WSOP – a look back at the bracelet events that are no longer around

With the WSOP’s November 9 final table almost upon us, it is time to take a look back at the events that resulted in bracelets for the lucky (and highly skilled) winners, including those that have been banished from the schedule of the world’s largest poker series.
This year, a total of 56 events awarded gold bracelets to their respective winners, spanning a selection of Holdem, Omaha and 7-Card Stud, featuring different betting structures and tournament formats. Because the WSOP is a living, breathing entity rather than a heartless collection of poker tournaments, it has been on a continuous evolutionary process ever since its inception. Various events were added, others were dropped. Various formats have been tried for the Main Event, some of which resulted in failures, while others stuck around.
For the 2010 Series, organizers had once again come up with a few changes to keep up with the public’s needs. One of those changes was the replacing of the HORSE format with an 8-game mix for the Player’s Championship. In order to make some of the Holdem tournaments more accessible for the masses, buy-ins had been lowered for them.
Every year in recent poker history, the WSOP has seen some changes. The Series consisted of only 12 events back in 1986. That number had climbed to 17 by 1999 and it continued to increase every year since. Some events were also dropped in the process though, and there’s no better way to conjure up some WSOP nostalgia than to take a look back at them, so here goes.

The Ace-to-Five Draw event was first introduced in 1971, when Johnny Moss won it for $10k. Ace-to-five Draw plays a lot like 2-7 triple draw, with only a few minor differences. It too is a lowball game, but straights and flushes count, so the best possible Ace-to –Five draw hand is the A,2,3,4,5. The event has had a bunch of noteworthy winners through the years, including Chau Giang, John Juanda and Men Nguyen. The very last such event was held during the 2004 edition of the WSOP, when Norm Ketchum won it for a prize of $84,500. Ketchum bested a starting field of 184 players, the third biggest in the history of the event. 1987 was the year when the event saw the most entrants (216) but that could probably be attributed to the fact that the buy-in was only $1,000 that year.

Fixed Limit Omaha is an event which saw its WSOP demise in 2003. First introduced in 1983, the Limit Omaha event last saw the light of a WSOP day in 2003. The introduction of the event was an obvious response to the newfound popularity that Limit Omaha had enjoyed in the 80s. All that came to an end when PLO took over. The first ever winner of a WSOP Limit Omaha event was none other than David Sklansky, who picked up $25,500 for his efforts. Eduard Scharf was the last one to win a Fixed Limit Omaha event in 2003. He took down $63,600.

Five-Card Stud was one of the most popular poker variants back in the 70s, when the WSOP started, so it was obviously included on the schedule. Despite the relatively large following it enjoyed, 5-Card Stud only appeared 3 times on a WSOP schedule. First introduced in 1971, the event was won all three times by Billy Boyd. The weird thing about the Five-Card Stud event is that Boyd is listed as the winner of the 1973 event, but according to the same records, there was only 1 entrant in that event. Could Boyd have won a WSOP bracelet simply by having entered an event?

The 2003 WSOP Main Event Final table participants – where they are now

The 2003 WSOP’s Main Event was undoubtedly one of the greatest moments in the history of the game. A true turning point, Chris Moneymaker’s 2003 win sparked the online poker crazy and pretty much single handedly turned poker into the global industry we know today.
Besides Moneymaker, there were other players at that 2003 final table too though, and while finishing at the final table didn’t quite mean as much financially as it does today, the rewards were still nice and many of the players involved went on to continue their careers as top-class professional players.
Eliminated in 9th place, and rewarded with $120k for his efforts, David Singer would probably be extremely disappointed with that haul by today’s standards, back then however, it turned out to be a driving force for him, as he started spending more and more time playing in online and live poker tournaments. One thing led to another for this talented player and following his WSOP final table presence, he amassed close to $4 million in tournament winnings. He made no fewer than 5 more WSOP final tables and won a bracelet in the $1,500 PLH event in 2008.

