Re: poker championship, was Re: [ba-poker] multiple rivers

[Michael Hunter <mph(deleted the rest)>]

On Fri, 2004-02-06 at 12:56, James Kittock wrote:
[...]
> 
> I realize that poker-as-an-organized-sport is relatively
> young, and maybe what will happen is that the WSOP will
> get rolled into the WPT (especially now that it will be
> "going corporate" with the Harrah's takeover).  Perhaps
> the WSOP will become the Wimbledon of poker.

Independent of the rest of topic of this thread I'm not so sure that
Harrah's should ever be held up as any poker champion.  They've killed
rooms in the past on whim and drive the one room I have experience with
as hard as possible (rake schedule on 3-6: 10, 20, 30, 50, additional
jackpot dollar at $20, no rake reduction period after midnightish,
running a 2-4 game in a party pit with a $4 rake and no floorman to get
the last dime, no tracking [removed the .25/hour they had previously
given]).  This is corporate with all the bean counters figuring out how
hard they can squeeze.  In poker terms I don't think they look at
implied odds at all.  Its how much they can make _now_.  Poker on the
upswing gets a yawn.  A bunch of new tournament types displaying
inelastic demand will get some interest.

> 
> And maybe the poker world does need an event that looks
> like a kind of lottery ticket to the fishy masses:
> "wow! I can play $40 online and win $2.5 million if
> I just get lucky!" (and, indeed, this is probably 
> *more* likely than winning millions in the lottery,
> especially if you have a basic grasp of tournament
> play, or use Sklansky's system, or whatnot).

I agree with your post.  I suspect that when/if poker sees a "hype
backlash" it will be because it appears too much like gambling.  It'll
be up to the WPT to grow with that (special "teaching shows" not like
the Lou Diamond Phillips sham, believable interviews with long term
winners/authors/experts, etc.) in an attempt to not lose too much of the
interest level.

[...]
> [1] See www.twodimes.net/poker  if you are not familiar
> with pokenum.

Oh, slightly.  Its probably more appropriate to quote the
sourceforge.net/projects/pokersource when referencing pokenum. 
twodimes.net is just a useful web interface for quick and dirties but
you should consider grabbing the source and hacking up your own research
pieces when faced with interesting problems.

> 
> [2] Although I think that purely as an experiment, it would
> be kind of fun to try this in a home game -- a single-table
> shootout where once people are all-in, pokenum is used
> to divide the pot.  If you are AA vs 55, are you sad or
> happy that you will always win 80% of the pot?  Hmm.

I'd be up for it.  Sounds like something which is suited for a virtual
home game on QOGS.

                        mph