It’s Main Event (ME) time already! The ME is the pinnacle of poker, and thousands of players are flocking to the Rio. Many an amateur player’s bucket list gets a check mark this time of year. The proliferation of amateurs plopping down 10k, many of whom have little chance to go deep, is what makes the ME a pro’s dream. There’s nothing like it, and I wish I could play it every week.
There are countless great stories from the ME. This is one of my favorites: An old guy was sitting next to me on Day 1 a few years ago. He was obviously not very skilled, but he just seemed happy to be there. He had a card protector with a head-shot picture that looked a lot like him. I asked him about it, and he told me it was his brother. They had put aside 10k, and had a deal that if one of them died, the other would play the ME before he was gone too. His brother had passed a few weeks before. He made it through the day, and I was rooting for him, but I don’t think he got very far on Day 2. I don’t think he cared that much.
Things to Know
Amateurs often make costly procedural mistakes, or break rules out of inexperience. Below are some guidelines that will hopefully keep you out of trouble:
String Bets
A string bet is when a player puts a portion of his bet or raise in the pot and then goes back to his stack for more without announcing his intention. For example, it’s a player’s turn to bet and, intending to bet 1,000, he puts 600 in the pot without saying anything, then goes back to his stack for the other 400. This is a string bet and he would only be allowed to bet 600.
Another example: A player has bet 1,000 and his opponent wants to raise to 4,000. The opponent puts 2,500 in the pot without saying anything, then goes back for the other 1,500. Only the 1,500 raise that he put in the pot in his first motion will be allowed.
This is perhaps the most common rules violation committed by novice players. The spirit of this rule is that a player should make his intention crystal clear.
The reasoning for this is that if the player to act behind the string bettor doesn’t know when the action is completed, the string bettor might gain some information from his opponent’s actions, giving him unfair advantage.
The simple solution to avoid string betting is to get in the habit of always announcing your intention before you put any chips in the pot. For example, if you want to raise a bet to 5k total, say “I’ll make it 5,000” before putting any chips in the pot. Also, if the blinds are, say 250/500, even if it’s deep in the hand and a 500 bet would be silly, if you mean to bet 5,000 but throw in a 5k chips and say “5,” it could be limited to a 500 bet. Be very clear about your intentions.
Oversized Chip
Another common occurrence and source of confusion is when a player puts a single chip in the pot that’s larger than the action calls for. From the TDA (Tournament Director’s Association) rule book: “Anytime when facing a bet (or blind), placing a single oversized chip in the pot is a call if a raise is not first verbally declared. To raise with a single oversized chip, a declaration must be made before the chip hits the table surface. If a raise is declared (but not an amount), the raise is the maximum allowable for that chip. When not facing a bet, as in post-flop when you’re first to act or it’s checked to you, placing an oversized chip in the pot without declaration is a bet of the maximum allowable for the chip.”
This again emphasizes the importance of announcing your intention. There are many variations on the enforcement of this rule, but the bottom line is that you won’t go wrong if you make your intention very clear.
Reading an Untabled Hand
Everything that happens to any player at any table in a tournament affects every player, so you have a right to get involved if you see something that doesn’t seem right. One instance where it’s not correct to get involved is when a player is holding his cards in the air so you can see them, but he hasn’t tabled, or placed them face up on the felt. If you notice that he has a winning hand, do not point it out to him unless he tables the hand. To do so would violate the “one-player-to-a-hand” rule (and would get his opponent very mad at you).
Once the cards are tabled, any player has the right to point out a winner. Don’t count on the dealer to read every hand perfectly. If you notice and intend to point out an overlooked tabled hand, do it while the cards are still face up and the pot hasn’t been awarded. I can recall many instances where a hand has been overlooked and for some reason a player waited until several hands later before pointing out that the pot went to the wrong player. Then all hell breaks loose, the game gets held up, and there are lots of hard feelings.