David Grey was the one sent packing in 8th place. His reward was slightly better: he picked up $160k, still rather unimpressive by the standards set by subsequent Big Dances. Unlike Singer, Grey had already had a WSOP bracelet before his 2003 final table presence. In its wake though, he too ramped up his tournament schedule and sure enough, he scored a second bracelet in 2005 in the $5,000 NL Deuce to Seven Draw side-event. Grey had been a relatively steady tournament earner before his 2003 Main Event sting, and he became even more prolific afterwards: he added another $886k to his already impressive tournament tally.
Young Pak finished 7th back in 2003 and since then, he’s pretty much disappeared off the map of prestigious live poker events. His tournament winnings had been relatively modest before his final table presence too at $34k, and they haven’t exactly turned northward afterwards either. He only managed to add $47k more, and his best post-2003-final table performance was a 246th place in the Big Dance in 2005.

Of all 2003 final table participants, Amir Vahedi was the one who faired the worst. He took down a quarter million dollars then, and he followed it all up with $2.2 million in additional tournament winnings after the 2003 Big Dance, but unfortunately he passed away in January 2010 due to diabetes complications. Right before his death though, he was regarded one of the friendliest and most beloved faces the game of poker had ever had.
Tomer Benvenisti, the 5th place finisher, had not been playing professionally before the 2003 WSOP. He had had no official tournament earnings and he didn’t really become successful after his $320k WSOP feat either.
Jason Lester, bounced in 4th place, was a high stakes cash game player. Just like Singer and Grey, he started playing in more tournaments after his final table stint. In 2010, Lester has been on something of a roll, finishing deep in several high stakes live events.
Dan Harrington, 3rd place man in the 2003 Big Dance, needs no introduction. For a player who has never been a full time pro, Harrington has done extremely well. The very next year (2004) he finished 4th in the Main Event. He also has several WPT final table finishes to his name. Most importantly, he is the author of some of the most popular poker theories and books.
Sam Farha (2003 runner-up), is also an established poker pro. A millionaire businessman, Farha has no fewer than 3 WSOP bracelets to his name, two of which came after his 2003 final table stint. At the time, he had already had a bracelet.

Chris Moneymaker, the winner, is one of PokerStars’ in-house pros today. Though many have doubted his skills over the years, he has proved his worth in several live and online events since. Though he hadn’t had a single cent in tournament winnings before 2003, he’s amassed more than 500k afterwards.

Overachievers and disappointments at the 2010 WSOP

The 2010 WSOP is (mostly) over and some players have obviously stolen all the headlines, while others – much better quoted – have disappointed bitterly. It’s not exactly rocket science to point a finger to the best performers, as well as to those who had promised, hyped, then failed to deliver.

Let’s start with those who brought something to the table. Frank Kassela. This guy has definitely been responsible for delivering some of the biggest surprises for layman observers this edition of the WSOP. In poker circles, Kassela had been known for a while before the WSOP, but he truly delivered a breakout performance that instantly put him onto the map for the entire poker community.
Kassela was the only player who managed to win 2 WSOP bracelets this year, and on top of that, he finished 3rd in the players’ championship event. He cashed six times including a final table, so he’s definitely a serious candidate for the “Player of the Year” title.
The only player who could rob him of the distinction would be Michael Mizrachi, who may yet win the Big Dance in November. Another guy who looked like he was going to snatch the POY title away at one point through the Series was Vladimir Schmelev. Unlike Kassela, the Russian came out of nowhere quite literally and first shocked the poker world by finishing second, behind Michael Mizrachi in the $50k player’s championship event. It’s true that he did not manage to get his hands on the gold, but he reached the final table in 4 more events, a more than genuine proof of his green felt prowess. The really impressive thing about Schmelev was that this was his debut on the US poker scene, and he managed to accumulate more than $1.14 million straight away.

