Well, we’ve winnowed the WSOP Big Dance field down to nine survivors who will compete for The Bracelet in November. But one race that started earlier in the event is still going on, and presumably will continue right up until November.
I’m talking, of course, about the arms race among the various online poker sites to get their brand on the shirt and/or hat of as many of the final table participants as they can.
As you may be aware, as the field narrows in the WSOP main event, some online poker sites approach the remaining players with offers of money (cash, tournament buy-ins, etc) in exchange for advertising on the player’s shirt. Depending on the site involved and the point in the tournament, the deal may be for a single day, the remainder of the tournament, or as much as a year.
It is a bizarre bazaar, with the sites proffering their offers, the players shopping those offers to competitors, and so on. It is expensive and time-consuming for the online sites, and I’m sure they’d rather not be doing it, but they’re all but forced into the situation.
This is just craziness; no other sporting event does this. Can you imagine Nike and Calloway running around toward the end of a PGA event trying to get the board leaders to wear their hats and shirts? A giant pause in a NASCAR race while the guys winning by a bunch of laps change the patches on their firesuits?
I worked on the European Poker Tour for a year and we never had that problem. If a player came into the tournament with a sponsor, then he “danced with the girl what brung ‘im.” If he entered the tournament without a sponsor, then he didn’t have a sponsor at the final table.
Instead, at the WSOP, we have online sites competing for the attention of players who are already guaranteed six-figure paydays, and harboring legitimate dreams of much more. That means that it costs big bucks to get any traction in this marketplace. And the way in which it’s done means that the players can play the bidders against each other to get the best deal.
The current system favors exactly one tiny population: the talented and lucky few who have made it down to the final handful of tables. It certainly doesn’t favor the online sites, which are in a very costly financial arms race to sponsor these players. Nor does it favor the thousands of players who didn’t get that far in the event.
Finally, it breeds a mercenary and cynical relationship between the online sites who have sent their satellite qualifiers to the event and the players. Players blithely ignore the online sites’ terms and conditions regarding wearing the sites’ logo-wear, hoping to get a better deal in the Day 5 scrum. The online site responds by virtually ignoring its qualifiers, knowing that it will have to offer a great deal more later on if it hopes to keep deep-going qualifiers in its stable.
What’s particularly sad is that this is all completely avoidable. The WSOP could simply institute (and enforce) an EPT-like rule: every player must declare his or her allegiance (if any) at the beginning of the tournament. No changing horses in mid-stream. In fact, such a rule existed some years ago, if my memory serves. It’s high time that rule came back.
This would force the sites to compete for the players before the event began. Perhaps they’d choose to offer deals to any player who decides to play in the event, effectively providing a small rebate on the buy-in. It might well lead to more attractive WSOP packages offered by the online sites, since they’d be assured of carrying any of their qualifiers to the final table, should those qualifiers be so lucky.
Furthermore, the status quo is certainly a mess for the ESPN people. What does the TV audience think when they see Bob Smith sporting a SuperPoker shirt on Day 3, but then TopNotchPoker gear on Day 5? It makes it harder for a casual poker fan to know who’s who, and if he’s paying attention to these things, probably confuses him some. “Wasn’t that guy wearing a SuperPoker shirt in the last show?”
Here’s the thing: I know every person who sits down with his 30,000 in chips at the WSOP is thinking about reaching that final table and everything that goes with it. But the truth is that from an EV standpoint (and that’s what we poker players should think about), virtually every one of us would be better off getting a little something up front, rather than what we might get should we survive to the last three tables.
Now, having said all that, I must issue a couple of important disclaimers:
1. I am the cardroom manager at Cake Poker. We had qualifiers in the WSOP main event, though regrettably, none of them made the final nine (or anywhere near it, truth be told).
2. The suggestions I’ve made would probably create a more opportunity for smaller sites (such as Cake Poker) compared to the 900-pound and 800-pound gorillas in the room, to wit, PokerStars and Full Tilt Poker. But I claim that my proposal is good for both a large majority of the players and the poker sites. I hope that argument resonates.
One final note: I’m tickled that we knew, from the start, what logo one of the final nine would be wearing. Call me old-fashioned, but there was Phil Ivey, wearing his company’s logo on Day 1. And on Day 5. And he’ll be wearing it at the final table. Wouldn’t it be nice if we could say that about all nine?
Lee Jones is the Card Room Manager of Cake Poker. He has worked in the poker industry for over six years and been associated with professional poker for almost 20 years. He is the author of “Winning Low Limit Hold’em,” which has been in print for almost 15 years.
Good article Lee. I agree on some levels. However, ESPN, Harrah’s and lots of other companies make a lot of money from the players and I’m not a huge fan of doing anything that would probably result in a net-loss to players overall. I don’t see the money being spread out all that well in a carpet bombing system. I think the lower end players wouldn’t see much at all and the top end players just wouldn’t have much leverage, if any. I think the overall payout would be a lot less.
What I’d like to see is a system where players have a single declaration for a poker site (on a per event basis) but they can make the declaration at any time. If they wear it day 1, they have to wear it the whole way through — or no poker site at all. That would let people hold out and get the big bucks (I don’t personally care if it costs PokerStars a lot — the guy deserves it if they’re willing to pay) but it would also avoid sites having to worry about a player switching on them deep in the event.
How could any of the 6000+ players realistically declare their allegiance before the tourney? Other than Ivey and Shulman, who really had any expectation of aking the November Nine? The players who get lucky and get that far they should be able to cash in for whatever amount they can get. It is the American capitalist system at work.
Let’s look at this more realistically. In 08, I had two big scores, a bad beat jackpot and a tourney win. I decided to take $10,000 to play the Main Event. Prior to the Series starting, I changed my mind and spread out the money in play in 6 events. (I played in 7 because I satellited in another while I was out there). I cashed in three events for a total of around $24,000, after expenses and buy-ins a profit of about $11,000. I then decided to play the Main Event and go home a little up, knowing I would bust. (I did last until Day 2). Now, let’s say I had to declare an allegiance as I handed over my $10K. Who would I declare it to? And how do I know if I actually made it deep the entity I declared would want to give me anything? Declaring for any site just does not work.
The real reason you want this rule is for the day someone from Cake Poker makes it to the November Nine, which will likely happen sooner or later if you get enough qualifiers in there. If someone was declared for Cake, you would then offer them a pittance, and the player’s only option would be to take your lowball offer or nothing at all. Under the current system, Cake Poker will likely never have a player wearing its stuff at the final table. Your idea only benefits Cake, Poker Stars, Full Tilt, UB, etc., and not any of the players.
There is a way for you and the others to lock someone in, and that’s buy an option. Now, if a rep from Poker Stars stood at the buy-in line and offered me $2,000 and in exchange, I was forced to wear Poker Stars gear for a set amount (and reduced from the current amounts) if I went deep, I would have signed that in a second and took the money. Of course, that is a losing option for the sites, which is why it will never happen. But, that is the only way you can lock anyone in from jump street.
Stop the arms race? Like the old Soviet Union, the one that can’t keep up always wants to end the arms race. Sorry Lee, that’s the way I see it, and you know I am right.