One Player to a Hand
No player should act in a way as to help another player in the play of a hand. (This doesn’t include reading a tabled hand, as discussed above.) An example of violating the rule: A player make a big raise on 4th street and a player not in the hand says, “wow, the last time he made a raise like that he had the nuts!” The player making that statement would be subject to a penalty. A good rule to play by is to not say anything about a hand in progress unless you’re involved. And if you’re involved in a mutil-way hand, be careful what you say. Let’s say a player makes a big bet into you and there’s a player behind you still to act. You say, “I’m pretty sure you’re bluffing, but I don’t have anything to call you with.” This could have an effect on how the next player acts and is unethical and could call for a penalty.
You’re not allowed to talk specifically about your hand, or expose a card. This is known as the “Jamie Gold Rule”, as Jamie used this chatty tactic to great effect when he won in 2006. Many pros don’t like this rule, as they feel they can gain an edge over inexperienced opponents.
Verbal Declarations are Binding
While announcing your intention is a good policy, you must always pay close attention to the action and be sure you know what’s going on before acting. Once you make a declaration, you must follow through (in some situations you have the option of forfeiting the chips already in the pot and folding).
An example of this came in the ME in 2004. Doyle Brunson, at age 70, was again making a run at the ME title. I was having a great tournament that year, with six cashes and three final tables. I got KO’d from the ME in 54th place (in a huge pot where I had KK vs. AK). As I was leaving the table, Tournament Director Matt Savage made an announcement detailing my WSOP performance and my demise. The crowd gave me a loud ovation.
As I was getting my applause, on another table, Doyle had gone all-in with a pair of tens and Bradley Berman (son of Hall-of-Famer Lyle Berman), not hearing Doyle’s declaration because of the noise, announced “raise.” The dealer told Bradley that he couldn’t raise because Doyle had moved in ahead of him. When Bradley realized the situation he tried to take his chips back and fold his weak A-7, but the dealer informed him that since he announced “raise,” he had to put his chips in. An ace flopped and Doyle was done, KO’d by Bradley — and me! I’m not sure whether or not the dealer announced Doyle’s action, but if he had and Bradley had heard it, maybe Doyle would have gone on to win his third title and the world might never have heard of Greg Raymer.
Chips Cannot Be Taken Out of a Pot
Once a player put chips in a pot, that’s where they have to stay, unless it’s an illegal raise. Let’s say a player raises, the player behind him doesn’t realize it, and puts in the chips for a call of the pre-raise bet. When informed that the pot was raised, the player has two options. He can either call the raise or forfeit the chips he already put in the pot and fold. Many times this is a result of the dealer failing to announce the action. It most commonly happens when the player on the left of the dealer is blocked by the dealer from seeing or hearing the action of the player on the dealer’s right. It also happens when a player has put in an oversized chip and the action isn’t made clear to the table. Even so, the player is responsible for following the action, so be careful before acting.
Acting Out of Turn
Actions out of turn are binding. A player may occasionally make this mistake for a number of reasons. Once he does, if nothing happens before his actual turn to change the action, he must follow through.
Let’s say a player announces “raise” with players still to act in front of him. The only way he’s not committed to raise is if another player raises before the action gets to him. If there’s a raise, the player in question has the choice to fold, call, or re-raise. Acting out of turn repeatedly or intentionally can result in a penalty.
Folding out-of-turn can be a penalty. If you need to go to the bathroom, or take a phone call, don’t fold until the action gets to you. Folding prematurely affects the action and is unfair to the other players.
What Constitutes a Raise?
From the TDA rule book: “A raise must be at least the size of the largest previous bet or raise of the current betting round. If a player puts in a raise of 50% or more of the previous bet but less than the minimum raise, he or she must make a full raise. The raise will be exactly the minimum raise allowed. In no-limit and pot limit, an all-in wager of less than a full raise does not reopen the betting to a player who has already acted.”