When it comes to overachievers, the British contingent should definitely be given a collective award. At times, it appeared as though the Brits were going to take over the series and surely enough, they won no fewer than 4 bracelets among them and made several final tables. Pras Bansi was the one who spearheaded the British invasion. Neil Channing made a deep run shortly after. Steve Jelinek pocketed some gold too, and Richard Ashby and James Dempsey had excellent runs in several events too.
Now on to those who disappointed. Spotting winners is easy, because they’re all in the lime-light, but singling out those who stood out by simply not showing up, is a different kind of challenge. When it comes to not showing up, one name is definitely the top of the list: Joe Cada. The reigning WSOP Main Event Champ only played in 16 events, which in itself is quite surprising, but when one tops it off with the fact that he didn’t manage to even get close to cashing in any of these events, the situation turns downright dire.
Barry Greenstein was definitely another no-show, and on my part I’d say Daniel Negreanu’s WSOP run was extremely disappointing as well, but that may only be in light of the possibly exaggerated expectations I’d built up regarding the PokerStars pro. Then again, based on the same line of thought, Doyle Brunson, Mike Matusow, Annie Duke and Chris Ferguson would also have to be included among the let-downs.

It may be that this is a new time and age though and the WSOP window for the above mentioned names has closed. For Annette Obrestad though, that was certainly not the case. She was the poster-face of the series and there was a tremendous amount of expectation burdening her, to which it wasn’t exactly a surprise that she couldn’t live up.

In the wake of the 2010 WSOP

The World Series of Poker 2010′s Main Event has come to an end (or at least to a break before the 9 remaining players jump at each others’ throats again in November to decide the winner). The time to reflect on what’s been done and to look back at the accomplishments and disappointments is here. The story of the Mizrachi brothers would definitely have to go into the “accomplishments” column. The three of them embarked on a veritable invasion of the Main Event, and for a while there, it seemed like there was nothing that could stand in their way. Two of them did hit the rail following the bursting of the money bubble though. Michael, the oldest, the winner of the $50k Players Championship Event, did make it to the November Nine though, albeit on a short-ish stack. The fact that he’s a NL Holdem specialist though certainly makes him one of the favorites. The Mizrachi story is only one speck of color on the canvas of a Main Event which has apparently been about business only more than ever before.

In previous editions, tomfoolery was right at home in the main event venue. Folks dressed up in various costumes on account of having lost a prop bet, or just to shock. Who could forget Tom Dwan’s antics, or various folks dressing up in diapers, togas and who knows what else. This year, there was only one batman costume, and by Day 3, none of the non-poker celebrities were present at the tables anymore. Those who were left weren’t keen on fooling around, and thus the whole thing seemed a lot more sober than usually. The new “serious” image created by this year’s event was considered a plus by many of the experts though. With legal online poker looking more likely than ever during the past few years, poker needs this type of image, if it’s ever to pass as a sport rather than a game.
What poker does not need though, is the influx of playmates and porn-starlets used by various sites to push their brand. Women who played in past Main Events hadn’t exactly been looked at as top-notch competition either, but this year, the bar has been lowered to new lows and I’m not sure how well that bodes for the image of serious female poker players.

This year, the ladies made up only a meager 3%, down from last year’s 5%, and no woman made it to Day 7. The tough pros we all know and respect were there, and some of them did indeed manage to build monster stacks in the early going, but luck did not side with them, and by the time the field had whittled down to 270, only 2 women were left in contention. The last woman standing this year was Breeze Zuckerman and she was eventually eliminated in 121st place.
Another thing that poker probably doesn’t need is the bounty hunt that commences as soon as the field thins down a little. Agents of various online and offline poker interests descend upon the tables, making it quite impossible for the remaining participants to partake in a decent bathroom break. Such agents have been a nuisance in the past, but the situation appears to grow from bad to worse each year.
The attempts of the Harrah’s staff to announce the names and hometowns of each player as they busted out (after the field had been reduced to a set number), were quite obviously a feat well worthy of an achievement column somewhere too. Given the amount of trouble writing down some of the name of the players gives me, I can honestly say I feel for those guys.

A word on the WSOP final tables

This year, an interesting trend has surfaced at the WSOP. Unlike in past editions, instead of letting the field play down to the final table on Day 2 of most events, the organizers have decided for some reason to call off the action with several tablefuls of players remaining. The survivors would then return to action on day 3 and play down to a winner, which means that under these circumstances, the final table is barely recognized as a noteworthy milestone in the poker tournament. How exactly does that impact the overall show-value of the tournament? In years past, a select group of players would go to bed on Day 2 knowing that they’ve made a WSOP final table, an achievement the importance of which couldn’t possibly be downplayed. Making a final table at the World’s most prestigious poker series used to be reason to celebrate. People would make calls to friends, they would fly them in to assemble a noisy throng of supporters on the rail the following day. They would dress up, and generally instill a festive atmosphere on the final day of the event. All that is now gone…

