Mike Sexton bashes WSOP, November 9 in blog

[Dan Druff]

I’m a partypoker and WPT guy and have no grievances against the WSOP. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. The opinions expressed in this article are from an old-school poker player who has always had nothing but love and respect for the WSOP.

I seriously doubt that anyone has loved, supported (I’ve been to every WSOP since 1984), wanted to win a bracelet more, or respected the historical aspect of the WSOP and what it has meant to poker than me.

I loved the WSOP when it was at Binion’s and have admired how it has grown since Harrah’s took control in 2004. It has been remarkable to watch the transformation. I’m also ‘wowed’ by the WSOP’s organizational skills, the brilliant job they do operationally and the entirety of the ‘three-ring circus’ that take place at the RIO every year. I still, however, think they could make some changes beneficial to players.

Their effort to try new things, like the November Nine, is admirable but I’m personally against it. I think the negatives outweigh the positives. And here’s what I am not a big fan of:

- The WSOP keeping players’ money for four months

- Players having an opportunity to train for an additional four months

- Those of us that are in-shape are being penalized by allowing others months off to rest, etc. One of these days, someone is going to die in the four months before the final table. I’m guessing they’ll put a little coffin on the table and blind that person off (a sombre victor for the eventual winner).

- A player from Finland, South Africa, or Australia, one of these days, is going to make it to the final table with 2-3 Big Blinds and have to travel all the way back to Vegas to, most likely, go out in the first couple of hands and receive no additional money.

- Simply put, the November Nine doesn’t put players first

We all know they move the main event final table from July to November for PR and TV reasons. I wish they would allow players to take two days off – one for rest and the other for player interviews – and play the final table on the third day. This would allow family and friends time to travel to Las Vegas to watch. The RIO showroom would still be jam-packed (and rockin’ & rollin’). And I’m sure the TV ratings would be good. Most importantly, I feel certain the vast majority of players would prefer to play the final table in July.

In addition, I don’t particularly like Australia and Europe being included in the POY award. We all know this is decision strictly based on business factors as it will lure anyone in contention for POY to Australia or Europe, but to me (and I’m guessing at least 80-90% of the players you ask), that award should go to the player who performs best in Las Vegas.

Players shouldn’t get a points’ advantage in the POY race because of going to Australia, nor should others, following the WSOP in Vegas, be able to catch the leaders due to a European excursion.

While I do love the WSOP, my concerns are clear to see. They’re attempting to strengthen their bottom line (which we all understand and appreciate), but in doing so, are diluting their product (i.e., the value of the bracelet).

Winning a WSOP bracelet is the dream of nearly all poker players, marketing of which has played a key role in attracting customers. The staying power, however, will evaporate if more and more bracelets are continually handed out.

In 1970, when the WSOP started, only one bracelet was awarded. Two were awarded in ’72, 12 in 1980 (which included a ladies and mixed doubles events) and 16 in ‘99. This year, I believe, there are 68 bracelet events on tap plus all of the events at WSOPE and WSOP Australia. I understand more players exist today and have no problem with the number of events they hold in Las Vegas, but WSOP bracelets should only be awarded in Las Vegas.

I’m worried, as the number of events continually grow, the value of each bracelet will diminish. My suggestion to the WSOP decision makers is to keep tradition in mind and not let their attempts increase the bottom line destroy bracelet’s value.

Let poker players aspire to obtaining a coveted bracelet and keep their dream alive.

http://www.partypoker.com/blog/poker...alls-wsop.html

[Dan Druff]

Ty Stewart (head of the WSOP) responded in the comments section.

Mike-

Thanks for thinking of us and know we are always listening. Despite this forum being a partypoker blog, we would never question your motivations to want what is best for the industry and the WSOP, as the showcase festival of a game you love.

So it is out of respect, that I have my own "Jerry Maguire" moment in playing devil's advocate and providing some color on our motivations.

