Harrahs stock was all redeemed on 1/29/08 for cash of $90 per share.

1) Is what ESPN proposes truly good for the game- does it legitimately offer some sort of unique dynamic that will bring in new viewers (and in turn, new players), or is it simply something new for the sake of newness- a mere shark-jumping gimmick?

2) What is the proper balance between what’s good for the casual poker viewers and what’s good for the hardcore players? The interests of both must be managed- the advertisers who make poker on TV possible are far more interested in the casual viewer but the casual viewers aren’t the ones paying $10K for a ME buy in… Joe Homegamer has an entirely different set of ‘poker interests’ than Gary Grinderdaily. Given that there are 10 Joes for every one Gary, how does televised poker address the needs of both without boring Gary while not going over Joes head?

IMO, these are the two questions that need to be carefully answered before proceeding. A lot of the discussion on this matter has been about things that aren’t even that important to the health of the game.

btw, still not convincing me this is a good idea. 90 days is just a retarded amount of time to finish a poker tournament that i started a week before and had a mad rush that got me to the final table (pretty much what it takes these days.) no way i want to lose that momentum over a 90 day wait so i can come back and play what would feel like a lopsided SnG. guess it does not really matter though since i doubt i will ever have a chance to play in it.

Remember the Player’s Pavilion (tent) it was an experiment and we know it will not be back this summer.

I am all for well thought out experiments to improve the WSOP brand. I fully support a final table delayed for live broadcast as a one year experiment. As long as:

a) players are told prior to the event all of the details of the final table;
b) the actual structure of the event is not changed to make it more TV friendly;
c) this is the tough one. real poker fans get a shot to see all of the final table, I do not want the final nine locked in a studio in Van Nuys;

free ride

Personally, I didn’t go to cover the event because none of the magazines or websites were paying for the story. It would have been a long drive, and if I recall, I didn’t have much notice before the event. I did write a news story about it for PokerWorks, but I had all of the information I needed in the press release.

Perhaps you shoulda gone after the Christian media. Seriously, I bet they woulda been on it. Maybe.

But the “mainstream media” have ignored Jerry’s good deeds even after they were notified.

“Feed the Children” notified EVERY TV station with a news department in Los Angeles (both English and Spanish), plus every Los Angeles area newspaper. Also, the CNBC and CNN bureaus in Los Angeles were notified.

Do you know how many media outlets sent reporters to cover the event at the Food Bank of Southern California a few weeks ago?

Answer: ZERO

Also note that ZERO poker media outlets showed up, not even those outlets with reporters in the Los Angeles area.

Those of us who live in the “real world” where we are subjected to the cruelty of Nielsen ratings know better.

Facts:

1. Neither FSN nor its international syndication affiliate FSI have NOT paid a rights fee for any poker since Poker SuperStars III ended in 2006.

2. ESPN dropped the US Poker Championship after 2006, even though there were allegedly 2 years left in the alleged 5-year TV contract.

3. ESPN and Harrah’s allegedly did a 5-year contract for the WSOP in 2006. After the 2008 WSOP, there will allegedly be 2 years left in that contract.

4. WPT on GSN gets over twice the Nielsen ratings in terms of both households and total viewers compared to any other cash game that has aired on any form of TV in the U.S., including High Stakes Poker Season 4 on GSN which aired in the same time slot as WPT on GSN: Mondays at 9pm Eastern/Pacific.

5. At my suggestion, PokerStars.net started a pilot program to sponsor players at WPT TV final tables starting with Tunica in January. PokerStars.net suspended that program after Reno because the first WPT on GSN ratings showed that over 50% of the viewers of WPT on GSN were over the age of 50, making the WPT on GSN audience incompatible with the young audience that PokerStars.net is trying to reach.

6. Budweiser and Xyience energy drink both cancelled their WPT sponsorships after WPT left the Travel Channel for GSN.

My opinions:

1. Harrah’s/WSOP has no choice but to shake things up in 2008 so that the WSOP won’t head in the same direction as the WPT.

2. If ESPN were to discontinue its TV rights fee deal with the WSOP, I do NOT believe any other network out there with the exception of GSN will offer a rights fee for the WSOP. Harrah’s/WSOP will probably have to buy time to get back on ESPN or FSN.

3. If the WSOP were to end up on GSN and its AARP-membership-eligible audience, I am willing to bet that Miller Brewing will drop its sponsorship of the WSOP because the demographics of the GSN audience is incompatible with the young audience Miller Brewing is trying to reach.

Of course a lot of this could be solved if Harrah’s/Full Tilt/someone else backed the creation of a bona fide cable Poker Channel. We have a golf channel that works, “Speed” for auto racing fans … Fishing channels that sublet chunks of time from other stations …

What about the live Turning Stone heads-up match between Ivey and D’Agostino? Was that a Full Tilt infomercial, too?

UPDATE: Was thinking that was ’05, but now realize that also was in ’04 also.

Oh I dunno, Tom, the president of Feed the Children knows who Jerry Yang is … as do these kids he helped, and the news media that came to cover his good work. These people are all outside of poker. I think the big-important people at Make-a-Wish Foundation know him pretty well, too, as do the peeps at Ronald McDonald House. I know McDonald’s knows you very well, but that’s different.

But in the interim, live no-hole-cards on pay per view … followed by a version with hole cards a week (or month) later for free? there’s a big win.

But since the purpose of this would inevitably to capture some new poker viewers, hole-cards become essential, i guess.

I think I understood the question you posed. I’m saying they could try this format, and if the ratings still aren’t sufficient enough for it to remain on ESPN, it’ll be dropped like The Contender was. In regards to FSN taking risks, I’m sure Oliver would chime in with the fact that FTP,UB and Mansion paid their way onto the network. The last time FSN did any poker related events without relying on those two sites was Championship at the Plaza in 2004.

@Kevin: You suggest that the worst case scenario is that ESPN drops the WSOP. I think you misunderstood the question. That’s the worst case scenario if ESPN/Harrah’s does *not* try this experiment, isn’t it?

There are so many poker fans who claim that they know better than ESPN about how to package poker on TV. “Show more hands!” “Skip the Nuts segments!” “Skip the bios and the interviews!” “Show the entire final table live without hole cams!” ESPN is trying to hit a much broader audience (higher ratings) than poker players/poker media/poker fans who read and post at online poker sites.

@Easycure: Which other network would pick up the WSOP? It’s a pipe dream to think that a network like NBC would pick it up, air it in a decent time slot, and parade the final tablists on the “Today Show” and the “Tonight Show with Jay Leno.” It’s just not gonna happen.

ESPN is a great fit, if only because televised poker needs to transition from the paradigm of a TV show to the paradigm of a sport. TV shows get cancelled; sports don’t. A “better” network like NBC or CBS would more than likely push it as a TV special. We want ESPN because we want them talking about poker on SportsCenter alongside baseball, football, and basketball.

If ESPN drops the WSOP, the only comparable network is Fox Sports, which puts us right back where we started, but reaching fewer households (lower ratings). And Fox Sports has historically shown much more willingness to take the kind of risks we’re talking about here — so why not try it now anyway?