21 replies to this topic

[LIPOKERPACK]

That ESPN is contractually bound to harrahs, and the probably are doing the game no good by showing it as a degenerating addiction. If they step on the same toes as playmakers did, who knows what would happen, maybe coverage of the WSOP gets cancelled. All Im saying is if they are in the business of promoting the sport of poker, just as they are promoting sports by having a 24 hor sports news channel, they probably shouldnt paint a negative picture about it. I want o hear your rebuttle.

[LIPOKERPACK]

this was suypposed to be in reply to my original topic of the "2nd episode of Tilt" Sorry, didnt mean to create a new topic

[Smasharoo]

Unlike football Poker benefits from a seedy dark side image.Harra's proabbly bankrolled the the thing.

[jayistheman]

its cool...anyway. i highly doubt anyone seriously thinks less of poker since tilt... and im almost positive that before the series short life is over, that justice will be served to those who deserve it on the show. the negative picture of poker has always been around, and tilt isnt gonna do anything to help or hinder that IMO. If you read a book by T.J. or Brunson, they will tell stories of playing in sleazy clubs, and gun-toting thugs.... its part of the allure of the game to the non-player. Quite frankly, the game doesnt need anymore players.... lets all just sort through the fish that we have for now anyway.

[speedz99]

I'm not sure poker benefits from it. I think the idea of mass cheating in casinos would discourage some of the fish from leaving the blackjack table when they go to vegas.

[LIPOKERPACK]

This can be a possibility. But I think they would like to take poker outfrom the darkside, and portey it more as a game of skill and battle of wits. Sort of like chess. ESPN, and the Travel Channel have done nothing but wounderful things for the game, why bring it back under the microscope by creating a show that shows players cheating, commiting crimes, stealing, etc. I just dont think it is good business.

[justblaze]

They are not in the business of promoting poker. They are in the business of getting ratings. If watching people scratch themselves interested viewers, they would air it, probably to the loud objections to the scratchers club of USA or whatever. They dont care about poker. People watch tilt. Poker players who dont like tilt watch it so they can whine about it in forums. They get ratings. This is good business. Playmakers was cut because the NFL, which generates huge ratings and therefore has huge sway with the network, objected. Unfortunately, poker players have no such organisation to voice their concerns. Harrah's doesnt care because they will get 5000 entries to the WSOP regardless of Tilt's exposure of the seedy side of the game. People will still watch the WSOP, probably more than without shows like tilt. From a business perspective, you cannot criticize ESPN. They will make a ton of money from tilt.

[jayistheman]

by the way... its a shame that this thread will reappear under a different title every friday until the bloody show gets cancelled.

[Smasharoo]

No one over the age of 8 didn't realize it was possible to cheat in poker.Really, do you think that the cheating aspect is goig to outweigh the come nail hot stripers teh day you meet them because you play cards well aspect??Think about the target audience. Teenagers have cheated their entire lives, it's just no big deal to them, they accept it as part of life.

[LIPOKERPACK]

So you are saying that the WSOP does not get goot ratings copared to the NFL. You might want to correct your information, because according to Nielson 2004 summary, the WSOP presented by Harrahs on ESPN generated nearly 3x's more viewwers per episode compared to the Superbowl, the world series, and the top sit coms. I think ESPN would be concerned if Harrahs was unimpressed an a little ticked off with "Tilt" reversing all the progress made by great poker programming on the Travel Channell., ESPN, and other networks.

[jayistheman]

no friggin way it beat the super bowl... let me see your numbers.and while your there, check tilt's ratings.... as they begin to plummet in the next few weeks

[justblaze]

LIPOKERPACK said:

So you are saying that the WSOP does not get goot ratings copared to the NFL. You might want to correct your information, because according to Nielson 2004 summary, the WSOP presented by Harrahs on ESPN generated nearly 3x's more viewwers per episode compared to the Superbowl, the world series, and the top sit coms. I think ESPN would be concerned if Harrahs was unimpressed an a little ticked off with "Tilt" reversing all the progress made by great poker programming on the Travel Channell., ESPN, and other networks.

