2007 Wsop Schedule

[Incubus77546 0]

So in the last Video Blog Daniel you mentioned that you had wrote up what you think would be a great schedule for next years WSOP. Just hoping to see it typed out here because I am curious as to what you have in mind.

[DanielNegreanu 141]

I'll definitely do that when I finish tweaking it. The schedule consists of something like:10 NL Hold'em6 LH4 PLH3 Stud3 Stud HL4 Omaha 83 PLO2 Mixed Game ($50,000 HORSE, $2500 HOSE)2-7 NL SIngle Draw2 Razz2-7 Triple DrawAlso a $25,000 Heads Up tournament for Bracelet Winners Only.

[The Czar 0]

The bracelet winners only idea is gold and would generate tv revenue.

[myenemy 0]

The bracelet winners only idea is gold and would generate tv revenue.

I know people hate this sentiment but I think its a good one. Also I certainly think that there can be a superior schedule while maintaining tv appeal.

[socalpoker_j 1]

The 25K HU Matches would be phenomenal.

[Naked_Cowboy 0]

Might I suggest making one of your Omaha-8 tournaments pot limit.

[gcello 0]

Daniel;Do you think the buy-in for all the events you listed should be raised too?gcello

[greatwhite 0]

I'd like to see a shorthanded pot limit omaha tournament.

[rockytrh 0]

you forgot 5 card draw (high)i like the kansas city lowball, need 2 events like that (you have 2 razz, so why not, lol)

[HangukMiguk 8]

you forgot 5 card draw (high)i like the kansas city lowball, need 2 events like that (you have 2 razz, so why not, lol)

i think the lack of a 2nd KC lowball event is balanced out by the triple draw event.awesome schedule, i think everyone involved would be happy with this schedule. and it renews prestige in all events.

[ricker 0]

awesome schedule, i think everyone involved would be happy with this schedule. and it renews prestige in all events.

I agree 100%, but I don't think it'll happen....not enough NL events to satisfy the suits at Harrahs....

[sdnuol 0]

I saw a video on CP.com where J Pollock was talking about an event that was only for non-braclet or non-wsop final tablist. IMO the WSOP is an event centered around pros. They wouldn't just have PGA event where anyone could give it a shot. The non-braclet winner tournament should be down the street with the kiddie game IMO.

[nell789 0]

I think there needs to be more NL Holdem tournaments. Those are the tournaments that draw the most players, as well as make the most money for Harrah's. There has to be give on BOTH sides, not just Harrah's doing exactly what the player's want.

[sdnuol 0]

I think there needs to be more NL Holdem tournaments. Those are the tournaments that draw the most players, as well as make the most money for Harrah's. There has to be give on BOTH sides, not just Harrah's doing exactly what the player's want.

QFT, but I think that 10 NLHE events is plently. Daniel, there was a thread in general where we were talking about lowball events.I think you should push for a B.R.A.S. event. (B)adugi, ®azz, (A)-5 single draw, and 2-(S)even Triple Draw

[The Nuts 0]

I'll definitely do that when I finish tweaking it. The schedule consists of something like:10 NL Hold'em6 LH4 PLH3 Stud3 Stud HL4 Omaha 83 PLO2 Mixed Game ($50,000 HORSE, $2500 HOSE)2-7 NL SIngle Draw2 Razz2-7 Triple DrawAlso a $25,000 Heads Up tournament for Bracelet Winners Only.

Shame that we'll never see that schedule.It'll be more like this next year:40 NL Hold'em

[wildspoke 2]

What about a final table tournament? You would only be eligible if you made a final table at a previous event.

[Golden 2]

Shame that we'll never see that schedule.It'll be more like this next year:40 NL Hold'em

This man speaks the truth. I like DN's schedule, but it's all about the $$$$ for Harrah's.

[sdnuol 0]

Daniel;s WSOP schedule is up on his blog, not video

[pokertvstar 0]

I do like DN's proposed schedule, but the lack of lower buy in events would greatly limit the "every man" from the chance to play.I guess I need a better job!

[greatwhite 0]

I don't like the idea of having to win a bracelet to enter an event to win a bracelet. Anyone who wants to put up $25k should be able to enter.

[DanielNegreanu 141]

I do like DN's proposed schedule, but the lack of lower buy in events would greatly limit the "every man" from the chance to play.I guess I need a better job!

The WSOP brand was NEVER about the "every man." The satellites were for the "every man" but the tournaments were for the "big dogs." I went to the WSOP in 1996 and tried my butt off to get into a tournament. I couldn't do it. I went back in 97' to try some satellites again, but just missed. Finally, in 98' I got my chance and did well with it. It was once a struggle to get into those tournaments and the buy ins have gotten LOWER since 98- much lower. If Benny Binion were alive he'd be turning over in his grave right now. Bigger doesn't necessarily mean better. Look how watered down the bracelets have become? Tell me, any of you, who won the $1000 no rebuy NLH tournament? Or how about the $2000 NLH ? There used to be a time where the whole poker world knew. Those were the good old days.

I don't like the idea of having to win a bracelet to enter an event to win a bracelet. Anyone who wants to put up $25k should be able to enter.

