poker is dead: negreanu on the state of poker

[getarealjob 0]

:shock: I can't believe I'm beginning to respect this guy. After making a decision to succeed in the big game, taking tournaments more seriously, and thinking about poker as something bigger than himself... His latest blog about the "suits" using hold'em as a tool for the corporate takeover of poker (and the "death of poker as we know it"), has an edge and progressive mindset of someone who loves the game above and beyond himself. It appears maybe he's hasn't lost his heart, and I guess he's not the yes/man sell out I thought he was. Maybe...

[ukpoker 0]

I have to agree with Dan here that the WSOP is now fast becoming the WSONLH. At the end of the day the organisers want their cut and its getting bigger every year.I'll assume, for the sake of argument, that Harrahs will rake off $600 out of 8000 buy-ins for the main event. Thats $4.8M folks of YOUR money being sucked out for the men in suits.Thats pretty much the total prize pool of some WPT events in RAKE!As Dan says in his blog the game of poker is many games not one.I suggest him and the boyz create an alternative event which runs at the same time down at the Bellagio where they can create their own schedules and see how it goes.Would sure make for interesting competition.

[chunky04 0]

I can easily see this leading to the demise of the WSOP's status as "World Championship" of poker.Many of the top guys I understand had already boycotted the WSOP at one stage, and I imagine stuff like this will make it pretty easy for them to do so again. If enough did, I think it would undoubtedly end up affecting the turnout, as how many of the everyday schlubs go along in the hopes of maybe busting Doyle Brunson, Phil Ivey, DN, etc?I think it would take some time, but this could easily be the start of that trend. If WPT were to launch a competitor even that all the pros decided to support instead, would the masses follow? Can the pros organise themselves sufficiently to make this realistic? Could this be the straw on the camels back that sees the much ballyhooed players union finally come into being?Could this burst the bubble of pokers growth?

[shpaget 0]

I agree with DN here, but I also believe it's a phase (or at least I hope it is).I was in Vegas last week and couldn't even find a 7-card stud game.20 years ago that's all you could find.At the same time, I think it's up to these pros to grab the bull by the balls and start holding their own events....put their name on a tournament for some buy-in, and see what kind of turnout they get.eg. have a $5000 buyin TripleDraw tournament, market it, and even affiliate with some online site and local casinos to hold some satellites for it.The pros need to show that there is a market for the other games as well. You need to hound ESPN to show more non-HE events (I've only ever seen one Razz event on TV, and everything else I've ever seen is NLHE)...hound the WPT to hold and televise other events....At the same time, whether DN acknowledges this or not, the WSOP was devised by the pros both as a showcase for their talent, but also a way to bring "dead money" to a series of tournaments held in close proximity and time, in hopes that that "dead money" would also play in the lucrative cash games outside the tournaments. Holding more, and more affordable, NLHE tourneys will do that.But, I'm old school (though not old enough to be).I'd love nothing more than to find a 5-card stud game, or, even better, a Jacks or better 53-card Draw Poker game/tournament.

[missIdaho 1]

I agree with DN completely about the state of poker. I was surprised during my trip to Vegas last month that I couldn't find a decent 7 stud game. I had to play Holdem because there was nothing else to play. I was surprised when I approached the lady that was supervising the poker room at the MGM and I asked if there was stud game going on. Her response, "No. If you want to play Holdem you can take a seat." What was sad was she gave a look as if I had just asked a ridiculous question.Maybe when the big poker boom dies down a bit, the WSOP will get back on course and fully represent the wide spectrum of games. Or maybe not. We'll just have to wait and see.