This would be a little more believable if you posted a link as to where you got these numbers. Especially considering the 2004 WSOP was held at Binion's, not Harrah's...

[LIPOKERPACK]

http://www.nielsenmedia.com/public data tab, you got to do a little navigatingI was originally informed of this while watching the local news a coule of months ago.

[justblaze]

clicked through, couldnt see anything labeled 'public data'. please post the exact link to the information, i could have found the neilsen site myself. And please explain how the 2004 WSOP was presented by Harrah' s when it was held at Binion's.

[LIPOKERPACK]

I dont want to argue, or even explain to you

[KKsuited]

justblaze said:

They are not in the business of promoting poker. They are in the business of getting ratings. If watching people scratch themselves interested viewers, they would air it, probably to the loud objections to the scratchers club of USA or whatever. They dont care about poker. People watch tilt. Poker players who dont like tilt watch it so they can whine about it in forums. They get ratings. This is good business. Playmakers was cut because the NFL, which generates huge ratings and therefore has huge sway with the network, objected. Unfortunately, poker players have no such organisation to voice their concerns. Harrah's doesnt care because they will get 5000 entries to the WSOP regardless of Tilt's exposure of the seedy side of the game. People will still watch the WSOP, probably more than without shows like tilt. From a business perspective, you cannot criticize ESPN. They will make a ton of money from tilt.

Blaze, I usually agree with you and smash, but I have to disagree here. First, for smash, I don't think poker benefits from the "dark side" being brought to light. Poker (and as a result ESPN and the Casinos) will grow the most by bringing more of mainstream America into the game. If poker is seen more like chess, more people will be drawn to the game. Tilt is making the game look a lot like what my girlfriend thinks..a bunch of cheat'n, no good, smoking, drinking losers trying to take money from each other. While much of that my describe myself, there's no need for ESPN to put it on TV.Blaze, your argument about the ratings may be valid, but what about the loss in ratings they may get during WSOP time? I don't want to argue over whether they will get ratings or not (time will tell), but I'd be willing to be the show doesn't last too long. I just don't see how people who don't play poker would watch it. Second, to many people who do play poker thinks its terrible.Long story short, I think it's not good for poker and will bet $100 that there won't be more than 10 episodes shown (I really think about 6, but I need to play it safe..

[jayistheman]

justblaze said:

clicked through, couldnt see anything labeled 'public data'. please post the exact link to the information, i could have found the neilsen site myself. And please explain how the 2004 WSOP was presented by Harrah' s when it was held at Binion's.

harrah's owns binions.... they are at the root of all of the new marketing for the WSOP... more of a "big corporation" approach to everything.... didnt u see all of the commercials for harrahs before each commercial? with the spinning chip and all...

[KKsuited]

All I could tell on the neilson site was that Hispanics like some show called Rubi.

[justblaze]

LIPOKERPACK said:

I dont want to argue, or even explain to you

Then why did you say " i want to hear your rebuttle" at the beginning of the thread? Just admit you cant show me any numbers proving the WSOP got higher ratings than the superbowl and we'll be done with it. And Jayistheman, im in canada so i didnt see all the fancy espn commercials KKsuited: i guess you are right, that argument is useless until the 2005 WSOP ratings come out... but even though poker players dont seem to like Tilt you must admit they all seem to know just about every line, if only so they can make fun of it.

[poker_bull]

KKsuited said:

All I could tell on the neilson site was that Hispanics like some show called Rubi.

Don't forget about Amor Real. Monday and Wednesday seem to be the hot days for that show with the hispanic markets.The closest thing I could find concerning ratings for a Super Bowl would be:http://www.nielsenme...rktelecasts.htmI don't; however, see anything relating to last years WSOP or the Super Bowl. All other reports are pretty expensive and to have a point proven is not worth $400.