3
#474 – WSOP Notebook #46 – What I Saw at the World Series of Poker, Part III
This is Part Three of my four-part essay on my overall observations from the 2008 World Series of Poker.
Part III – The State of Leadership, According to the World Series of Poker
I feel comfortable saying that the 2007 World Series was an improvement over 2006 and 2008 was an improvement over 2007. Here is a partial list, just off the top of my head:
* The registration crowds were gone. Unlike 2006 and 2007, there were no long lines for the first few events. How’s that for noticing during the first 5 minutes at the site that the operators had their act together?
* The tent was gone.
* In general, Jeffrey Pollack and his staff have gotten the Rio to turn over a lot more property for the tournament. The Amazon Room, the main tournament area, had much more space between tables (and an excellently-conceived color scheme for each quarter of the room to make it easier to locate your table). This was accomplished because they set up a separate room for registration, a separate room for single-table satellites, and the Brasilia Room down the hall for multi-table satellites, second-chance tournaments, and overflow and/or 5 PM events.
Not only did this assure adequate space for each activity, but it also cut down on crowds and confusion. For example, in the past couple years, if you wanted to play the second-chance tournament, you’d have to go by the cage, where people were standing in line to cash out from cash games, sign up for other tournaments, and sign up for satellites. Then after you got your seat assignment, you had to wade through cash games, multiple bracelet events going on, possibly a mega-satellite, and single-table satellites to find your table.
* This is subjective but I think the dealers and floor people are doing a better job. That doesn’t mean they did a perfect job or that players didn’t complain. But the complaints seemed fewer and lower-profile. The subplot of Caesar’s treatment of dealers and floor personnel was not part of the Series.
The complaints I noticed (and considered making) almost entirely concerned the operation of the non-hold ‘em games. The reason for the problems are obvious: not that many dealers, especially part-timers and new dealers who they have to hire to have the massive workforce necessary to deal the Series, have experience with PLO or Stud Eight-or-Better. A related problem was that the overhead monitors – a welcome addition – contained frequent errors during these games (like having incorrect antes or bring-ins for certain levels). But I predict that they will improve that for 2009, as they have generally fixed the most frequently noticed errors.
*The Series featured a greater variety of events, especially for the top players. There was no shortage of $1,500 NLHE events, and there shouldn’t be. But if the Caesars’/Rio powers-that-be (outside the WSOP operators) had their way, just about all the events would be low-buy-in no-limit hold ‘em. They get the most juice from those events and the most secondary benefits of bringing players to the property. But the operators of the Series have increasingly tried to strike a balance between the masses and those profits on the one hand, and the prestige of the Series among top players on the other. This year’s 6 “championship” events with $10,000 buy-ins brought out all the great players and some great performances, as well as annointing (or recognizing) some new stars. The $5,000 Stud EOB was also designated as a “championship” event and there were a pair of HORSE events at lower buy-ins (in addition to the $50,000 HORSE) plus an Omaha EOB/Stud EOB event and a PL Hold ‘Em/Omaha event.
* The general consensus among top players was that tournament structures were good and improving. With the innovations in the tournament games (e.g., mixing limit and no-limit games, mixing ante and no-ante games, mixing flop and stud games), finding the right progression of limits, antes, bring-ins, etc. is a matter of making ever-smarter guesses. Because I played a lot of the those events (mostly the 5 PM events), I heard a lot of opinions about the structures. Most players who weighed in told me they thought the structures were getting better in those events, fixing some rough edges from 2007. Also, many top players complained that the 5 PM events gave TOO MUCH play in 2007. They would play from 5 PM until 2 or 3 AM and almost none of the field would be eliminated until the last level. Much of Day 2 (especially around the bubble) would be spent just getting into the money, leading to (a) very late play on Day 2 to get low money or make the final table, and (b) make it difficult to play the next day’s noon event if the 5 PM event wasn’t working out. Personally, I liked the additional play back in 2007 but I was in the minority on the issue. Because the Players Advisory Committee played an active role in this aspect of the Series, almost automatically the structures were both intelligent and reflected what the top players preferred.
*Incidentally, the Main Event was better structured, both in making the schedule more reasonable – no more playing until nearly 4 AM on Day 1 – and in providing more play for the money. This, of course, meant that it wasn’t until late on Day 3 that the players made it into the money, but I found the structure much better for the 1 1/2 days I was around. Even though the Final Nine includes no household names and a lot of big-name players went out early, it seemed to me that more top players were lasting at least to Day 2. That’s just my subjective judgment and could be wrong, but the structure definitely required more patience and varied strategies and adjustments. To me, that’s a good thing.
As I said with some of the individual points, the operators received a lot of complaints and some were valid. I think the food service could stand some more improving. A lot of the things they tinkered with are works in progress, especially the various mixed events. For example, in the $1,500 HORSE, because they didn’t give players 5-denomination chips, the first level of the ante games required one player per hand to post the antes for the entire table. That was actually fair, but there were secondary issues involving whether the “button” should therefore move (to denote who pays the table ante) or stay in place (to make sure everyone pays the same blinds when the blind games continue. That was further complicated by (a) some tables not being full;(b) the different treatment of late-arriving players and late-entering players; and (c) the dealers and the floor not really knowing all about this in advance.
But I know frome experience that these things are works in progress. They’ll figure out how to get the right information on the overhead monitors, how to communicate these things to dealers and the floor, and whether they have the most equitable method of collecting blinds and antes during the early levels of these mixed-game events. At least I’m pretty sure they’ll try.
