The ‘Real’ World Poker Tour

The WPT is not the World Poker Tour. The Americans just got in there first, splattered some events round the states that would allow them to gamble, dumped one in France, strapped Mike Sexton in a chair smiling, and there it is.

All sounds very similar to baseball - 29 clubs in America and ONE from Canada. Neither the Cubans nor the Japanese get to play, but yep, it’s the “world” series.

Unfortunately for the Americans, unlike baseball/NFL/basketball where the rest of the world is hopeless, poker is now a global game in every sense. The Scandis have long been renowned for their prowess on the felt, and I have a feeling that the Russians may become a new force judging by their results over the last year.

Some people feel poker has reached saturation point, and that the “Moneymaker effect” is over. Whilst I feel this is true to an extent, I think poker will evolve again into a more co-ordinated structure. At the moment we have WPT and EPT - fine. We also have the Aussie Millions and the Carribean adventures - all good. However, do we really need separate associations for Asian Pacific with a separate Australian Grand Final (APAT)? Do we need the National Poker League big buy-in tournaments (NPL)? Do we really need both and Irish Open and an EPT Dublin event? The Ladbrokes Poker Million with its crazy buy-in? Probably not.

Eventually players and the watching public will tire of all the overlapping events and lose interest. When you watch poker on late night TV these days, unless it is one of the majors you never know the buy-in, the money at stake or the purpose of the tournament. I was watching the “Mansion Poker Dome Challenge” the other day - what is that about? No recognisable players, mediocre standard, music in the background, flashing lights - it made no sense at all. You will never turn on Sky Sports to see Roger Federer playing in the “Ronseal Tennis Grandstand Challenge”, but TV companies seem convinced that viewers would like to see a random tournament with undefined parameters, or even worse, Phil Taylor and Peter Manley poking around with small pocket pairs on the “Darts Celebrity Poker Challenge”. I believe this will all change in the future.

On a separate rant, I can’t stand the way every poker show insists on giving a refresher on hand rankings and betting rounds before every show. When I watch the football, I don’t get Andy Gray explaining that if the fella upfront puts the ball between the posts then the team gets a point. Poker is popular enough now to dispense with that. By all means discuss the more advanced points, and players’ motivations for their actions, but don’t treat the audience like idiots.

So where do I see it going? I don’t think elitism is the way forward, as part of the magic of the game is that you could sit down with Phil Ivey and play in a major tournament. I do think however, that poker should come under one code and event scheduling should be better organised. 4 tournaments should sit above all others and be regarded as grand slams. A schedule like below would work I think: January Australasian Malaysia, Korea
February Australasian Australia ( Grandslam )
March EuroLeg 1: Austria, Russia
April EuroLeg 2: Poland, Czech Rep
May Caribbean Bahamas, St. Kitts
June WSOP Bracelet Events
July WSOP Main Event ( Grandslam )
August EuroLeg 3: Spain, UK, Denmark
September EuroLeg 4 Monaco ( Grandslam )
October North America Leg 1: Atlantic City, Niagara Falls, Foxwoods November North America Leg 2: Tunica, LA
December North America Leg 3: Bellagio 5 Diamond ( Grandslam )

If implemented, I could see another increase in poker interest throughout the world. I also believe there is a space in the market for a live poker channel. Live TV poker is rare, because broadcasters believe people want to see “action hands”. This is true to an extent, but the bottom line is that you simply can’t understand players’ motivations in some hands if you haven’t seen the other action. Has the guy had his blinds repeatedly picked on? Has the raiser been raising every pot and it’s a perfect opportunity for a re-steal? You can make people look pretty idiotic just by showing a few of the hands they play.

An example of this was the on final table of the 2007 WSOP Main Event. Yang in the SB raises to 1m with A9. Lee Watkinson in BB pushes with A7 for 9m (not unreasonable given Yang’s wide range here). Yang calls, which looks diabolical in most circumstances (ignoring that he is huge favourite here). However, because we haven’t seen these guys match up in the blinds before, we simply don’t know if Watkinson has been raising Yang all night from the big blind. If he has, then the call with A9 doesn’t look so bad. You just don’t know, because you are only seeing the hands when a player is knocked out.

A footnote to this hand, is that it is the funniest moment in poker history. Once the call is made, what can only be described as a “pray-off” ensues. I’ve attached it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjFeOBRmiA0 - starts at about 1:30.

Watkinson’s Missus (pre-flop):
“Lord, no weapon yielded against him shall prosper”
Yang (pre-flop):
“Please father in heaven in Jesus Christ’s name let me win this hand” Watkinson’s Missus (flop):
“Make Lee a believer father”
Yang (flop)
“Give me purpose today Lord”
Commentator (turn)
“I don’t know who the Lord is listening to, but Watkinson needs a 7 or he’s done”

GENIUS