Wsop Schedule 2008

[compncards 0]

Daniel (or anyone that knows)How much input did you guys have in this years schedule. After last years schedule, I was looking forward to another outstanding year. This schedule in some ways is a step back in my opinion. Did you all have less input? To me last years schedule looked like the players council put it together and this years schedule looks more like it was monkeyed with by Harrahs. If I am wrong please feel free to correct me but overall Im disappointed. I will say that I like the Mixed event, although I would have liked to see a smaller buyin version. I do like that there is a $1500 HORSE this time. Otherwise overall the schedule to me looks like a step back.Any opinions are welcome and encouraged.

[showstopper24 0]

Well, it's cool that the HORSE trophy is named after Reese.Also, the 10k heads up sounds good. I remeber Daniel saying that he wanted a higher buy in heads up event for bracelet winners-maybe this higher buy in (last year was it was 5k) is from the player's imput.

[compncards 0]

I agree with that too. I didnt see that they were going to do that with the HORSE trophy until after I made this post. However, the 50k HORSE event isnt part of what I didnt like. Things like doing away with SHOE and the 1k Stud 8 event just irk me. I dont know if any of you were at the series etc but the mixed events were like playing in an All Star event every time just about. It was a blast, even if I had to play in the tent quite a bit. I like the fact that I had to skip events due to having to focus where Im good. I had to skip the Daniel Invitational because the 1500 Limit was the next day. (Good choice too as I cashed) Im probably just too picky but honestly if I go, ill probably end up at one of the other concurrent events a lot more like I did last year. Binions had a great event with most of the games at the WSOP at 1/10 th the buyin and with very strong fields, both numbers and player wise. I realize that Harrahs wants to make all the money they can and thats likely what fueled it. Its just a disappointing schedule to me after last years excellent run.

[compncards 0]

Ok. My argument looked a little weak so I guess Ill state a little more why. These are some of my beefs1. Stud events reduced from 3 to 2. 2. Stud 8 events reduced from 3 to 2. This really irked me. Eliminated the 2k and 1k and made a 1500 Stud 8 and a 5k stud 8. This one really irks me. I love this game and finally there was more than 1 event. I personally played in 2 out the 3 last year. In fact the 1k event is the only reason I stayed the last few days of my trip. 3. Limit Holdem events reduced from 5 to 4. I dont count the mixed holdem events in this. Also what is up with the first Limit event being event 12??? It was event 4 two years ago and event 6 last years. This and the Stud8 irk me. In part its due to the fact I cashed in the 1500 LHE In 2006 and 2007 so the event is one I look forward to. 4. Omaha Hi Lo reduced from 4 to 3. 5. SHOE eliminated. 1 year and done eh? The 10k mixed event is fine...but there are no other buyins at that. Yet Lowball remains with 2 events. I honestly dont know what to say about the plethora of 10k events. You want more 10k, fine. Dont screw with the rest tho. Ill be interested to see the turnout on those.

[drcossack 0]

Ok. My argument looked a little weak so I guess Ill state a little more why. These are some of my beefs1. Stud events reduced from 3 to 2. 2. Stud 8 events reduced from 3 to 2. This really irked me. Eliminated the 2k and 1k and made a 1500 Stud 8 and a 5k stud 8. This one really irks me. I love this game and finally there was more than 1 event. I personally played in 2 out the 3 last year. In fact the 1k event is the only reason I stayed the last few days of my trip. 3. Limit Holdem events reduced from 5 to 4. I dont count the mixed holdem events in this. Also what is up with the first Limit event being event 12??? It was event 4 two years ago and event 6 last years. This and the Stud8 irk me. In part its due to the fact I cashed in the 1500 LHE In 2006 and 2007 so the event is one I look forward to. 4. Omaha Hi Lo reduced from 4 to 3. 5. SHOE eliminated. 1 year and done eh? The 10k mixed event is fine...but there are no other buyins at that. Yet Lowball remains with 2 events. I honestly dont know what to say about the plethora of 10k events. You want more 10k, fine. Dont screw with the rest tho. Ill be interested to see the turnout on those.