Well, I don't much like the idea of "Seniors Only" or "Ladies Only" events either, but they are a part of what makes the WSOP great. Notice, that on the day of the Bracelet event there is also a tournament for NON-bracelet winners. Having a qualification process for the event makes it even more special to win. It makes those that have a bracelet feel like they are part of a "club" if you will. A bracelet only tournament will also guarantee some sick, sick, match ups that will play well on television... imagine Hashem vs Raymer? Hellmuth vs. Chan?

[pokertvstar 0]

The WSOP brand was NEVER about the "every man." The satellites were for the "every man" but the tournaments were for the "big dogs." I went to the WSOP in 1996 and tried my butt off to get into a tournament. I couldn't do it. I went back in 97' to try some satellites again, but just missed. Finally, in 98' I got my chance and did well with it. It was once a struggle to get into those tournaments and the buy ins have gotten LOWER since 98- much lower. If Benny Binion were alive he'd be turning over in his grave right now. Bigger doesn't necessarily mean better. Look how watered down the bracelets have become? Tell me, any of you, who won the $1000 no rebuy NLH tournament? Or how about the $2000 NLH ? There used to be a time where the whole poker world knew. Those were the good old days.

Well, I can't argue that point with you, as I am a relative noob to the game (playing 3+ years). To the seasoned pros, I see your point, that the bracelets don't seem to mean that much. To the rest of us, they are the Holy Grail.I could not tell you who won those lower buy in tourneys (another very valid point you pose). If it were me, I would know!I say again--I need a better job.Keep keepin it real, DN. That's why you are the man.

[TheMathProf 0]

Having a qualification process for the event makes it even more special to win. It makes those that have a bracelet feel like they are part of a "club" if you will. A bracelet only tournament will also guarantee some sick, sick, match ups that will play well on television... imagine Hashem vs Raymer? Hellmuth vs. Chan?

I would only want this if they show the whole tourney.

[nutzbuster 7]

The WSOP brand was NEVER about the "every man." The satellites were for the "every man" but the tournaments were for the "big dogs." I went to the WSOP in 1996 and tried my butt off to get into a tournament. I couldn't do it. I went back in 97' to try some satellites again, but just missed. Finally, in 98' I got my chance and did well with it. It was once a struggle to get into those tournaments and the buy ins have gotten LOWER since 98- much lower. If Benny Binion were alive he'd be turning over in his grave right now. Bigger doesn't necessarily mean better. Look how watered down the bracelets have become? Tell me, any of you, who won the $1000 no rebuy NLH tournament? Or how about the $2000 NLH ? There used to be a time where the whole poker world knew. Those were the good old days. Well, I don't much like the idea of "Seniors Only" or "Ladies Only" events either, but they are a part of what makes the WSOP great. Notice, that on the day of the Bracelet event there is also a tournament for NON-bracelet winners. Having a qualification process for the event makes it even more special to win. It makes those that have a bracelet feel like they are part of a "club" if you will. A bracelet only tournament will also guarantee some sick, sick, match ups that will play well on television... imagine Hashem vs Raymer? Hellmuth vs. Chan?

All extremely valid points. I hope this happens Daniel.

[JadeTiger 0]

The WSOP brand was NEVER about the "every man." The satellites were for the "every man" but the tournaments were for the "big dogs." I went to the WSOP in 1996 and tried my butt off to get into a tournament. I couldn't do it. I went back in 97' to try some satellites again, but just missed. Finally, in 98' I got my chance and did well with it. It was once a struggle to get into those tournaments and the buy ins have gotten LOWER since 98- much lower. If Benny Binion were alive he'd be turning over in his grave right now. Bigger doesn't necessarily mean better. Look how watered down the bracelets have become? Tell me, any of you, who won the $1000 no rebuy NLH tournament? Or how about the $2000 NLH ? There used to be a time where the whole poker world knew. Those were the good old days. Well, I don't much like the idea of "Seniors Only" or "Ladies Only" events either, but they are a part of what makes the WSOP great. Notice, that on the day of the Bracelet event there is also a tournament for NON-bracelet winners. Having a qualification process for the event makes it even more special to win. It makes those that have a bracelet feel like they are part of a "club" if you will. A bracelet only tournament will also guarantee some sick, sick, match ups that will play well on television... imagine Hashem vs Raymer? Hellmuth vs. Chan?

Im telling you Daniel you guys really need to form a League and a union of players. Lots of great ideas and since the WSOP is going down the tubes lets do something about it. Your influence is huge and I think if you rallied Jen, Marco, Erik, Carlos, Ivey, Allen, and JJ that would be enough pull to get something started. Those names are big enough to draw other pros but it comes down to taking a stand and either start your own league or at least a poker players union of sorts. Seems that meeting with Harrahs and the WSOP committee just isnt getting it done. Seems that the lines of communication only go so far. Anyway keep the ideas coming. You are the only true ambassador for poker with all you've done and are capable of doing. Get it done big dawg!

Having a qualification process for the event makes it even more special to win. It makes those that have a bracelet feel like they are part of a "club" if you will. A bracelet only tournament will also guarantee some sick, sick, match ups that will play well on television... imagine Hashem vs Raymer? Hellmuth vs. Chan?

Jeff Cabanillas vs. Jack Zwerner?that would be tight!