I was wondering what everyone thought about those cards that forced a person to show their hole cards at the end of the hand. Personally I thought it was kinda dumb. Reminded me of some celebrity tournament where you could use a card to ask for a pro palyers advice (i think DN was one of the pros). i don't think that has a place in a real poker tournament. what's next? a rabbit hunting voucher? :roll:

i totally agree....they should start playing the cards face up...so the best hand always wins....lets get this skill thing out of the way !!
i just takes too much time!

it doesnt really bother me. these are made for tv events where the players are basically playing for nothing (like they wouldnt go to the wpt championship anyway). if they start letting us ask for pros advice in the casino i will be concerned, but these are just devices thrown in to add to the entertainment value. no big deal

I thought the wpt young guns of poker sucked IMO. I watched the 1st 15 minutes and turned it off because I could feel myself getting dumber by everysecond I watched it.

None of them really cared, they were all just basically playing around not giving a damn who won the event. messing around with J4s and 63s everyhand, everypot won was because of a bluff, raising blind, calling blind, Joe cassidy drawing out on gutshot draw to Daivd's trips... :?

as far as the freecard play goes, kind of disregards the point of "you have to pay to see" don't you think, but who cares when your playing for popularity points

and what exactly is the problem with that?

Not a bad innovation if it is only done once a session.

I noticed the players were a little embarrassed asking to see hands, as if they didn't want to show that they needed to know what the winner had. It probably gives information both ways.

not really a problem, don't get me wrong, I love the big bluff. It's just that thats all the show was, seeing who could outbluff the other, not entertaining poker to me when its just a macho contest of who has the biggest sack of marbles, not the smarts or skills to put their chips in.

its called "trying something new"

good, now they should know better than to ever do something like that again

Wow, you guys are real close minded aren't you.

This is a made for TV event, so they wanted to have an added incentive, what difference does it make since we can see their cards anyway and they will be able to see it when it's televised, so who cares?

I actually thought it was one of the more entertaining WPT shows. For some reason I think I've been giving J Dags more props than he deserves and not enough to Scott Fishman. Although I still think, and was reassured last night, that Joe Cassidy is far superior to all of them, and no not because he sucked out on David Williams, as Scott Fishman did as well.

If it was just for tv and to have fun, they should have sent it over to the celebrity poker events where its fun for the whole family to watch.

so what if they get to see the folded cards on television 6 months after the tournament has bee played? Will seeing it then give them an edge and help them win the tournament?

didn't think so

I have just become accustomed to the typical wpt event with at least 1 pro in there and some solid poker being played all around, as I like to learn while I am watching.

If you like to learn from what you are watching, most WPT events and almost all WSOP events don't teach you anything. This year's WSOP event has just shown eliminations 95% of the time, tell me how you learn from that?

And since when did it become wrong for WPT to try and entertain once in a while?

I think if you watched the event and not concentrated on the 3 times they actually used the cards, there was plenty of poker to be learned.

Oh well you can have your own opinion, but I thought it was entertaining and had some really good poker on there too. And most of those guys were pros. Remember Cassidy is the guy that beat up on DN in limit holdem in one of his first challenges, forgot?