How could one be expected to fly in relatives and friends with 20-30 players remaining in contention? It would be the ultimate cooler to leave the tourney in 30th place with all those people cheering on the rail. Looking sharper than usual at the final table is also a thing of the past. No longer will Gavin Smith show up wearing a suit and a hat to the final table. Worn-out jeans coupled with a T-shirt or a hoodie is all one will see at the final table these days. The moment has pretty much lost all significance as players are moved to the final table not even being able to give it a second thought.

Exactly what was it that made organizers introduce these changes? Could it be something linked to poker strategy? In years past, players could use the break before the final table to plot a strategy-approach. Over the course of the seconds day of action, and right before the final table was reached, players would develop a history with one another. Using that data, a skilled poker player could always make adjustments for the final stretch, that could mean quite a lot in the overall economy of the tournament.
Was it the organizers’ intention to disrupt such efforts and to deny skilled players the advantage they could grab this way? If that was indeed their intention, they’ve certainly overshot the mark on this one. Not only have they made it impossible for players to prepare for the final table, they’ve made it quite a bit tougher for them to play their regular A-game too. Day 3 usually kicks off at around 3 PM. That means the heads-up stage will usually commence at around 5-6 in the morning. Regardless of the number of breaks inserted in-between, this stretch is just way too much for a poker player to cope with. These guys need to focus on a level you and I may never have experienced. Imagine them doing that while overwhelmed with fatigue, dreaming about a cozy bed and pillow. That goes a long way towards explaining why there seem to be so many mistakes made by these otherwise more than capable players towards the final stages of tournaments.
Apparently though the explanation behind the weird shift in the schedule is a simple one: while the tournament structures have stayed the same as in past editions, the number of registrants has increased, thus the field is no longer able to slim down enough by the end of day 2.

WSOP Milestones

With the WSOP Main Event drawing near, it’s becoming more and more obvious which the most memorable moments of the series will be. Such “landmark” moments happen in high stakes poker tournaments all the time, but some of them are just a notch above the rest.
Take Men Nguyen’s bubble exit in the $5,000 PLO event. That’s definitely quite a moment, well worthy of the “most dramatic WSOP 2010 bubble” title. There were 46 players left in the game, and Nguyen had been feuding with Ryan D’Angelo for a while. He had a rather decent stack as he’d done pretty well up until that moment. After a preflop give and take, which cost Nguyen more than half his stack, the flop fell Qs,Jd,9s. Feeling pot-committed and trying to appear as menacing as possible, The Master shoved all-in. Holding As,Ah,9h,5h in his pocket, D’Angelo was faced with a really tough decision. After some time spent in the tank, he decided to make the call though and sure enough, it proved to be the right decision. The dealer spread The Master’s cards over the table, to reveal a stunning Ad,8d,4d,3c. Embarrassed as he was to be caught red handed on such an obvious bluff, Nguyen had nothing further to add.

As far as bad beats go, Danny Wong’s, in the $25k 6-max may not have been the most outstanding one, but it was certainly up there with the best of them. In less than an hour, Danny went from hero (chip leader) to zero (railbird), but it wasn’t like he could do anything about it. At dinner break, he was among those with large stacks, and less then an hour later, he was out, wondering how his top set could betray him in such an utterly unlikely manner. When Danny got all his chips into the middle, holding pocket 8s on a board of 8,7,3,9, everything looked perfect. Life was fine and the sun was shining as his opponent tabled pocket 3s for a dominated bottom set. The 3 on the river was like a nasty military-issue boot stomping onto a child’s sand-castle city. If that doesn’t hurt and make you want to cry foul, I don’t know what does.

