100k buy in event...

[KingAustin 0]

8)

AlfWhat I do like.....is the idea of adding ONE tournament after the main event....and have the tournament be only for the current year's bracelet winners....that would be cool....and would be a real Tournament of Champions.....

Alf........i really like your idea.............

What would be the game.........................(going along with the mass amounts of periods that seem to be popular).....................

[sdevilgal 0]

8)

AlfWhat I do like.....is the idea of adding ONE tournament after the main event....and have the tournament be only for the current year's bracelet winners....that would be cool....and would be a real Tournament of Champions.....

Alf........i really like your idea.............

What would be the game.........................(going along with the mass amounts of periods that seem to be popular).....................

It would be cool if it were a mix game like the tourney they took out.

[Smasharoo 0]

What I do like.....is the idea of adding ONE tournament after the main event....and have the tournament be only for the current year's bracelet winners....that would be cool....and would be a real Tournament of Champions.....That'd be great. Then some complete unkown could win that, too. Don't you guys get it yet?You have to be lucky to win a 6600 person tournament, you have to be lucky to win a 4 person tournament, etc. Escelating blinds = more luck involved as the stack to blid ratio changes. One individual tournament is utterly meaningless. If the best player wins a particular tournament it's cooincidece.Long term performace is what matters.

[mark33f 0]

For the last time, we already have a 25K championship, and look what it drew a wopping 452 players. The World Series should not be changed for the following reasons:1. Harrahs is makeing a butt load of money on the vig 452 players will never pay as much in fees as 6600.2. The prizepool for the WPT Championship was tiny when compared to the WSOP.3. Lastly, for all of you who complain about who wins the WSOP, lets just take one look at who won the WPT Championship.

The prize pool for the WPT Championship was smaller even though there is a bigger buy-in is because the WSOP has way more marketing draw than the WPT. You guys don't seem to understand poker is about business now. Corporations and businesses are JUST trying to make more and more and more money. They don't care if their event has a final table of newbie internet qualifiers! This is what they want. That only makes poker even more marketable to the masses and the hoards of people will come to play thinking they could win.They DON'T care about determining a World Champion...they care about making money.

[deviper 0]

Remember when playing in the WSOP was a big deal... that was in like the 1970s... 10k really meant something then...If you threw 10 grand in a solid interest bearing investment in the 70's you would have over a million bucks...So, those guys who use to play 10k tournaments back then were true gamblers... they were not afraid to put their livelyhood outhere because they believed they were just that good.I think the main event should cost 100k to buy in... so we can actually see a smaller field of elite talents once again...Now days any chump who has watched Rounders one to many times can save for a year or two and buy in...Thoughts about the idea, PLEASE.

Thats what the WSOP is all about, anyone can win. I know we would all like to see a pro win it buts thats not going to happen every time.

[pokepoke1967 0]

I have a better idea however. You start a tourney with a $100,000 buy-in! Call it the American Express Presents Earth's Championship of $100,000 Buy-in Poker Tournements!

[LooseCannon 0]

Unfortunately if you raise the buy in to $100k you will only get a few of the top players playing and wind up with a tournament for rich guys only.(Sorry elitist events like this already exist and they are called the Americas and Admiral's Cup for sailing whilst in Motor Racing it is called Formula 1 and they cost millions so the winners are ALWAYS the richest).Sadly most of the top players can't afford a $100k entry fee.

Well, it will be a few of the richest, plus a bunch of online qualifiers.I have always contended that raising buy-ins hurts primarily mid-level pros who probably would not play very many 10K tournaments if not staked. I am thinking along the lines of a player like Al Krux last year. The money that would back those players is instead going to get a piece of big names who can't afford 100K. Meanwhile, the online sites will just crank out the same amount of money spent on buy-ins going toward a fewer number of total buy-ins for internet qualifiers, so it's not as if you are getting rid of these players that the uninformed complain about.