There are lots of different scenarios where a player will put in more than the chips required for a call, but not enough for a full raise. The above rule is a catch-all that makes the decision easy.
A common situation in tournaments is when the level has gone up and a player makes a raise applicable to the previous level. For example, the blinds have just gone from 200-400 to 300-600. A player living in the past puts in 800, intending to raise. Since at the present level a full raise would be 600 more and the player has only put in 200 of the 600 raise, it would be ruled a call and the 200 would be pushed back. If the player had announced “raise,” the raise would stand and he’d put in the extra 400.
Keep Chips in View
Players are required to keep all their chips in plain sight and to keep their biggest chips on top of their stacks or in front. This makes it easy for players to see how much their opponents have.
In 1982 Jack Straus won the title when he discovered a single 500 chip under a napkin after he had made a bet that his opponent had assumed put him all in. That incident coined the saying that a player isn’t out of it if he still has “a chip and a chair.” Under today’s rules, Jack would probably have been required to give the chip to the player who won the pot, he wouldn’t have his picture on the wall, and we wouldn’t have that cool saying.
Asking for a Count
You’re allowed to ask your opponents how much they have. They’re allowed to not answer, in which case the dealer should count for you. You don’t need to do anything more than arrange your chips so they are plainly visible to your opponent. Some opponents will ask for a count to gauge your reaction and hopefully pick up a tell.
Protect Your Hand
You should always put something on your hole cards to protect them. Dealers have a tendency to accidently scoop up unprotected cards. I generally just use a chip or two. Some players have elaborate or interesting card protectors.
John Bonetti was a great tournament player and a good guy, but with a very gruff demeanor. My favorite Bonetti story took place in a NLH preliminary event about 25 years ago. John had a bad habit of leaving his cards about six inches in front of him without anything on top to protect them, essentially daring a dealer to take them. I was sitting to his right and watched this unfold.
John raised pre-flop, got called in one spot, then bet the flop. After his opponent called, the dealer scooped in the bets, along with John’s cards! On fourth street, without a hand, John bet again and his opponent called. The dealer then put out the river card. John then looked down and realized his cards were gone. All hell broke loose. He immediately started viciously berating the dealer. (No penalties back then!) Jack McClelland came over and made a pretty bad ruling, giving him his fourth street bet back. But, it was hard to defy John Bonetti back in those days.
Just because you have something on your cards doesn’t mean a dealer might not grab them. If this happens, you’re probably out of luck, so keep them as safe as possible while still keeping them in view of your opponents.
Protect Other Players
Discussing a hand in progress, whether you’re involved or not, can be detrimental to the participants. Be careful about disclosing the contents of your hand. Many times players will make an obvious reaction that suggest the contents of a folded hand, such as when two or even three-of-a-kind flop and a player makes it obvious he folded one of that rank of cards. This can greatly affect the play of the hand. If two other players are involved in a hand and are talking to each other, no matter what they say, don’t get involved. This happens a lot when TV cameras are around and players seek TV exposure. Also, if you’re in a multi-way pot, resist the temptation to discuss anything about the hand in an attempt to gain information. It’s unfair to your opponent.
Cell Phone Rule
Cell phones and tablets are a part of modern life. Pros with a following often tweet or post from the table. The present rule on cell phones is that you must walk away from the table to take or make a call, and you can’t look at your phone
English Only
This rule is aimed at preventing players speaking a language unfamiliar to their opponents to engage in conversation during a hand. This includes people watching a game, and applies to players whether they have a hand or not.
Penalties
Penalties in poker were first instituted by Jack McClelland in the mid-’90s as a means of controlling dealer abuse. Old-time players, for some reason I’ve never been able to figure out, tended to blame the dealer when they lost a hand. And it seemed, with notable exceptions, that the bigger name the worse the offender.