1 and 2) Yeah, this annoys me. Stud variants are my best games.3) I might play some LHE tourneys, not sure.4) I hate/suck at Omaha Hi/Lo, moving on.5) Blah, one less game for donks to get stupid in (Razz missing); I'd like to play the 10k mixed event though.Either way, I do know I'm going to have a busy month in Vegas - Venetian's Deep Stack tourneys, Binion's Poker Classic, Bellagio Cup, cash games, and maybe some WSOP events - tentatively scheduling 11 (Stud variants, 6 max and NLHE shootouts)

[DanielNegreanu 141]

We had a lot of input this year in most ways. The 1k Stud 8 was sacrificed for the 10k mixed game event. Not my choice, but one event had to go and it wasn't going to be a hold'em one.

[Andr4w 0]

2k should be the min buyin to any event and the main event should be 25k min

[Lynbrook 0]

2k should be the min buyin to any event and the main event should be 25k min

The Main Event should not be $25K. Part of the reason for the popularity of poker is I can play at a table with Doyle, Ivey, Hellmuth, Negreanu and four other superstars and kick their ass. If you make it 25K, then you'll see the Main Event drop dramatically in entrants, and a lot of common poker players lose interest. I like to see Moneymaker, Raymer, Hachem, Gold and Yang. It's awesome when you see one of them turn into an elite player. I wouldn't mind seeing a 100,000 buy in NLHE. That would be cool. But the Main Event should always be 10K.

[showstopper24 0]

The Main Event should not be $25K. Part of the reason for the popularity of poker is I can play at a table with Doyle, Ivey, Hellmuth, Negreanu and four other superstars and kick their ass. If you make it 25K, then you'll see the Main Event drop dramatically in entrants, and a lot of common poker players lose interest. I like to see Moneymaker, Raymer, Hachem, Gold and Yang. It's awesome when you see one of them turn into an elite player. I wouldn't mind seeing a 100,000 buy in NLHE. That would be cool. But the Main Event should always be 10K.

Yea, a 100k buy in would be cool-like they have at the Aussie millions. I think they had 18 entrants in the Aussie Millions so they would probably have more people if it is in Vegas for a bracelet.

[Frez 0]

The Main Event should not be $25K. Part of the reason for the popularity of poker is I can play at a table with Doyle, Ivey, Hellmuth, Negreanu and four other superstars and kick their ass. If you make it 25K, then you'll see the Main Event drop dramatically in entrants, and a lot of common poker players lose interest. I like to see Moneymaker, Raymer, Hachem, Gold and Yang. It's awesome when you see one of them turn into an elite player. I wouldn't mind seeing a 100,000 buy in NLHE. That would be cool. But the Main Event should always be 10K.

How many $10K tournaments are there each year now? 50? 100? WSOPE 'main event' with 10,000 GBP is double the buy in of the Vegas main event.It's been $10,000 for 30 some years. It used to be a meaningful amount of money, now it's not.$25K would be a perfect amount. Yes it would reduce the field some, but even if the field was half the prize pool would be larger.

[Zach6668 513]

To say that the ME should always be 10k is ignorant, simply for if you disrespect the effects of inflation.It's been 10k since the first WSOP, and the dollar inflates like 3% per year, or whatever.