[Marcstar 0]

Wow...I could not believe they didnt at least bring back the HORSE event...I can't even remember how many times I read or watch interviews where top pros said they were upset there was no HORSE event. I've heard Doyle comment in the past that HORSE should be the main event since it's more of a true test of overall poker skills.Also sucks there is only one 7 hi lo event..that game rules. I've never played in any WSOP event but actually am thinking about playing in that one.It seems most peoples best game is NL Holdem...it is for me but I actually think I have more of an advantage in some of the other games...obviously the pros feel the same since the big game is a mixed game.The other bad thing about showing so much NL holdem and not other forms is it limits the growth of poker. After a while the passive fans will get tired of seeing the same stuff over and over...showing various games sparks more interest in poker overall.I remember last year they showed the Razz event. The very next week in a regular home game I play in where it's dealers choice ...people started calling Razz...never had we played Razz at that game before...the TV coverage sparked it.I'm with DN...who the hell is in charge of making these decisions about what tourneys they play...I don't think it's someone that plays a lot of poker.

[burningyen 0]

I agree with the above suggestions. If Daniel and the other pros feel strongly enough about it, they should schedule their own tournament during the WSOP. If they time it to compete with some of the smaller WSOP events and have it televised (NBC, FSN, whatever), or even webcasted a la Live at the Bike, it might steal enough of the WSOP's thunder to get Harrahs to notice.But it's easy to see why Harrahs is doing what it's doing. I can't say that I blame them.

[myenemy 0]

Like all above I agree that WSOP has become a joke and a fish frenzy. However I do see that there is money to be made and that this will always afford non-pros the oppurtunity to sit for such enormous prizes. That being said i hardly consider the main event a true deciding test for the world champion of poker. If the so-called pros that we have come to know and love could achieve some solidarity on the issue, they should agree on a qualifying system. A point system, much like the POY, would include all of the season's $10000 buy-in tournies to decide on say 100 qualifiers (or whatever # they decide) for an end-of-season championship. The qualifiers would then put up $25000 each and all beneficiary parties (ie casino, tele station, website, advertisers) would also come up with $25000 for each player making a prize pool of $5M ([$25000 + $25000] x 100 players). I would assume that all the best pros would make it and hopefully we would see the kind of final tables and build up that we really want to see. Please reply. I am interested in this boards thoughts on this idea. PS. Im doubt this is an original idea, I'll probably hear about it though .

[speedz99 145]

I think DN owes his fame, huge enorsement contracts, and this Web site to the popularity of Hold-Em...and it's ridiculous to ride the wave of HE popularity and trash it at the same time.That's like Vin Diesal saying that he's annoyed that action flicks are taking over the film industry.

[Logun 0]

There's a distinction between trashing hold'em and what DN is saying.Bottom line is HE is not the end-all-be-all to poker. Sure its great and sure its the event that brought poker to TV, but more and more people are becoming interested in the other games.Question:Why don't the pros band together and hold their own WSOP?

[lindylarge 0]

I hate to say it but I can see both sides of the argument. I agree with Daniel, the WSOP is becoming the World Series of Hold em. But the popularity of the events is driven by the television coverage. The average joe is not interested in the mixed games. Harrahs is going to make their money off of the Hold em events, hence more Hold em. But that doesn't explain Harrah's turning their back on the pros and eliminating mixed games events. That is inexcusable. The WSOP will probably never be what it once was. The prestige of being a bracelet winner will not carry the weight it once had. But honestly, is it really that big a deal? Top pros are being offered to make money away from the poker table in todays poker world. These opportunities were not available before the poker TV boom. My suggestion is that some other tournament venue can step up and give the pros more of what they want. Why not the Bellagio? Some pros already consider the $25,000 event to be a true world championship. Maybe they should add the HORSE and SHOE events here. Right now, all of the events at the Five Star Classic were Hold EM as well. I am sure that someone out there will listen to the pros. It just won't be Harrahs.

[Vegas King 0]

Daniel is right on the button with his comments.There is more to the poker world than Holdem.The Mixed events have always been the most fun to play, and it brings the creme to the top. Imagine the WSOP main event being a mixed game. It would be a whole different story.Daniel, Doyle, and whoever else it takes should make this happen. With Daniels ties to the Wynn this should not be too difficult to make this happen. Maybe a week or 2 after the main event, there should be another "MAIN EVENT". Same buyin but H.O.R.S.E, not just no limit. I can not imagine that there would not be major interest. Someone like an NBC should jump all over this. With solid advertising and plenty of satillites during the WSOP at the Wynn, the field could really grow to very nice levels. You would need at least 1,000 players which would make first place $2.5M-$3.0M. Time to stop complaining and make this happen.