This concept might seem foreign to modern Internet-weaned players who developed their poker skills in games where there was no dealer to blame for losses. (Of course, the random number generator has assumed that role, but it’s an uassailable target.) For many years dealers had little recourse. Players seeing the big names abusing dealers often emulated their behavior until the situation became untenable and Jack was having a hard time finding dealers to work the tournament. The institution of penalties gave dealers some protection and eventually the abuse subsided.
Penalties range from being required to sit out a hand, or maybe a full round, to disqualification, usually at the discretion of the floorman.
Abusive Behavior
Any abusive actions toward dealers, floor people or other players is cause for a penalty. This includes verbal attacks, throwing cards off the table or hard at the dealer in anger, and any other forced of unwarranted aggression. This a good rule that prevents the scene from becoming too earthy and colorful. There needs to be some understanding here, however.
Poker can be a mentally taxing and frustrating game, and each player needs to find his own way to blow off steam. An example I’ll never forget happened years ago in a game with Puggy Pearson. Pug had a reputation for dealer abuse in his younger days, but had mellowed by this time. He took a particularly bad beat and I could see he was steaming. The dealer had his hand over the muck and Pug gently said to him “Son, take your hand off the muck. I gotta have somewhere to throw these cards.” And with that he tossed them into the muck with just enough effort to open his steam valve, but not hard enough to be dangerous.
Excessive Celebration
New in 2008 was this attempt to cut back on theatrics, which had gotten out of hand as players performed in an attempt to garner TV time. I like this rule as I’ve always felt celebrating in your defeated opponent’s face was a classless move. There’s a delicate balance between what is over-the-top and what makes good TV, which is all-important these days.
Intentionally Exposing Cards
A player who exposes his cards with action pending may incur a penalty, but will not have a dead hand unless it’s an extreme case. The penalty will begin at the end of the hand. In the old days showing a card was a ploy used to try to obtain information from your opponent’s reaction. This practice was banned in the ’90s, so be aware!
Keeping Chips in View When You Move Tables
This is very important for new players. Putting chips in your pocket at any time, including when your table breaks and you are moved to a one, can result in forfeiture of the chips or disqualification. I hate this rule because it’s almost always an unknowing amateur who breaks it. A while back at the Rio, a foreign player there for the first time (who probably didn’t speak English, so he didn’t know the rule) came to his new table and had chips in his pocket. He was disqualified from the ME! Not only was this very unfair, I can’t imagine he ever came back, and he probably bad-mouthed the WSOP for years.
If you’re playing the ME this year, remember to have fun and embrace the experience. Good cards and good luck!
Never miss another post
They should call the Main Event the “Lake Woebegon Poker Classic.” All the players who enter are above average.
In actuality, the 12% (or whatever it is now) that is snatched from the prize pool makes the event unplayable. What casino game can YOU play and beat a 12% house edge? Yet, if you ask ANY player why that doesn’t matter to him/her, you’ll always get the same answer: “There’s a lot of dead money in this event.” True, perhaps, to the extent that the dead money is the player saying that.
To look at it another way, you pay $1200 for a few hours’ worth of entertainment. Then you also pony up the other $8800 as a legitimate bet (since if you win anything, you’ll get paid as if your and everyone else’s bet was $8,800). Not exactly an attractive proposition!
The two biggest winners at the WSOP are CET (which makes almost $10 million in fees from the Main Event alone) and the IRS (28 percent or so of ALL winnings!!!!). Take the rake (as in, the piece of the action taken off the top from the prize pool) and the tax liability winners incur, and you’re playing a worse game than keno. Yet, every year, the room fills with “savvy poker experts” slouching at the table in their hoodies and shades. Feh! It’s not even very interesting to watch.