[compncards 0]

Just make the 50k HORSE event the true "Main Event" and make the current 10k main event the "NL Holdem World Championship"Freddy Deed is the true World Champion of Poker this year, not Jerry Yang. I dont agree with there being a "World Champion of Poker" crowned when all they did was win a NL Holdem tourney...which is 1 form of poker only.Yes, the appeal of the main event is that they can put down 10k and play with the best and potentially beat the best. Do you think those same people could do the same thing in HORSE? Not likely. I know a lot of people will say "But most people cant afford 50k." I know this. Hell, I cant afford 50k to play HORSE. I still want to see the 50k HORSE event the main event however. At least then I can look at the winner and go "Ok, that man can play poker" instead of going "Ya, he won a NL Holdem" tournament. Im wired a little different however. NL Holdem players do not impress me as a general rule. NL Holdem players that can play most or all the other games well and consistently.....THOSE I respect. Phil Ivey impressed me more at the Series than Yang did. Phil only cashed 2 times...both final tables. 3rd in a HORSE event and 2nd in the 5k Stud event if I remember correctly.

[dscoot 0]

To say that the ME should always be 10k is ignorant, simply for if you disrespect the effects of inflation.It's been 10k since the first WSOP, and the dollar inflates like 3% per year, or whatever.

8million to first sure is nice! Seriously, with 10k u get enough entrants to make 9th place a millionaire (when matesow got 9th). What other tournament can boast that! If it was 25k entry i highly doubt u would make a million until final 4, due to the smaller size of field. I also like the idea that u have to beat a 6-8thousand person field to win this tournament. Its one of a kind. Making the main event >10k might end up ruining the growth of the game, please Daniel I beg for you to not lobby for this.

[Balloon guy 158]

They should make the Main Event $100.Then they would get like 40,00000 entrants.That would be cool

[Frez 0]

They should make the Main Event $100.Then they would get like 40,00000 entrants.That would be cool

LOL - indeed, the ultimate arguement against making a low buy in event "The World Championship", and let's face it, $10K is no longer a high buy in event.

I also like the idea that u have to beat a 6-8thousand person field to win this tournament. Its one of a kind.

6-8-10 thousand poeple may be "one of a kind", but it also lotterizes (I made that word up all by myself!) the event. When the field is too large, you have to escape too many bad beats to advance, so (bad) luck becomes an overwhelming factor.This has been debated before, but let's run through it again. Say you're a top player with excellent reading ability and you're great at inducing all-in bluffs from your opponents. In fact, you can frequently get them to bluff you when you are a 90% favourite. Let's just say you can do this every 2 hours of playing. The ME takes 4 days of 12 hours a day, so you can do this 24 times. Biggest tournament in the world, huge prize pool, and you can get your money in as a huge favourite two dozen times - SWEET.Or not... You have less than an 8% chance of of surviving.You are a 90% fav the first time.81% to make it twice (90% x 90%)72.9% to survive thrice (90% x 90% x 90%)etc, etc. just plug 0.9^(# of all ins) into your calculator and you get the idea.Why do you think the final ME table is not full of people who we know are the best in the world - they have to escape too many lotteries to make it.compncards has the right idea. Run a $25K event for the "World Champion NLHE Player", and call the winner of the $50K HORSE the "World Champion POKER Player".

[SpiderGuard 0]

Why do you think the final ME table is not full of people who we know are the best in the world - they have to escape too many lotteries to make it.compncards has the right idea. Run a $25K event for the "World Champion NLHE Player", and call the winner of the $50K HORSE the "World Champion POKER Player".

I don't get why people care about this. You are free to call whoever you want the world champion of poker - no one's going to stop you. The idea of one tournament winner being declared the best isn't necessarily the most logical thing in the world anyway - I doubt many people would assert that Freddy Deeb was the best poker player in the world last year.

[Frez 0]

Ya, anything that is one off is stubject to chance. The NFL playoffs are a less reliable indicator of the best team in the league than the NHL playoffs for example.SpiderGuard - is there some way to censor your picture? I just ate...

[NickZepp 0]

I can see both sides of the argument. 10k makes the WSOP what it's been. But even if it was changed to 25k we have a lot more entrances the last few years because of online poker. Now they leveled off because of the law passed the last couple of years. I wouldn't mind seeing it raised. But you'll still see a lot of qualifiers get in that have no business being there, yet they will make the final table.