[alf13 0]

That'd be great.  Then some complete unkown could win that, too.  Don't you guys get it yet?You have to be lucky to win a 6600 person tournament, you have to be lucky to win a 4 person tournament, etc.  Escelating blinds = more luck involved as the stack to blid ratio changes.  One individual tournament is utterly meaningless.  If the best player wins a particular tournament it's cooincidece.Long term performace is what matters.

I am not suggesting that the tournament will prove who is the best player in any given year.....I was just suggesting that it would be a cool idea.....as for the game......It IS the World Series of POKER.....Poker is all the games.....so i would suggest that this be at least a H.O.R.S.E. tournament.

[HarryDemetriou 0]

My personal suggestion for resolving this problem is to have an extended WSOP like they have now where it lasts for 6 weeks (or even longer).Every week or fortnight you have a selection or series of events including a first day for the main event.In this way players can come for a week or two and also play in a first day for the 10k main event.Let us say that Mondays are designated first days for the main event.Then for the first five weeks we can have five first days each with 2000 players giving us a total of 10000 players.The top 200 (say) in each of these five first days could then all be in the money and come back on the sixth monday to play the final stages of the main event with a carryover of their chips during this final week or ten days.This is obviously not going to be to everyone's liking but personally I think it is a reallistic solution that will allow the buy in to remain at 10k and allow a lot more players to play in it too and also accomodate those that wish to come along for a few events and then return at a later date.If the WSOP series were extended to 10 weeks then we could have 18000 players as an example and 1800 carried through to the final stages.This would then allow for very large numbers of participants, permit the buy in to remain at current levels and allow for 10% of the field to be paid and help avoid turning people away or having the event capped at a certain number.

[happyjuggler0 0]

The only way you can have a 100k buyin and still get a decent field is if you ran 1 table Sats...for 10k and even then...how many people would buyin to a 10k sng....that pays a seat?What I do like.....is the idea of adding ONE tournament after the main event....and have the tournament be only for the current year's bracelet winners....that would be cool....and would be a real Tournament of Champions.....The Player of the year also gets freerolled into it....even if he had not won a bracelet that year....That would be cool.....

Ok I thought I was going crazy and was the only one who felt this way. I was checking out how the alleged WSOP Tournament of Champions qualifiers make it in. Basically the circuit tournaments each qualify 20 players, and the 9 players from the WSOP main event qualify, for a grand total of 6 actual champions and about 100 also-rans. Granted they did exceptionally well to be an "also-ran", but they aren't champions in the sense of a champion being the winner of an event.I can't fault the Harrah"s folks for wanting to rpomote their properties and get people into their poker rooms around the country. But it is not really a TOC this way, and to deny the actual 40+ bracelet winners (aka WSOP Champions)an entry is mystifying to me.

[happyjuggler0 0]

My personal suggestion for resolving this problem is to have an extended WSOP like they have now where it lasts for 6 weeks  (or even longer).Every week or fortnight you have a selection or series of events including a first day for the main event.In this way players can come for a week or two and also play in a first day for the 10k main event.Let us say that Mondays are designated first days for the main event.Then for the first five weeks we can have five first days each with 2000 players  giving us a total of 10000 players.The top 200 (say) in each of these five first days could then all be in the money and come back on the sixth monday to play the final stages of the main event with a carryover of their chips during this final week or ten days.This is obviously not going to be to everyone's liking but personally I think it is a reallistic solution that will allow the buy in to remain at 10k and allow a lot more players to play in it too and also accomodate those that wish to come along for a few events and then return at a later date.If the WSOP series were extended to 10 weeks then we could have 18000 players as an example and 1800 carried through to the final stages.This would then allow for very large numbers of participants, permit the buy in to remain at current levels and allow for 10% of the field to be paid and help avoid turning people away or having the event capped at a certain number.

I like your idea a lot, and I suspect the biggest stumbling block is airfare for lots of people. Basically a lot (most) of amateurs and semi-pros, which together make up the bulk of the main event entries these days, would need to make 2 trips. But if it increases the number of entries then I suspect Harrah's would like it.

