tbh, it would be a better idea to compare the ratings the WSOP ME coverage got to the ratings ESPN normally gets at that time. If ESPN can increase their ratings in that window compared to their average, through offering live coverage of an event that could stretch out for days and days - thus increasing their ratings still further - that is clearly good business sense.

bink

anyway I thought the coverage was awesome... but I also wish they had live coverage of anand- topolov playing chess for 20 bazillion hours on tv. and wish they had live coverage exactly like this for say ..the 10k plo event or the 50k horse.

The casual viewer- I cant imagine a normal person who doesn't play poker watching this... I mean six hours of two guys "three betting"- I say this in quotations because when you are cv you have no idea what they are talking about even with antonio explaining things. It must've been brutal watching this. The fact that many TWOPLUSTWO-ers were bored with this speaks volumes.. I mean in the general population someone with 100 post on 2p2 and over say 5000 hands of nl microstakes in pokerstars knows more about the game than 99.999% of the population at least.

the best set up imo: make it edited footage and make it like deal or no deal-ish. after all to the most casual viewers who turn it on for more than 30 seconds the one thing that is cool to them is the prospect of 8 million dollars. People who are morally against gambling and think it's "a sin" buy lottery tickets and watch deal or no deal. spend 40 minutes explaining who the characters are and show the big hands for the remaining time. forget about proving poker is a skill game or whatever you nerds are trying to do- just present it as a luck game where people make choices that could lead to 8 MILLION DOLLARS.

then also have web coverage of the actual final table as presented this year so us poker geeks can watch it and put advertising on it.

win win for everybody imo.

really? wow cool. I retract my previous buzzed rambling with a new one. heinz puis heinz PIUS PIUS HEINZ!!

Yep. Hearing the terms "range" and "3bet" etc caught them way off guard and made them feel uncomfortable.

Basically, they should do whatever makes the majority of the audience happy.
This is what will be best for the economy.
They should still have a full unedited livestream for the rest of us ofc.
I actually found out one of my other friends watched it. He liked Antonio's commentary and the idea of thinking about the way players play hands as 'telling a story'. Then again, he is probably the most clever out of all my friends and has a more analytical mind than most.

The audience that positively likes this live footage is very nichy. But we have to realise that most recreational viewers aren't like us, and need to give them what they want, for our benefit.

I only saw maybe 15 or so hands heads up, because the coverage was on at silly O'clock in the UK, but was it him picking his chips up in one hand, and counting it out with his other when he was going to bluff?

I agree with the possibility that not showing the hole cards makes the broadcast more about the commentators than the players.

But showing every hand played was enjoyable. If only they started the November 9 on Friday and ended on Sunday. That, or start the broadcast earlier so viewers aren't up at 2am waiting for the tournament to conclude.

Also wish they did this for the 10k PLO, but whatevs.

I hate everything about the final table nowadays. I hate the several month delay, I hate the "cheering sections," I hate the attempt at creating a greater hoopla for it, etc.

If, however, you are going to do what they now want to, simply sequester the players in a room and show the damn thing w/ hole cards. That is the only way that casual fans (and many serious players as well) will watch.

late night poker had it correct 12 years ago in that they only showed the cards midway through a hand, everything else since has done it wrong

I enjoyed the coverage much more than the normal show. I prefer not to know what they have during the hand. It give me a chance to enjoy the final table and see if my analysis is correct. Hope they do it again next year.

I think they should keep the format, The format encourages participation instead of passive watching. Casual viewers actually learn something.

I would add something to the format though for more entertainment, throw in some sms contests for certain hands.

****Guess the Cards**** for some big money prizes. This would lure in more viewers, recreational/casual viewers love contests and prices. If the challenge is to put players on specific/most likely hands the better players who watch obviously have an edge. Commentators would only announce the action ofcourse during those hands.

Good idea?

edit: maybe alongside sms, develop some sort of app to input your cards for the contest.

if the commentators like esfanadiary weren't there, I guess it would have been 100x more boring, especially for non recreational players.Since recreational players have no idea whom he is and think he's just another commentator.

I still think my idea of two separate coverages is the best way to resolve what die hard fans want and the action only highlight others prefer.

Live stream (or 15 minute delay, w/e) for the first group, then edit the package for the second group (although I think they should stick with the editing concept they did this year, which showed more "regular" but interesting hands instead of all knockouts and huge pots).

Run the FT all the way to a winner instead of the two day gap with the 15 minute delay live stream, then take the two days to edit for the Tuesday night highlight package for the other fans.

I thought the coverage on Sunday was fantastic and engrossing. Once it got down to 2 players, it started to drag on. Maybe they could add a play clock which started only when heads up and allow them to broadcast the hole cards.

Maybe showing hole cards will help maybe not...I watched the live coverage last year on ESPN3, and I got bored with the heads up match last year too. They need to speed up play to make it interesting. I'm not sure if there is much they can do without altering too much and potentially destroying the integrity of the game.

This is an amazing idea, it's similar to the barrett jackson auto auctions they have on Speed, you have to try and predict what the cars sell for and you can win an iPad and other stuff.

This would encourage critical & logical thinking while inadvertently improving the casual viewers game(which isn't really a good thing I guess).

Very interesting. For a thinking player, this format is so vastly superior that I never even considered anyone would prefer the old way. It seems so much more rewarding to find out the cards after the hand, but I guess this simply isn't the case for mouth breathers.

This line of thinking is so foreign to me. What does he mean no more bluff of the century?? We still get to find out what they have!! Do people get some sort of thrill sweating along with them? Like they put themselves in the players shoes and their heart rate goes up or some nonsense?

I suppose if this is what the casual player wants, then I am all for returning to that format. On a personal entertainment level, it's a shame, as this was the first main event I have watched since Eastgate and I thought the live coverage this summer and for the FT was awesome... but we have to give the people what they want if we hope to keep poker in the public spotlight.

Yes this is exactly what they like to do and they like to do it with all the information. Its like drama shows on TV everyone loves where the viewer knows both sides of the drama and people love to watch the ensuing trainwreck or great call that they will say was easy cause he knew the guy had a lower pair cause it shows it on the screen.

im a micro/casual player and i liked a lot the coverage.
only problem was that ended at 8.30 of morning in portugal, i was so sleepy..

HU match was way boring.

It's a lot better if they show the hole cards for entertainment purposes. Casual people don't want to even think for half a second while watching TV.

as for encouraging critical and logical thinking--people have done just fine w/o it and don't care. In fact, it's probably a big negative on the casual viewer. They just want to go FOLD/CALL YOU IDIOT at the TV and whatnot.

Showing hole cards won't work without a mandatory shot clock so to speak for what should be an obvious reason.

Not sure what was worse; Lon or Antonio being wrong most of the time. Lon can't even figure out basic things like if someone has two pair or whatever they have.

The best solution appears to be some medium where we can get the coverage as live as possible but also as entertaining as possible, but that's a real challengeas to how to pull that off. This year's coverage shouldn't have been interesting whatsoever to the casual viewer imo though and I couldn't even stand the HU. Still can't believe Stazko folded the Qh6h Pretty much a snap call situation there considering how likely his opponent just had a 5/4 in his hand and enough in the pot. Dunno why he thought with those blinds/stack he was such a huge fav to grind him down. Probably will regret that fold for quite a long time.

just show the hole cards FFS.

If you don't want to see them stick some tape on your screen and turn off the sound. Nobody seems to have been impressed with the commentary anyway.

FWIW though I'd be happy if they alternated between showing the cards and not showing them...say in groups of 5 hands at a time.