Phil Hellmuth’s final table in the $1,500 PLO 8 or better event was certainly one of the milestones of this year’s Series too. It’s no secret that Hellmuth hasn’t really been at the forefront of the high stakes tournament (or cash game) action lately. The Ultimate Bet pro seemed to finally get things going in the above said event, but he eventually withered away, bounced in 8th place. His 12th poker bracelet once again drifting away in the mist of uncertainty, the poker world took little notice of the sorrow of a player whose fan-base is increasingly looking like a one-man operation.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, there’s Allan Kessler. The outspoken tournament structure critic has finished in the money in no fewer than 8 events this year, an achievement which turned him into one of the most successful WSOP 2010 players, and a serious candidate for the Player of the Year title. Kessler’s highest finish was 2nd place in the $10,000 7-Card Stud 8 or better World Championship event, which earned him a $276,000 reward. With all the trash talkers and the controversial personalities taking up most of the spotlight, it is sometimes refreshing to see one of the good-guys score a few for the home team too.

The Tournament of Champions is back on the WSOP schedule. After the first couple of days of action, Mike Matusow leads the field, and even though it would probably be a long-shot to include him in the “good guys” category mentioned above, I’d still like to see him walk away with the gold for some reason.

Phil Ivey – on a roll again

Phil Ivey has apparently set himself a rather ambitious goal as far as WSOP bracelets are concerned. The Full Tilt Poker pro has said shortly after he pocketed his 8th gold bracelet the other day that he would aim to win 30 such pieces of jewelry in his poker career. The statement was a rather shocking one, in light of the fact that the person with the most WSOP bracelets is currently Phil Hellmuth, who’s won 11 thus far. Considering that it’s coming from Phil Ivey though, a player well known for his cool headedness and for his abilities at the green felt (many consider him the best pound for pound poker player in the world today), there may be some weight behind it.

First of all, compared to most other professional sports, poker offers an overwhelmingly high number of chances for players to grab a WSOP bracelet each year. Both in Golf and in Tennis, there a lot fewer such opportunities, yet the top players have managed to accumulate around 20 titles without problems. I know what you’ll say: in none of those sports is the outcome as dependent on luck as it is in poker. While there are a massive 60 bracelet opportunities each year, the luck factor means that one person will find it extremely difficult to constantly walk away with the gold. The skill factor certainly means that a player with Ivey’s skills will consistently go deep in various events, but the luck factor is potent enough to deny the win nonetheless. Event with luck factored in though, Ivey stands a pretty good chance to walk away with at least a bracelet each year. As long as he keeps making final tables, it’s just a question of enough shots given for him to make it all the way.
The other variable in the equation is the number of years that Ivey’s poker career will span. Unlike most professional sports though, age is not really a factor in poker. A certain amount of mental decline is inevitable with age, but that has not been known to affect players’ poker performances significantly. One should only look at Doyle Brunson for inspiration in this respect, but the Legend himself is just one of many who play well into their seventies. The record breaking starting field at the seniors’ event has certainly proved that rather than the exception, Tex Dolly is actually the rule.
Holdem still seems to be the most popular poker variant at the WSOP and it keeps attracting the biggest starting fields. For a Holdem specialist, it’s obviously pretty tough to wade through all the competition on the way to a title. Ivey however, is quite adept at PLO and mixed games as well. These poker variants, when combined with high buy-ins, create perfect opportunities for Ivey and for other players like him to make deep runs.
One might ask if he’s indeed that capable of scoring bracelets, why is it that he’s only scored 8 so far? The reason is simple: a few years ago, players like Ivey had little to no motivation when it came to fighting for bracelets. These days though, thanks to the side bets which have upped the stakes on bracelets considerably for these guys, most of the top online and live poker players are back in WSOP action.

Last but certainly not least, we mustn’t forget that it’s Phil Ivey we’re talking about. If this guy sets his sight on something, chances are he won’t stop until he achieves what he wants.

Tom Dwan still bracelet-less

There’s a HUGE difference between mere mortals playing in WSOP events and well-known poker pros doing the same. For us mortals, the game is about the money, thus all we root for is to finish as high as possible on the final leader-board to possibly build us a house instead of buying a car. For pros, it’s about bracelets. Even this attitude of theirs offers these guys an advantage. While mere mortals will settle for being “farmers”, pros like Tom Dwan will always be “foxes”. They will fully exploit the lulls preceding various bubbles, and they will generally enjoy all the advantages offered by the fact that they’re only interested in all the marbles.
I mean for a guy like Sam Farha, what do a few hundred thousands dollars mean? Not much. From a strictly financial perspective, the first place prize doesn’t mean a whole lot either. How come then that the tiny piece of WSOP jewelry is so precious for these players? The answer is simple. No longer satisfied by the prizes awarded by various WSOP events, professionals have turned to prop bets.