[Mojo_Yugen 0]

While I agree with the sentiments of Daniels blog there is quite a bit of hypocrisy in it. Daniel owes much of his non-poker income to the popularity of N/L Hold’em. His new poker game only offers one type of poker. Care to guess what it is? The Stacked website even calls him “Texas Hold'em star Daniel Negreanu…”. Not even poker star. Hold’em star. Since the WSOP is no longer family owned Hannahs is trying to maximize profits for its shareholders. In the long run I think they have a bad plan, but when have corporations cared about the long run? Will Daniel boycott the 2006 WSOP? Will a significant number of other big name pros? I would like to see that but I think that they are too market savvy to do that. In the end getting their face on ESPN in a watered-down WSOP is EV+ compared to doing what you believe is right for the game in the long term. Who would have thought a game like poker would become all about making money?

[patho 0]

I totally agree with how Daniel feels about how this is killing all the other poker games. I had a feeling this was going to happen eventually. First about a year ago, in one of my local cardrooms, they got rid of the Omaha tournaments. Then for a few months there were only Hold 'Em tournaments, both Limit and No Limit. About a month or two after that, they just made all their tournaments No Limit Texas Hold 'em. And at a different card room, they just got rid of all poker games altogether, except for Hold 'Em. Now the only way I get to play other games is when my friends get together and we play dealer's choice. Hold 'em is fun once in a while, but it's boring if that's your only option. Anyways, that's just my 2¢.

[zimmer4141 0]

I don't think Daniel is being hypocritical at all. He has risen to the top because of the television success of NLHE, but it's not like he was the one who forced all of this action. He hit a good run at exactly the right time, and got on TV repeatedly, which allowed him to become a likable personality in poker.Now I don't see why every pro doesn't boycott this year's WSOP. It's easy for me to say because I have nothing to lose by not playing. However, let's see how many people will show up once they realize they have no chance of playing with a name pro, which I feel is what many players play for. What is ESPN going to show when every final table is Donk 1-9? Their whole coverage will have to be focused on why no name pros are playing, and therefore maybe Harrah's will wake up. It's easy to say, but I think it would be awesome if it happened.

[Mojo_Yugen 0]

I don't think Daniel is being hypocritical at all.

I guess it depends on how you look at Daniels and Harrahs actions. Harrahs is clearly trying to cash in on the popularity of Hold’em by drastically curtailing the other games that they offer for the WSOP. This is clearly bad for poker in the long run by making poker = Hold’em in the eyes of the general pubic. But I look at Stacked as doing the same thing (on a smaller scale). Of course one difference is that the WSOP is being changed while Stacked is a new game, but I think that both of them end up promoting Hold’em at the expense of other types of poker. If not out right hypocrisy it’s a close neighbor.

However, let's see how many people will show up once they realize they have no chance of playing with a name pro, which I feel is what many players play for.

I think that the TV ratings are the key. Will ESPN be willing to pay the same amount to Harrahs for the TV rights if it’s nothing but Hold’em? Even with the pros there I think ratings would go down. (But definitely go down more without them.) As soon as the value of the asset (The WSOP) goes down Harrahs has to start looking at ways to improve the value of it. Hopefully they will make the right decision.

[cruddymike 0]

:boohoo: :java script:emoticon(':boohoo:')Boohooboohoo: :boohoo: It's intresting as someone who is new to the "sport" of poker to see this observation suface. Growing up listening to "punk" music, riding a skateboard, snowboarding when four or five resorts on the entire west coast allowed it I can relate to daniels lament. However this is the way things go these days- corporate profit dominates and sucks the life out of what you love. So what can you do about it?Pick up a guitar, jump the fence and skate a back yard pool,go hike in the back country,or in daniel's case open the all poker all the time casino somewhere on the strip.

