You can do all the linguistic gymnastics you want, but anyone with a brain and working eyeballs know they cheated. It's better for GPI to do something even if Partouche/France/whoever won't. You're defending cheaters, plain and simple.
I can see some potential problems with the MPP format. Depending on the sizes of the buy-ins, there could be some incentive for people with cheap chips to dump them to people with expensive chips. You immediately increase the value of the chips. Like I said, it would depend on the size of the buy-ins whether it was worth it, but certainly it could be a possibility.
Can you imagine a final table where there are two high buy-in players and one low buy-in player with a bunch of chips? And the low buy-in player happens to be a friend or horse for one of the high buy-in players? That could be bad.
You need to focus on the tv producers, not the players. The players aren't getting paid to be on tv. They should play whatever way they think maximizes their long-term profit. If that means being outgoing and getting more tv time, that is fine, but if means sitting motionless and silent, that is fine too. Unless you want to start paying them to be entertainers. Someone compared televised poker with Dancing With the Stars. I don't think the DWTS celebrities are putting up their own prize pool. TV is paying them to entertain. Huge difference.
News Comments
PokerNews Op-Ed: The GPI Shouldn't Remove Players from the Rankings (20)
91 days ago
You can do all the linguistic gymnastics you want, but anyone with a brain and working eyeballs know they cheated. It's better for GPI to do something even if Partouche/France/whoever won't. You're defending cheaters, plain and simple.
News Comments
The Nightly Turbo: Viktor Blom Won't Defend PCA Title, Romanello's Innovative Poker Game (3)
134 days ago
I can see some potential problems with the MPP format. Depending on the sizes of the buy-ins, there could be some incentive for people with cheap chips to dump them to people with expensive chips. You immediately increase the value of the chips. Like I said, it would depend on the size of the buy-ins whether it was worth it, but certainly it could be a possibility.
Can you imagine a final table where there are two high buy-in players and one low buy-in player with a bunch of chips? And the low buy-in player happens to be a friend or horse for one of the high buy-in players? That could be bad.
News Comments
PokerNews Op-Ed: What Happened To Poker? (33)
214 days ago
You need to focus on the tv producers, not the players. The players aren't getting paid to be on tv. They should play whatever way they think maximizes their long-term profit. If that means being outgoing and getting more tv time, that is fine, but if means sitting motionless and silent, that is fine too. Unless you want to start paying them to be entertainers. Someone compared televised poker with Dancing With the Stars. I don't think the DWTS celebrities are putting up their own prize pool. TV is paying them to entertain. Huge difference.