The WSOP is a living-breathing entity which evolves constantly. Before the Chris Moneymaker/Greg Raymer years, only a few of the pros attended the events. In the wake of the popularity explosion caused by the above mentioned two PokerStars pros and by the internet, countless amateurs have been drawn to the tables, thus indirectly re-introducing value for the pros. Prize-pools sky-rocketed and the level of competition became extremely attractive as well. Television got involved too, and soon, high stakes pros were lured back to the tables yet again hoping to catch a feature table where they could work off their 15 minutes of fame. Apparently, every time pros would have a reason to lose interest in the Series, something new came along that brought them right back to the tables.
With the advent of nosebleed stakes online games, Bobby’s room would no longer be the only place where players could wager incredible amounts of money. Soon, a nosebleed stakes online poker elite developed which was then joined by many of the “name” pros world over. Many of these players have built bankrolls beyond the wildest dreams of mortals, and thus they lost interest in the WSOP again. Why would Tom Dwan bust himself playing in an event, the first prize of which would barely equate one average size pot that he routinely plays for? What is playing in a $2,000 event for Phil Ivey if not the purest form of wasted time? The prop bet was the factor that brought these guys back to the WSOP tables yet again.

I’m sure you know about Dwan’s 2010 bracelet chase already. Supposedly, he has a huge amount of money riding on prop bets, money that could end up in his bankroll in case he won a bracelet. Exactly how much money it is that he’s looking to win no one knows, but the mere fact that he shows so much interest in the issue means it’s probably much more than we could ever fathom.
Event #11, the $1,500 NL Holdem one, in which Dwan finished runner-up may have thus seen the largest prize-jump from 2nd place to 1st. Officially, Dwan won $381,885 for his second place finish, while the winner pocketed $614,248. The actual difference was much bigger than $232,363 though. Word has it, the total Dwan stands to collect after a possible bracelet win, is somewhere around $9 million. Mike Matusow dropped the number $12.5 million in an interview. The validity of these numbers cannot be confirmed, but given that Matusow is one of the players who quite literally danced across the room in the wake of Dwan’s loss in event #11, his words have to carry a lot of weight in the matter.

Dwan took the disappointing loss in stride though. The following day, he was right back at the tables, stacking chips and peeking at hole-cards as if nothing had happened. Was he disappointed to have come so near to taking down the biggest pot of his life? He probably was, but he looked genuinely excited nonetheless, obviously enjoying his position, having found yet another meaning in the WSOP.

An in-depth look at the $50k Players’ Championship event

The first major event of the 2010 WSOP carried great significance. Besides the fact that it pretty much set the tone for the rest of the Series, the $50,000 Players’ Championship event would introduce several changes over the $50k HORSE event which it replaced for the first time this year. All those changes represented reasons for jitters for the organizers. First of all, the familiar HORSE structure was changed to an 8-game structure this year, with the addition of NL Holdem and PL Omaha to the mix. The final table of the event would ditch the 8-game structure – so difficult to keep up with for TV viewers – and it would adopt a straightforward NL Holdem one.
With so many things going on, how did the biggest buy-in event of the 2010 WSOP fare? The answer to that question is a resounding “great!” from just about every angle.

The event saw the emergence of Michael Mizrachi, one of the toughest grinders of the poker world ever to go bracelet-less for such an extended period of time. Michael Mizrachi fought his way through a stellar field, which lacked fish almost completely. The super slow structure of the event definitely played into his hands, minimizing the luck factor and creating an almost endless grind most of the participants were ill-equipped to handle.
At the end of it all, Mizrachi, who had lately only seen the spotlight on account of his IRS problems, drove home the point that despite his previous lack of WSOP success, he was in fact one of the best live poker players of his generation.
The final table of the event couldn’t possibly have been a better one. Robert Mizrachi, Michael’s brother was the one who held the biggest stack of chips going into the final table, and Michael would have to go through him to get to the title. The sibling rivalry was kept at a minimum during the early going, but soon the inevitable happened and the unstoppable force met the immovable object. Sparks flew as Michael eliminated his brother in 5th place, thus maneuvering himself into prime position for the final stretch of the event. Was Robert Mizrachi disappointed to be sent to the rail by his own brother? You bet he was, but at the end of the day, I guess both Mizrachis would agree that this was one of the best possible scenarios for them at the event’s final table.

