You and WellReadTed could have quite the brainstorming session lol….

The WSOP should turn Bally's into a poker themed Hotel.

You pretty much just summed up the biggest problem with the WSOP. You don't see the NFL still leaning on Joe Montana and Johnny Unitas. It's onward and upward, whereas the WSOP is permanently stuck in the past. There are great players today and there are entertaining players today but the WSOP does not give them a proper platform.

BTW, winning 16 bracelets is a great feat but an individual bracelet is so commonplace today that the response to someone winning one is pretty much "Who cares?"

That's harsh and not the friendliest of replies.

I am not from a cultural environment associated with firearm ownership and am happy to be lifted out of my ignorance. These are not sarcastic questions, and would appreciate polite (and well-reasoned ) answers:

Should the topic of concealed weapons during a poker tournament not be raised?
Is it poor etiquette to ask someone (when the ongoing conversation has been about regional differences in political viewpoints) if they are carrying?
Is asking a Texan about handgun ownership considered offensive?
Does WSOP/Nevada prohibit concealed carry and, if so, was my question viewed as asking them to admit to an illegal act?


"Ignorance is a banquet table laying bare; filling it with lovingly-prepared dishes honors all who participate."

You're obviously not from a cultural environment associated with simple google searches either.

Sick brag Greg

With just a bit more effort you could have provided some answers to lessen my ignorance. Why the animosity?

While reading his post I was thinking they should just turn Ballys into Ted's poker hotel.

Completely different. Unlike football where stars are born based on their play, you also need to have a personality to make it big in poker. Who are these great players from today that are entertaining? Im genuinely curious, there may be some that I dont know of but almost all of the big crushers are mute.

Being quiet at the table doesn't mean these players don't have personality. This idea that entertainment should be derived from players talking is ridiculous and totally flawed. We might as well just watch a bunch of dudes sit around a table having crumpets and tea.

Conor McGregor is a huge personality but he doesn't need to show any personality during a fight in order for the fight to be entertaining. Getting players to talk more at the table is just putting lipstick on the pig. The real problem is not with the players so much as it is with the game. The game needs to be adjusted and altered to provide a more entertaining product. If players have to talk in order for the game to be enjoyable to watch, there are severe problems with the game.

That's not to say the players' personality doesn't matter. That should be on full display leading up to the event, which would help fans become emotionally invested in the players (which begs the question as to why in 2022 the crown jewel of the WSOP is still an event played by thousands of novice amateurs).

If the WSOP wants to grow/expand and get back on major TV then huge changes need to be made and most people won't/can't wrap their head around that because everyone is so used to the same boring product we've been watching for years.

Needs more love

Which players today are entertaining and exciting? Also which older person from the past does the WSOP lean on that doesn't play anymore like Montana?

Yah they're common place, but no one is near Phil's rate of winning them. Even with more events and smaller high roller specialty fields no one is matching what Phil has been doing. Maybe I'm wrong and there are younger people doing it better in the WSOP field...IDK.

The WSOP relying on Hellmuth and Negreanu isn’t even remotely comparable to the NFL relying on Montana.

It’s very much comparable to the NFL marketing the crap out of Tom Brady though.

“ why in 2022 the crown jewel of the WSOP is still an event played by thousands of novice amateurs”

There are other sports where the championship includes thousands of amateur entries. These are also where while underdogs these amateurs have a chance. A team of amateurs has no chance to win the Super Bowl. The same is true in other major team sports. But poker is not a major sport and is an individual one. So the amateurs can make a better living in another field but still compete at the highest levels and have a measurable chance to win in single event.

A couple of these other sports with amateurs competing against the pros include: golf (The Open and the US Open) and the USBC National Bowling tournament (held in LV in 2022). I imagine there are other examples other posters could list l8ke maybe backgammon, bridge, shooting, etc?

Part of the allure of the WSOP ME is that any amateur can put up his cash and have a chance to win. Take that away and you won’t be helping the game. You will massively harm it.

The vast majority of running events like road & trail races. You can sign up for the New York marathon and collect first place money if you're fast enough.
Triathlon except for events where pros compete in their own category like Kona.
Everything at the Olympics except for the sports that exclude professionals.

I almost went to the marathon example but I have not been in contact with that closes for many years and don't know if there are amateurs with realistic chances to place. That used to be true, especially when Olympics did not allow professionals. Most of the runners had "real jobs" and trained outside of those.

Not sure I would include all the Olympic events since you have to qualify through a national body to get on a national team. But conceptually I agree, in something like the shoot, archery, biathalon and other individual events, if you are good enough, show up, compete nationally and "win" you can then compete in the associated olympics

Not exactly true, you can’t just “sign up” to run the top marathon races, you have to qualify via other races, or the back door way is to raise a certain amount of money for charity to “earn” your bib.

Only Boston is qualifying-only. At NYC you can qualify to get direct entry but otherwise you can get a spot through the lottery.

At the other major marathons (Chicago, Berlin, Paris, London, Tokyo) people usually get in no later than on their second try, NYC might take a little longer.

And while a lot of people can’t qualify for Boston (sub 3 minus x for males under 35) the same can be said about the $10k it costs you to get into the WSOPME.

$1 says they'll rename Bally's to Horseshoe by January 1, 2022.

I don't doubt this may happen if not by Jan 1. before the next WSOP. But it does beg the question if they do rename Bally's before Jan 1 2022, why did they announce the WSOP 2022 would be at Bally's (and Paris) only rename (and eventually rebrand I would expect) a few weeks later.

The rename rumor has been out there for months. So I expect the decision was also made months ago. Then why not announce the rename and new location at the same time as in ..

'The WSOP of 2022 will be held in the new Horseshoe casino located on the Vegas strip in the current Bally's casino' (or similar)

You focused on the word amateurs, but the key word was actually "thousands." That is the real issue in regards to marketing and branding poker to the masses. Year after year this produces a final table full of nobodies (avg like 1 somewhat known player a year, who we probably don't even know that well), and there is day after day of watching players that even the most hardcore poker aficionados could care less about.

I didn't say get rid of the main event. It's just that the game will not grow nor expand to a more mainstream audience if the WSOP Main Event is the focal point for poker every year. The main event did great things for poker back in the aughts, but that was a prerecorded show and the media landscape is completely different going into 2022 than it was back then. If poker is going to get eyeballs on it again, it's certainly not going to be through the main event (in its current configuration).

The wide availability of online poker throughout the U.S. in the “aughts” is what created the success of the Main Event on ESPN back then. A symbiotic relationship to be sure, online poker & televised tournament poker (WPT, WSOP). When one exited the landscape (online poker), it was just a matter of time before televised tournament poker dwindled away to a subscription specialty network.

Negreanu was out of the main event before they had a chance to put him on a TV table. This year they focused on the likes of Erick Lindgren and Barry Greenstein. I don't know how someone can think that is a good thing. Feeling the need to market the likes of "Moneymaker, Doyle Brunson, Johnny Moss, Stu Ungar" in a gift shop as the previous poster recommended simply reinforces the fact that the WSOP is a complete and absolute failure at producing stars today.

Companies with very deep pockets are paying records amounts of money for content today. Live content in particular is in high demand by networks. If the WSOP could produce a good product, someone credible would pay good money for it.

The two other examples I shared have thousands of amateurs competing (and in one case often winning) the title.

Poker will NOT get more eyes as long as it depends on a live stream or unedited hand by hand show. Frankly, for 99+% of people, that is boring. It always was but with the robots of today (which are not the amateurs btw) it is even worse. I agree that the aught's highly edited shows were much more entertaining. But that isn't simply the configuration of the ME it is how the producers have chose to produce this.