I’m extremely equity-sensitive, but I disagree that good players don’t have an edge in this tournament. The Main Event has a 6% take-out and that can absolutely be overcome. But even if it were 12%, there are still tournament-poker experts that have positive EV for playing. If you gamble for a living, you should be filing taxes as a professional, which allows you to apply proper deductions like any other business. If you’re an accountant you’ll pay taxes on the money you earn. Same for a professional gambler, so factoring in the tax burden also doesn’t fly. Not considered is the appreciable back-end for winning a high-profile tournament. Books, television, juicy sponsorships and staking deals. It’s not what it used to be, but it’s still there, and winning the ME magnifies that many times over. The real negative is the variance. You could be the greatest tournament-poker player in the world and never register in a 7,000-player event.
I watched Vanessa Selbst break the rules on day 1B of the ME on ESPN by trying to speak French at the table, the other players at the table should have screamed for the floor! I know I would have just to infuriate Vanessa.
It was heartbreaking to watch Vanessa get knocked out early on the feature table with a monster hand where she turned a boat AAA77, only to have Baumann turn quad 7’s.
I watched for a few hours yesterday and enjoyed it more than I thought I would. Is it really live though on ESPN? The only thing I don’t understand, and it was brought up the announcers, is why the entry fee hasn’t been raised to adjust for inflation. If it was $25K or even $50K , it might keep a lot of the “gamblers” out and give the better players a more reasonable chance.
I checked out some of yesterdays action on TV as well but I enjoyed the way the feature table started today with Vanessa and Gaelle. Vanessa committed two penalties that I seen today. However she was called out on neither with the dealer and the announcer/floorman standing right there. First she was trying to speak a foreign language at the table and the players just let her run over them and let her do what she wanted to do without contest. They let her get away with it. Next she said the word, “Shit!” I heard her say it when she knew she was beaten by the beautiful Gaelle on the hand that knocked her out of the tournament.
I believe ESPN is on a 30 minute delay. What I don’t like about this ME and surprised the hell out of me is that the players on the feature table can get up and talk to any teammates in the crowd that may be watching key hands. It’s just how they do the final table for the tournament and the WSOP is allowing information to be fed to players at the feature table on Day 1, that’s hogwash and BS! Just to satisfy the networks.
If they raised the buy in amount for the ME to adjust for inflation you would basically have a high roller event and an event with a small field. Why don’t they just raise the buy in for the ME to $50 million so that only the wealthiest people on earth can play and NO gamblers could play in that game.
6% is pretty cheap by today’ standards. The ME is by far the greatest poker tournament in the world. The reason is that thousands of people play it who have little chance, and the structure is so slow that the cream has time to rise. My belief is that a really good tournament player should expect and average return of 20k from his 10k entry. If someone offered me a 5k profit to not play, I wouldn’t take it.
Raising the entry fee would be the worst decision in the history of poker. Thousands of people who play it because it’s a lifetime dream, or who win their local poker club, satellites, etc., would not play. This would drastically reduce the overlay pros have, not to mention dramatically reducing the prize pool. There are plenty of high-rollers where pros can play against each other. The ME is in a class of its own.
Was she talking French during a hand? If not, it’s fine. It’s also fine to say “shit” or even the f-bomb, as long as it’s not directed at another player or an employee.
I don’t like the “team play” aspect either, but it’s hard to stop. I do think headphones should be banned at tables where cards are shown, even though it’s on a delay.
It was during a hand she was involved in. She was trying to speak what sounded like French to another player who put her on a decision early on in the game. She tried talking to him and the male player mentione that he didn’t speak English. I didn’t like her behavior when she tried that, I seen it as she was trying to run the table over and bully the other players besides for breaking a rule. The spineless dealer who was sitting right at the table did absolutely nothing and the players said nothing. I couldn’t believe it! The players at the table missed a grand opportunity to crack the whip on Vanessa and to straighten out her table antics. I was disappointed that the players at the feature table let her off so easy, that was weak.