November Nine - I take for granted no one understands the TV business as well as you, and its role in continuing to grow the game and keep prize pools high. In this era of social media and live reporting it was not optimal strategy to put out a documentary of action that happened months earlier. I hope the industry feels proud of a platform which sees every hand of a poker tournament covered on the #1 sports network in the world via a multi-day prime time finale. Extended coverage, cross-promotion on ESPN programming, even the big lead on SportsCenter. From metrics like trends on twitter, measured media, etc. the WSOP Final Table is the biggest window we have to celebrate the game. By the same token, I don't think anyone (with exception perhaps of another tour) would want to see those weekly prime-time slots on ESPN go away that reach the masses. Definitely not best appropach to market game to put WSOP in a one-week box and complete serialized programming in July. At the same time, we don't want to mistreat players who have gone on this "good for poker" journey known as the November Nine. I want to point out that 1)we do in fact pay out 9th place money in July - 2)we put the remaning prize pool in an interest baring account and distribute to the players 3)furnish business cass travel and expenses for return trip, etc. While it is not easy on all players, many have spoken of the great opportunity to gain a sponsorship deal in this tough climate, use a heightened profile to their advantage in subsequent tournaments, and experience things through their profession they never thought possible. For instance, I believe it was very exciting for Bruno Politano to receive a good luck message from country icon Neymar last year...something that simply didn't happen without this format. Having been there in 2006/7 myself when a sparse crowd of mostly sleeping, univested persons witnessed the final table, I am continually floored by the atmosphere of the modern final table, which replete with body painters, country flags and chanting fans, makes poker feel very close to sport. The November Nine has always been about putting players first, albeit more focused on the future players we all so desperately need. We don't make more money or share in ad revenue from ESPN. We in fact go dark on penn and teller and Caesars/ESPN shell out more money to re-build the TV set and infrastructure a second time. It is absolutely fair to criticize, but this is a noble endeavour to give poker as an industry its due.

On the Total Bracelet Tally-There is no doubt the modern WSOP "PokerPalooza" is a different vision than it was pre "boom" but we are guided by the principles of having choices/opportunities for all segments of players and giving them the best experience/prize pool/value possible. I think we can all agree the WSOP was once primarily the stomping grounds of professionals/serious poker players. For this highly coveted original group, we try to service your needs with the higher buy-in options and mixed games (a real source of pride given the scarcity of those events in the market) Yet we also want options for the recreational player who desires to experience the game and "the show" without having to break the bank. Given the WPT's own actions, I think you are familar with the size of this market, particularly given the limited scale of online poker today, inhibiting chance to qualify on the cheap like the good old days. And, then of course, we want mid-stakes tournaments that are consistent with the bank-rolls for the majority of players today. We're simply not going to let any one special interest group rule the roost. Ultimately, we want to bring together $227 million of prize money under one great circus and let the players decide which track(s) they want to follow on any given day. We are proud to have $1 million events and $1,000 events. This is poker today. I'll agree to disagree with you that we're only worried about bottom line. We re-committed to a two-track system for all core disciplines of game, our growth has been quite calculated over the past several years and based upon response leading to all-time records in entrants and prize pool, it seems to be good for players. An outfit only focused on bottom line wouldn't put on a mixed game bracelet in Australia (much less two) And yet it is still statistically harder to win a bracelet than at any time in the past. Last year, you bested 7600 players to run deep in the Millionaire Maker. Whether your next bracelet is against a huge field like that or the tough but smaller $10k Championship fields, I believe everyone will celebrate it as a worthy accomplishment.

POY-I am glad you are interested in the race! I hope you put it in your sights for 2015. Stay tuned for more news here. But generally I want to say that it is not simply business interests that guide the POY or the one international festival overall. I have actually been very clear that we don't make money on those events at all. The international events are not housed in our casinos, and we do not collect the rake. We do not use them as an infomercial for online gaming (as we do not even operate in European markets outside UK) - and with a blend of righteousness and embarassment I can admit the majority of the international events have operated at a loss. You yourself can testify to the very high costs of first-rate TV production, which is not offset by rake of a modest 10 event slate. The international events were another of our convinctions to do what we can to grow the game through power of our platform - with a long term view of the world. We have always believed in the "World" in WSOP and that with a fast growing global game not all events should be on home soil where Americans can save the travel expenses. There have been great moments with players not even eligible for the WSOP Vegas - Like Annette Obrestad and Adrian Mateos jump-starting their careers. We have broken barriers like getting poker on the Olympic TV Channel Eurosport, or the first live poker in Australia. I am quite proud of this and believe it is worth the tradeoff of having 10 events annually outside the Rio. However we take very seriously that the WSOP intl events are not yet fully realized, took the appropriate step in retracting to one event, and are very inspired by what will take place in Germany this October. Why let the WPT have all the fun