The NL Holdem factor at the final table definitely had a say in the eventual outcome of the event. Michael Mizrachi is a great NL Holdem tournament player and when going deep, he has a knack for finishing on top, which is exactly what he did here. Some people (myself included) liked the transition to NL Holdem at the final table. For a televised event, NL Holdem definitely makes better viewing than a complicated 8-game structure… there’s not a whole lot more to say about that. David Oppenheim and Vladimir Schmelev, both accomplished cash game specialists, would probably disagree with me on this one though.

The Main Reason for the structure switch was the fact that ESPN decided to cover the event yet again. Last year, the HORSE event had no ESPN coverage. The changes made by the organizers definitely appealed to the TV folks as well as to the audience, and make no mistake about it, to have those cameras there is a huge thing for every live poker event, even for a $50k WSOP one.

The Players’ Championship was quite probably the perfect choice to use as a series opener. Having all those “name” pros go up against each other right out of the gates does a lot to get the whole thing rolling so to speak. It really did hammer home the point that the WSOP was in town and that it meant business as ever.

Tom Dwan and the WSOP

It’s not a secret in the poker world that Tom Dwan, one of the best known online poker prodigies, was not exactly vying for the player of the year title in past WSOP editions. He seemed more preoccupied with other, more directly rewarding games, like the big game at Bobby’s Room, actual WSOP events relegated to a perpetual second place on his list of priorities. This year though, the New Jersey Wonderkid will adopt a radically different approach. He may not be among the favorites to win several bracelets, or even one, but that underdog status has just created him a great opportunity to collect fabulous sums from people willing to bet against him in the WSOP bracelet race. Exactly how much money he would win in case he managed to get his hands on WSOP gold is unclear, though he did say in an interview that it would be the biggest single win of his life.

In order to facilitate his odds for the WSOP gold, Dwan will play in as many WSOP events as he’ll be able to. Unlike in years past, he’s already played in several events, including the $50k Players’ Championship event. While he is definitely not a mixed games specialist, Dwan defied the odds to roll with the big boys towards his first WSOP gold. Unfortunately for him, he fell well short in that event, not even making the money.
Driven on by the WSOP side-bet possibilities, Dwan has played in many of the low buy-in events too this year. He achieved his first ever WSOP cash in one of these events: the $5,000 NL Holdem Shootout. Whatever the case, he does seem to be inching closer to that title he now wants so bad.

The WSOP bracelet side-bet craze started quite a while back, but it only really hit the public spotlight last year, as Phil Ivey was getting closer and closer to the top ranks of the Main Event. Ivey may have won two bracelets and a rather fabulous amount of money in those events, but all that was probably dwarfed by the dough he collected on the various side bets, after winning those bracelets. Pretty soon, there’s going to be way more money on bracelet side-bets then on the actual bracelets themselves. In the case of “name” players like Tom Dwan and Phil Ivey, this already seems to be the case.
What exactly is the impact of this fact on the games themselves? Well, not much. As a regular mortal, looking to score a win to build a house or to get a poker career going with the prize money, you shouldn’t expect to pick up a lot a dough this way. It’s a privilege only reserved for the big names, and in that respect, it can only be good for the game in the long-run. Dwan was never really interested in playing in the small buy-in events, and look at him now. If it gets more “name” players to the tables of the smaller buy-in events, thus further raising their profile, then so be it. If these guys like to gamble, so be it.

Will Dwan get his two bracelets this year and be on his way to Hawaii as he plans to do? Only the Gods of Poker and time can answer that question. We’ll see. And if we do see Dwan walk away with that bracelet, we’ll know there’s a whole lot more to it than bragging rights.

Next Page »