I heard Vanessa say her cuss word on TV and while it may not have been directed at Baumann, I still thought she should have been given an infraction or warned on her way out the door. 🙂
As far as the team play aspect is concerned with the vultures surrounding the feature table AT THE START of the ME tournament is a horrible idea! I checked the WSOP website today and they ran a headline stating that none other than Daniel Negreanu and I believe last years POY Jason Mercier are at the feature table. How splendid! Was it by happenstance and random selection that Daniel just happened to be on the feature table? I mean the WSOP needs to get real! It’s all about the ratings. Does Daniel need the extra help to get out of Day 1 so that he may play optimally by having reads on past hands? Does he need an extra edge? I see it as the WSOP is favoring certain players in the ME which in my eyes takes away from the Main Events luster.
The could start another event called “The Whale.” $50 million or $100 million buy-ins would be inflation in reverse, not with money but with people so the WSOP could get the number of entrants like they had in their early days, meaning fewer people can enter such an event. That would be a true high roller event. That way only the worlds wealthiest people would be getting catered to.
I was very opposed to the million dollar entry One Drop being a bracelet event. I think it started out as some very rich guys wanting to find a way to get a bracelet without having to compete against the unwashed masses of poker players. I don’t they expected so many pros to enter. I also think it’s absurd that Antonio is far and away the all-time money winner from winning what was basically a really expensive satellite, that he likely only had a small piece of, if any.
Or, Blitz, how about lowering the entry fee to $50 so almost everyone could afford it? And, while we’re at it, let’s lower the speed limit to 5 mph so no one will die in accidents?
My argument for raising the entry fee is threefold:
1) $10,000 in 1972 was prohibitive. The average middle and working class person could not afford that much money no matter how much they liked poker. This tells me that the main event was originally meant only for the creme de la creme. (More proof is that the first main event in 1970 was invitation only.)
2) It’s called the “main event” and the bracelet is different (more special) than other bracelets. To me, it’s difficult to reconcile that supposed special-ness with the fact that almost anyone can compete, and win.
3) It crowns the “World Champion,” supposedly the best poker player in the world. Does anyone now believe that any recent champion lives up to that title? Also, how can the poker cognoscenti keep claiming that its beloved game is one of skill when its “best” player won its most prestigious trophy by merely being able to afford the buy-in and “taking a shot?”
What makes more sense, especially since the name was borrowed from Major League Baseball, is to make the main event a real series by having playoff rounds where players would earn the right to compete for the title. They could also incorporate the Player of the Year points system so that only players who earned the most points make it to the playoffs. I, personally, would find that much more interesting and would thus take the main event much more seriously. Under the current system, it’s no different than playing the lottery. Fun to watch, and compete in I’m sure, but ultimately an over-commercialized farce.
I was slightly inaccurate–they take 9% out of the main event pool, and 12% out of the other event pools. This include a 3% involuntary gratuity.
Of course, it should be up to the player whether or not to tip. I was playing in one event, had the first three hours go by without winning a pot. The dealer say down and the floor asked him where he’d come from; he said he had been dealing Omaha. I thought, oh, no…and sure enough, I get dealt AK suited in the small blind, get ready to go all in with my short stack—and Doofus the Dealer gives me a third card, and face up to boot. Misdeal.
Had i somehow cashed in this event (I almost did, actually), I would have sued CET in small claims court for that 3%.
It’s interesting to read your thoughts about the Million Dollar One Drop Event. I remember that million dollar One Drop event that Antonio won and the results sure changed the stats at the WSOP website. I watched the One Drop final table where Dan Coleman edged out Daniel. I don’t think a million dollar buy in is high enough to thwart pro players from entering such an event. It’s to low. The current all time money leader statistic for the WSOP can be changed with one event.
If the WSOP had a Whale event they should put the buy in so high that even top pro poker players would have an extremely difficult time trying to scratch up a buy in. It’s all about the bracelet right? If a pro player were able to buy in somehow and if they busted out before hitting the cash, doing so should break them financially to where they have to end up sleeping on a poker buddies couch. That way a pro poker player would be playing a poker game with their back literally against the wall, everything on the line, win or the lights get shut off. If the WSOP is really geared toward making all the cash they can I have to ask myself why they haven’t put on such an event.