[woodsy 0]

If the top pros boycotted the WSOP I don't think it would affect things one bit. I don't think most amateurs enter because they want to bust a pro. They enter because they want to win and hit that jackpot. As long as the payouts are there, the players will be there as well. In fact, more people might come out for it because there would be less pros. Would you rather face a field with more or less pros?Also, I think three things really created the big boom in poker (hold'em); 1) the use of the pocket-cam, 2) an amateur (Moneymaker) winning the ME, and 3) internet poker. Once people saw that they could actual win something like a WSOP event, with little investment, it went nuts. Besides, how many people actually knew who these players were before 2003? How many new, young pros are now getting a lot of attention at these events? As long as they televise events, the ESPNs and Travel Channels of the world will continue to create the poker celebs.Don't get me wrong, I would much rather watch the pros play. However, I would still watch without them. I doubt that I'm alone in that.Mike

[DanielNegreanu 141]

:shock: I can't believe I'm beginning to respect this guy. After making a decision to succeed in the big game, taking tournaments more seriously, and thinking about poker as something bigger than himself... His latest blog about the "suits" using hold'em as a tool for the corporate takeover of poker (and the "death of poker as we know it"), has an edge and progressive mindset of someone who loves the game above and beyond himself. It appears maybe he's hasn't lost his heart, and I guess he's not the yes/man sell out I thought he was. Maybe...

You thought "I" was a yes man? Dude, you just don't know me well enough yet! lol. I have always been willing to rock the boat and stir things up. I'm not one to sit by idly while someone trys to take advantage of me and my peers. It really ticks me off.

[Stylin_Fish 0]

:shock: I can't believe I'm beginning to respect this guy. After making a decision to succeed in the big game, taking tournaments more seriously, and thinking about poker as something bigger than himself... His latest blog about the "suits" using hold'em as a tool for the corporate takeover of poker (and the "death of poker as we know it"), has an edge and progressive mindset of someone who loves the game above and beyond himself. It appears maybe he's hasn't lost his heart, and I guess he's not the yes/man sell out I thought he was. Maybe...

You thought "I" was a yes man? Dude, you just don't know me well enough yet! lol. I have always been willing to rock the boat and stir things up. I'm not one to sit by idly while someone trys to take advantage of me and my peers. It really ticks me off.

Yeah, Daniel takes it to the man.

[lvegbpj 0]

Daniel.I have always read your poker blogs, as I find them very interesting! I am an okay$10-20 limit player in Las Vegas. I have made my living as a sports bettor and have done well for seven years. I finally decided to make my first post, as I agree 100% with your blog on the 2006 WSOP schedule. As a sports bettor, I have had TONS of problems dealing with Harrah's properties. Limits of $200 are not uncommon in their sportsbooks. The CEO of Harrah's, Gary Loveman has only one goal and that is to please shareholders. He could absolutely care less about the customers, unless you play just slots. I would love to see you and many other top professionals boycott the WSOP. Poker Pros deserve to be treated with utmost respect, as they are making them millions! The high % takeout in tournies is bad enough! $10 buffet comps! Gee, Thanks. Anyway, A top players boycott would certainly create another competing tourny that would give you guys all that you do deserve! Believe me, as someone who bets sports for a living, I would like nothing better than to see Harrah's get buried by you guys!! Good luck!