In closing, I'd just like to say that we believe we have right to operate a fair business with the WSOP event and brand, we are almost always guided by simple endeavour to do the right things for the right reasons. We want to be a source of pride and unifying platform for you and everyone who loves poker. we want it bigger and better yes. But we are not Dr. Evil plotting to exploit a community (which is too smart for that anyway) on an annual basis. Yes, with miles of truss & lighting/mountains of chips/thousands of staff/hundreds of security cameras we have the highest costs in the industry. But we also don't have a myopic view of the world. And I can assure you any variance in fees collected from 65 or 68 bracelet events is not going to be highlighted topic in the Caesars Interactive balance sheets. Apologize for the long-winded reply, but your post really struck an emotional chord. We truly are trying to follow an example of ambassadors such as yourself, harness the potential of a great game with great history and propel it to something more. We want to bring together the Poker World..and we want to encourage the World to discover Poker. We believe we can put out a great offering for all the different types of players we observe in this modern era. We believe we have a responsibility to do more than less. Try things vs. standing pat. And we plan to be a stakeholder deeply invested in the success of the game for decades to come. So, please know we're both listening and taking seriously every action with the sacred WSOP. I hope over time you will observe this and feel very proud the next time you hoist a gold bracelet.

[Dan Druff]

Ty Stewart then added the following 6 days later (March 11):

It wasn't a well-thought out PR ploy to respond to Mike's blog last week with my own version of War and Peace. It was simply an honest, emotional reaction to seeing one of the Mt. Rushmore of the game question your motivations, albeit something he has earned the right to do. Yes, I wanted reinforce to Mike (and any player) that we are not in some ivory tower counting rake like Uncle Scrooge McDuck, but actively collecting and processing your feedback to try and be something that lifts the industry. But one of the real negative consequences of my public response was to see it play out like Mayweather-Pacquiao. Firstly, there is no fight (Mike is a class act and immediately tweeted similar) and if there were - perhaps Sexton is akin to a legend like Mayweather, but I am a lot more Gerry Cooney.

So, in this matter, it would be wise to let sleeping dogs lie. But...

As I monitor the feedback, I'm kicking myself for not addressing what I see as the heart of the matter. And that's players valid concerns as to whether the "suits" (a role I understand is mine even if I choose to lampoon it) are willing to put business before poker. If the authenticity/integrity of the game is even a consideration in the decisions we make.

So, I want to make it very clear...we are willing to be progressive and make changes, some which are good for business now, some which we hope are good for business later, but never at the expense of being true to who and what we are. Every cause and effect is scrutinized and no change is made lightly. To wit, I want to present for consideration that the modern WSOP Final Table - aka the November Nine -may be the hardest and truest test of poker in the world today. While I was foriegn to the game arriving from the NFL system a decade ago, I am a willing student. Poker has many definitions, but most accept that it involves the balance of probability, psychology, and game theory. Not so long ago, a player like Peyton Manning may have been labled a cheater for being able to see instant snapshots of the defensive coverages, or counsel with his offensive coordinator on the headset between series. No one denies the WSOP Final Table is quite unique. With the 3.5 month gap to develop (or have other players believe you may develop) variances in your game from what they observed in the early rounds. With, due to the live broadcast, a steady stream of information to be processed, ignored, or even used as a weapon to build table image. With players clear understanding of the media/audience who will scrutinize their decision making, peer pressure of the cheering crowd, even the pride of their countrymen hanging on their every move. It is a brutal pressure cooker. And with ratcheted up stimulus to process in the areas of pyschology and game theory, it seems a highly differentiated but very authentic test of the game. And we're not sure winning the World Championship of Poker was supposed to be easy.

Yet without being too defiant, I would also argue that in the 7 years of the November Nine execution, there hasn't been one clear example that the format has materially affected the outcome. it wasn't coaching during the break which saw Darvin Moon hit a Q on the flop while Ivey casually chomped his bad-luck apple. Greg Merson didn't suddenly become a seasoned grinder in the downtime. And jet lag from a 2nd journey to the Rio didn't seem to slow down Martin Jacobsen. We want the poker to play out as it should. This is why, despite the fact we have perhaps the industry's only true global broadcast event, we refuse to make sacrifices specifically for television. We have two-hour levels, deep deep structures, and as observed, a willingness to roll the cameras until 7am to properly determine the outcome. We take for granted the poker community understands the marketing benefit of the final table - having one elusive date a year everyone can circle. That an analytically inclined audience can look to the prize pools of the "Majors" like WPT Championship, PCA, Monte Carlo, etc. and compare for themselves the difficulty maintaining high prize pools since 2008. But what I really wanted and needed to say is we absolutely prioritize the integrity of the product.