I see that your still in the ME, good luck.
The Giant event flopped compared to Colossus III looking at the number of entrants and prizepool. I figured that with a lower buy in that The Giant would surpass Colossus III in number of entrants. Not so.
Mirkon I think the Main Event buy-in today is adequately priced. $10K seems like a fair price, if the WSOP wanted to raise it or lower it it wouldn’t matter to me. I was looking at ME numbers last night in the early days of the event and noticed that it used to be $5K to enter the ME, then they raised it to $10K. I would agree with you that $10K back in 1972 was more than a lot of people were probably willing to wager in a poker tournament unless they had the cash or were established winning gamblers or were wealthy.
The Main Event is the event the WSOP and the poker world puts a lot of emphasis on because of the title of the event. Knowing that the Colossus has more entrants I would have to imagine that it would be more difficult to win the Colossus than the Main Event itself. Wouldn’t you agree? Anyone who is able to win a bracelet should be super stoked because it’s not going to be easy to win one.
The winner of the Main Event whoever it is, is not the best player in the world in my eyes. They may crown them as the “World Champion” but I don’t believe it. Seeing a repeat back-to-back winner in today’s fields would be a near impossible feat however Mark Newhouse made the November 9 in back-to-back years a few years ago and I was impressed by his play to do that. I remember Norman Chads comment about going out 9th place as Newhouse. Kenny Hallaert is making another deep run and I believe he could be on the final table again. Hallaert is playing real well and he may get his shot at redemption. Good for Kenny.
I do believe that poker is a game of skill although there is an element of luck involved. People make all kinds of mistakes in poker in every phase of the game. Poker is a game of decisions to me, and to be a winning player you just have to make less mistakes and make a lot less bad decisions than your opponents to give yourself a shot to win. It’s a fun game to play.
I don’t care where the WSOP got it’s name from. That means little to me, it is what it is. Under the current system the WSOP entity is more concerned about making money than doing some kind of Fed-Ex cup like entry for the Main Event like they do in golf at the end of their season. If only the top players of the WSOP series who have the most POY points were allowed to enter the Main Event then the WSOP wouldn’t be making the big bucks. Players earn the right to compete in any event by being able to buy-in.
The 1st year of the WSOP was in 1970. That year there was no tournament, just cash games, and they voted for the winner. On the first vote, every player voted for himself. Jack Binion then said, let’s vote for the 2nd best player. Johnny Moss got the vote and the title. The next year it was a freeze out, the buy-in was 5k, and Moss won that too. In 1972, the buy-in was 10k, but Jack took 5k of action on everybody. Slim won that year, when Doyle and Puggy agreed to let him win, because they didn’t want the publicity. Wise move, as Slim was the best ambassador for poker ever, putting the WSOP on the map.
I’ve haven’t heard anybody in the poker world assert that the ME winner is the world’s best poker player. That’s not what it’s about. I disagree that anybody can win–it’s 10 grueling days of poker in a field of the best players in the world. I would guess there”s about 35-40% of the field that has no shot to win. The player who does win has played great and also been very lucky.
You guys make some very good points and I concede that the powers that be have no plans on raising the buy-in any time soon. I’m just saying, to me, the current structure dilutes the significance of winning that particular bracelet and a change should at least be considered. At one time, Ivy League colleges used to be nothing more than boy’s clubs for those from patrician families to frolic for four years and get a degree that was in essence bought for them by their parents. Eventually those colleges decided that academic excellence was more important than money and football championships and therefore made a drastic shift in their standards. The initial shock of the Bluebloods notwithstanding, in the long run, who doesn’t believe that those universities are not much better off (and they still makes lots of money)? As said, why shouldn’t the WSOP at least consider following suit? The worst that could happen is that their main event will actually become the de facto determinant of poker’s world champion.