1. Home

Discuss in my forum

Al Moe

2012 World Series of Poker - Too Slow?

By November 7, 2012

Follow me on:

If you watched the 2012 World Series of Poker Championship live on ESPN, did you think it was too slow and boring? I'm not positive why Caesar's Entertainment wants to delay the tournament from July other than to keep the WSOP in the news for more months out of the year, but I have issues with that idea.

Aside from my own idea that and tournament should be played straight through until a winner is declared, I don't like the fact that the players can dig for information about each other for months, recuperate from the exhaustion they felt, and then start fresh. I'd much prefer seeing the cards the players are holding, also. If you have ever seen replays of the old WSOP tournaments from CBS sports, you know they weren't that great. I'd much rather read about the individual players and how the final hands went in The Championship Table by Tom McEvoy. At least in the book (1970 to 2007 included) you get to go at your own pace.

However, with the WPT and the WSOP showing the player's starting hands, poker on TV gained quick and amazing popularity. This year, as far as I am concerned, the WSOP went back a dozen years. What do you think?

Comments

November 14, 2012 at 2:26 am
(1) Roy Ritner says:

I thought the 2 pros agreed to play small ball because they could out play the kid from ASU. I do like the show and the delay and all the drama, getting a coach, tracking the play of the other players from the televised shows. It’s there for all to be had. I was amazed at the quality of play except for the Chinese player and the oldest player…do you have to be young to win…..hummmm.

November 20, 2012 at 10:29 am
(2) lucy says:

I miss them not showing the entire 7 days. With so many pros being knocked out, like to see when/how it happened. I miss seeing some of the “people of interest”, like the 96 year old, the blind guy and the one guy who played with his toes. Most of them never got to the money, but they were interesting and you wanted to root for them.

I dislike having to set my DVR for 12 hours to see when the winner wins, since no one wants to stay up till 6 am and then go to work the next day. Last year, they eventually did have the final table edited to 2 hours with the hole cards shown, so could see each hole card hand, which is more interesting to see what they were bluffing or raising on.

And I agree about not delaying it for 3 months. If they had done that back when Jamie Gold won, with the delay and with his luck of cards, may have run out in that time and most likely would not have won that year.

November 28, 2012 at 12:11 pm
(3) CHUCKIN8OR says:

My feelings on this particular issue are kind of mixed. Honestly, I don’t really like too much how they are doing it now, it just for some reason not as exciting to me as the old way they did it. Yet, on the other hand myself and a lot of friends who play as much poker as I do to some who don’y play at all or very little enjoyed watching it the old way. However, watchin g the game the ols way, a lot of my friends tend to critcize how the players played there hands made bad plays, moves etc.. I would always argue that it is very easy to critcize there play when you can see the cards and know what the players are holding. By telecasting the games the way they do now people get to see now more how the game is really played and can’t take it now for as much granted when they can see the whole cards.

Leave a Comment


Line and paragraph breaks are automatic. Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title="">, <b>, <i>, <strike>
  1. About.com
  2. Home
  3. Casino Gambling

©2014 About.com. All rights reserved.