[Stylin_Fish 0]

Daniel.I have always read your poker blogs, as I find them very interesting! I am an okay$10-20 limit player in Las Vegas. I have made my living as a sports bettor and have done well for seven years. I finally decided to make my first post, as I agree 100% with your blog on the 2006 WSOP schedule. As a sports bettor, I have had TONS of problems dealing with Harrah's properties. Limits of $200 are not uncommon in their sportsbooks. The CEO of Harrah's, Gary Loveman has only one goal and that is to please shareholders. He could absolutely care less about the customers, unless you play just slots. I would love to see you and many other top professionals boycott the WSOP. Poker Pros deserve to be treated with utmost respect, as they are making them millions! The high % takeout in tournies is bad enough! $10 buffet comps! Gee, Thanks. Anyway, A top players boycott would certainly create another competing tourny that would give you guys all that you do deserve! Believe me, as someone who bets sports for a living, I would like nothing better than to see Harrah's get buried by you guys!! Good luck!

Bettor?

[Kangaroo 0]

In all honesty I think the WSOP of poker is just shooting itself in the foot sure i love hold'em but too much of anything turns it bad. From a viewers point of view I watch WSOP or WPT to see my favourite players whether it e personality or poker ability or both playing at the final table. People like DN gus seidel hoyt corkins etc etc. and quite feequently when there's a bunch of random people at the table I have less desire to watch it. It is just my feeling that if they keep scheduling hold'em and do lose players like DN from their event they wont pull the viewing power thats just an opinion from my circle. I think the WSOP needs to remember it's not the viewers that make it successful, it's the players. Theyre the ones drawing the crowds if they keep this up they'll lose theyre audience.solutions may be big name players jsut playing their own tournaments, boycotting certain events, just playing the big game.

[vbstar16 0]

Hey Danny.... why not just boycott the Series altogether? I mean Doyle, Chip Reese, and others did for a few years didnt they? Why not do the same? I'm sure the absence of you and your well-known peers could make the point. I think it's a joke anyways with Harrah's taking over last year. No one seems to remember anymore where this thing started and the truly remarkable history that has been made since Benny Binion brought the best poker players to town for them to battle it out. I wouldnt be surprised if Harrah's just decided to tear down Binion's altogether in the next couple years so they can put up a larger and more profitable casino. It truly is a joke, and something needs to be done about it.

[hime 0]

Daniel! You don't know how happy it made me to read your post today and to see you saying that there's actually too much holdem out there to be had.I agree with you 100% - I play Omaha 8 all day. I dunno, a lot of people probably think it's boring, weird, or confusing, but I love the hell out of it, and I'm profitable at it, so I'm going to keep playing it. I may explore other games later, but for the time being, it's my main game.That being said, I've done a few HORSE tourneys on smaller sites in the past and had some luck with the Razz portion... I do well in Holdem and O8, tread water in the stud games. But the point of that is... it's a challenge! It's something new and it keeps me on my toes. I was rather dismayed when a lot of pros last year were mentioning no SHOE or HORSE... and I'm dismayed there's none to be had this year either.A lot of people are offering impractical suggestions - boycott the WSOP, have another tournament at the same time. Hey, Daniel's big in poker, but not so big that they would decide to not have the WSOP because of him not being there. (This goes for other pros... there will still be thousands of fish/amateurs/other pros to fill those seats.)To me, it seems like the solution is kind of obvious. You must know a tournament director or two. You still work at the Wynn, yeah?So have your own tournament. Get your pro buds to go in on it... invite ESPN. They might have to mix up the format of the show, or it might have to go to another channel, but you can't tell me that they wouldn't want to broadcast a tourney or ten featuring poker "stars" like Daniel, Phil Hellmuth, Phil Ivey, Mike Matusow, and so on. Well, Hellmuth might not want to play Triple Draw, but you get where I'm going.Same thing for any website you end up getting involved with - make sure their software supports different games. Commit to being in certain tourneys, some holdem, some other games.Maybe I'm just frustrated because I had to deal with people tonight in a freeroll I got a ticket to. It was limit holdem, and I was thrilled because lately I can't play NLHE well. I figured I'd get a decent lengthy tourney with some good decisions and end up in the money. I forgot "limit is gay" and that people who "accidentally" sign up for such tourneys online then cap everything like maniacs. I did pretty well, but with that kind of action, you have one hand not go your way and you get crippled, so it becomes a crapshoot.I dunno, am I out of line?