[Guest Anonymous]

My personal suggestion for resolving this problem is to have an extended WSOP like they have now where it lasts for 6 weeks (or even longer).Every week or fortnight you have a selection or series of events including a first day for the main event.In this way players can come for a week or two and also play in a first day for the 10k main event.Let us say that Mondays are designated first days for the main event.Then for the first five weeks we can have five first days each with 2000 players giving us a total of 10000 players.The top 200 (say) in each of these five first days could then all be in the money and come back on the sixth monday to play the final stages of the main event with a carryover of their chips during this final week or ten days.This is obviously not going to be to everyone's liking but personally I think it is a reallistic solution that will allow the buy in to remain at 10k and allow a lot more players to play in it too and also accomodate those that wish to come along for a few events and then return at a later date.If the WSOP series were extended to 10 weeks then we could have 18000 players as an example and 1800 carried through to the final stages.This would then allow for very large numbers of participants, permit the buy in to remain at current levels and allow for 10% of the field to be paid and help avoid turning people away or having the event capped at a certain number.

funny i was just thinkin the same thing.???????????????????????????????????????????????????

[Guest XXEddie]

Now days any chump who has watched Rounders one to many times can save for a year or two and buy in...and die on Day 1maybe day 2 if they decided not to show up

[Dixie Wrecked 0]

Every week or fortnight you have a selection or series of events including a first day for the main event.

Heheh.... "fortnight".....Harry's cool using words like fortnight and wanker. I wish he was on my fantasy team cuz he's doing pretty well.What is a "fortnight" by the way?

[Dixie Wrecked 0]

The only way you can have a 100k buyin and still get a decent field is if you ran 1 table Sats...for 10k and even then...how many people would buyin to a 10k sng....that pays a seat?What I do like.....is the idea of adding ONE tournament after the main event....and have the tournament be only for the current year's bracelet winners....that would be cool....and would be a real Tournament of Champions.....The Player of the year also gets freerolled into it....even if he had not won a bracelet that year....That would be cool.....

This is a really good idea. The Tournament of Champions could be held on a fortnight.

[HarryDemetriou 0]

A fortnight is a fourteen day period.Unfortunately Harrah's Poker officials do not listen to me but most people I've mentioned this to think it's a good idea.Now just imagine how much more helpful we as players could be to Harrah's if they bothered consulting us or listened to our suggestions. I'm sure there are brighter people than myself who could help them out in all areas of poker tournament organization.They make more money, we as players are happier and the event and everyone concerned benefits.

[theresa113 0]

Dixie said...

Heheh.... "fortnight".....Harry's cool using words like fortnight and wanker.I wish he was on my fantasy team cuz he's doing pretty well.

Harry is on my team! Number 5! Wished I would have put him at Number 1! Most of my players are not doing well. I absolutely LOVE reading Harry's post. They feel so fancy and formal. It makes me realize how poor I use the English language.

[HatTrick 0]

Remember when playing in the WSOP was a big deal... that was in like the 1970s... 10k really meant something then...If you threw 10 grand in a solid interest bearing investment in the 70's you would have over a million bucks...

To quote Barbie: "Math is hard!"

[LooseCannon 0]

I see two groups of people who are going to be shut out of the main event under this plan:1) People who plan on playing only if they do well in one of the smaller events.2) People who come to the WSOP and plan to qualify through satellites being run at the same time.Out of fairness, people ought to be assigned to first days randomly if you are doing multiple first days, so everyone should be bought in and assigned to a day before the whole things starts.Actually, one problem with multiple starting days has been a perceived unfair disadvantage if you draw the last starting day and get no break. This makes me think that putting the multiple day ones consecutively, then putting a smaller events or two in between to give everyone a fair break of at least a day, before going back to the main event might be nice. You could put the women's event in that spot, for example, along with the media charity event. It might be unfair for a woman who wants to play both the women's event and the main event, but perhaps not.I do think, however, that cutting 2000 down to 200 in one day is an unlikely target for one day, given that the current plan is to cut down 2200 to 500-650 on each of the day ones. I am guessing that competent dealers may be the lmiiting factor in how many you can play on a single day, so more than four day ones might require multiple day two flights.