We're ok if the field size of the 7th WSOP Europe looks a lot more like 1976 at Binions vs. Event #7 at the Rio. If Kemath tweets the WSOP APAC mixed game event didn't reach triple digits. And we're ok to ask players to make a second trip to Las Vegas for what we hope is the ride of their lives. For all our tweaks in recent years, there is leadership at the WSOP unabashedly old school. We're honored to steward something I call a public trust and something that has been around since 1970. We know it will continue only if the competition remains as credibible and prioritized as the business pursuits. So that is the heart of the matter. That is what I wanted to relay to Mike. We're marketers yes. But carpet-baggers no. We too love and prioritize the game. We want to be a group you observe making more good decisions than bad ones, and never with cavalier process. And above all, we are concerned about the satisfaction of our customers. The 2015 WSOP is only 10 weeks away and we can't wait to continue to face whatever music comes our way. Passion from the community is far better than apathy. In the words of Ryan Riess (sp?) #LFG.

[Dan Druff]

I agree with Mike (mostly) about the November 9. Always hated that concept. It's stupid, made-for-TV garbage, which really hasn't achieved what it was going for in the first place (creating excitement during the wait).

I also agree that bracelets are being cheapened, and shouldn't be awarded outside of Las Vegas.

Furthermore, I agree that WSOP POY points shouldn't include events outside of Las Vegas, and perhaps they should make a separate POY for the entirety of WSOP related events, while keeping the regular WSOP POY pure.

While Mike didn't mention this, they should also not award bracelets in silly variants such as the online WSOP tournament, or any other gimmicky tournament.

I don't mind, however, that there are over 60 bracelets awarded. That's fine. As Ty Stewart pointed out, the fields are now much larger, so it doesn't make winning a bracelet easier. In fact, it's harder to do so now, except at the very small field events (and even at those, the competition is much tougher than it was in decades past.)

[Jayjami]

POY is a meaningless award, make up by Caesars to satiate the massive egos of modern poker pros. It is merely a (brilliant) marketing tool to get people to play as many events as possible. The POY should be the winner of the Chip Reese trophy. The Poker Players Championship has the toughest field and you have to be good at several games.

[Dan Druff]

POY is a meaningless award, make up by Caesars to satiate the massive egos of modern poker pros. It is merely a (brilliant) marketing tool to get people to play as many events as possible. The POY should be the winner of the Chip Reese trophy. The Poker Players Championship has the toughest field and you have to be good at several games.

I agree it's mainly a marketing tool, but in a way, so are the bracelets.

I don't like the idea of one tournament determining who wins POY, because luck is such a big factor in individual tournaments.

I think it should be overall performance at the WSOP, but no one should be required to travel all around the world to have a shot at it.

[Reno]

I agree with Mike (mostly) about the November 9. Always hated that concept. It's stupid, made-for-TV garbage, which really hasn't achieved what it was going for in the first place (creating excitement during the wait).

I also agree that bracelets are being cheapened, and shouldn't be awarded outside of Las Vegas.

Furthermore, I agree that WSOP POY points shouldn't include events outside of Las Vegas, and perhaps they should make a separate POY for the entirety of WSOP related events, while keeping the regular WSOP POY pure.

While Mike didn't mention this, they should also not award bracelets in silly variants such as the online WSOP tournament, or any other gimmicky tournament.

I don't mind, however, that there are over 60 bracelets awarded. That's fine. As Ty Stewart pointed out, the fields are now much larger, so it doesn't make winning a bracelet easier. In fact, it's harder to do so now, except at the very small field events (and even at those, the competition is much tougher than it was in decades past.)

I mostly agree with everything Ty said. As far as the online event, I say why not? Who fucking cares if they give out a bracelet for winning an online WSOP event? Actually it makes sense, the WSOP would not be what it is today without online poker.

[Texter]

the november nine is dumb.

just make it the next weekend nine....and give everyone a free week's vacation.