The opinions in this editorial do not reflect the positions of the ownership or management of Poker News Daily.
The 2011 World Series of Poker was certainly one for the history books. With the ominous cloud of “Black Friday” hanging over the opening of the proceedings, the WSOP proved to be the venerable institution that it is by shattering several records on its way to the third largest Championship Event in its 42 year history (only 2006 and 2010 were bigger). It was at the Championship Event where we perhaps got a look at what may be the future of televised poker.
After the carnage of the four Day Ones and two Day Twos was complete, ESPN took the unprecedented step of airing the Championship Event “nearly live” on its airwaves. The broadcasts, using a thirty minute delay stipulated by the Nevada Gaming Commission, proved to be a success with poker fans as they soaked up the action from Day Three to the determination of the “November Nine.” Once this last Sunday rolled around, ESPN kicked it up another notch, running the final table – and the three handed action on Tuesday that crowned Germany’s Pius Heinz the World Champion – on a fifteen minute delay over several hours of action.
The “nearly live” broadcasts of the “November Nine” has, by most accounts, proven to be successful not only on the viewership point but also on the dramatic angle that sports loves to provide. With this in mind, it is time for Caesars Entertainment, WSOP officials and the honchos at ESPN to ditch the “November Nine” format and go live beginning next year.
Admittedly, there are strong arguments for both sides of the equation. This year’s Championship Event – with the cameras of ESPN capturing every nuance at two feature tables during the run up to the “November Nine” and then the actual final table itself – proved to be an exciting display of poker first off and a display of the characters of the game secondly. Everyone remembers well Daniel Negreanu’s rants about “table talk” during the tournament, a subject that fired up message boards across the poker world. Those same cameras also showed, after hands were completed, the skills that the players’ employed with considerably more drama than what would have been provided if the cards were displayed at the start of the hand (as is the case with taped broadcasts).
The “nearly live” broadcasts also brought a new level of commentary into the game, one which focused on the particular strategies that players would employ in particular situations. Through the usage of professional players such as Phil Hellmuth, Antonio Esfandiari, Olivier Busquet and Vanessa Rousso alongside the WSOP broadcast team of Lon McEachern, Norm Chad and David Tuchman, insight into the minds of players when in a hand were offered that are of tremendous benefit to those that are looking to learn the game. How many times did one of the pros in the booth nail the hands that combatants were playing? (The answer is more often than not!) This is something that the hard core poker player or fan wants more of, rather than the fluff and edited proceedings that we’ve seen in the past.
On the other hand, there are a few downsides to the coverage. While ESPN could set a limit on how many hours they would cover in the days prior to the determination of the “November Nine,” they were at the mercy of the players once it was down to the final two tables of action. Even once the “November Nine” was determined, Sunday’s play went for several hours and probably handcuffed ESPN programmers as to how to adjust programming following poker. Even Tuesday’s climactic night was a drawn out process and (at least according to my cable company’s schedule) pushed back ESPN’s scheduled programming into the early hours of Wednesday morning.
The other downside could be in maintaining the “casual” fan of poker who, once stumbling across the broadcast, will watch for a short time. With the taped broadcasts from the past, the pace was exciting and dramatic; with the live broadcasts this year, those casual fans weren’t able to immediately see the hole cards, may not be interested in the strategic discussion presented by the top players and may be turned off by simply sitting and watching…people sitting and watching.
Weighing the advantages against the disadvantages, it becomes obvious that, for televised tournament poker to continue to flourish, such innovations as the “nearly live” broadcast have to continue. ESPN and the WSOP took a tremendous chance, not only with the Championship Event live broadcasts but also the streaming of all the bracelet events online in a “nearly live” format, and they passed the test with flying colors. Having done this once, however, they cannot go back to the old taped format, otherwise it would potentially ruin future televised poker events.
If there is the intention of continuing the “nearly live” format for future WSOP events, then ESPN and WSOP officials need to abandon the “November Nine” effective next year. When put into place, it provided a chance to build some excitement for the players and for the event itself. With the tournament now broadcast live, like the Super Bowl or the World Cup Championship Game, the excitement has already been built; stopping after the determination of the final table for a four month period would kill any momentum of broadcasting the Championship Event live.
Many times Caesars Entertainment, WSOP officials and ESPN have proven to be groundbreaking in their attempts to bring the world’s greatest poker tournament to stalwart fans of the game and the casual viewer. With this newfound “nearly live” broadcast, those entities have clearly set the bar higher. Now they need to take the next step and end the “November Nine” so we can have the drama of a champion crowned next July.
Should the “November Nine” format be dropped in favor of the “nearly live” coverage that was on display this year? Let us know in the comments section your thoughts!