I also like the classic LNP lineup of Jeese and Barney Boatman.

Aside from the fact that he makes people want to throw things at their TV.

"Oh no! He cant... No, surely not... He cant bet all much on a... On a... FLUSH DRAW... Can he?"

Hehe!!  I won't have a word said against Jesse May - the man is a legend!

Just to alter the subject slightly but which world champion (in any sport) was actually the best at the time.

And thus what structure is the optimal to determine the "best"

I would choose:

Brazil - Football - world cup finals (just the best)
Steve Davis/Steven Hendry snooker (long games)

OK I am having a problem with this so lets switch it round, which sport gives the worst world champions?

Poker (Moneymaker) 

Just to alter the subject slightly but which world champion (in any sport) was actually the best at the time.

And thus what structure is the optimal to determine the "best"

Darts - Phil Taylor

Snooker - Stephen Hendry

Football (substitute 'player' with 'team') - Brazil (1970)

Just a few examples of people who were clearly the best at the time.

Sounds like an idea.  Only problem would be that the winner wouldn't get the big glamorous, glitzy presentation of the bracelet, prize, etc. 

why wouldn't they?

They would obviously get a presentation of some sort but it wouldn't be anywhere near the kind of thing you get at the culmination of a big tournament.  Theoretically, they might not even be in the last tournament when it's taking place so might be on the other side of the world or wherever.

ok, so obv I don't like HORSE determining the world champ and I agree that a NLHE event shouldn't do it either.

my solution is to keep the WSOP as it is now, leave the ME as the ME. that's the biggy and the one people want to play.

now to determine the world champion we have a points scoring system based on finishes in each of the championship events (these already exist for each discipline). Finishes in non championship events do not count. most points = world champ. simple

Sounds like an idea.  Only problem would be that the winner wouldn't get the big glamorous, glitzy presentation of the bracelet, prize, etc.  Another way would be have a set amount of tournaments throughout the year (similar to the PGA tour) and the top 50 players or so at the end play in a tournament to decide the winner (chip stacks in the tourney are decided by where you finish in the league).  It's similar to how normal poker leagues are run I suppose, except it would hopefully attract the very top players along with online qualifiers, rich businessmen, etc.

Now we just need to decide what kind of game the final tournament should be 

Let the argument begin....

Forgot to mention that the final table should involve jelly wrestling.

I like your thinking - it's the way forward

Cos you're looking for the best POKER player - not the best Holdem player.  I've no problem with a holdem world championship being in there somewhere too.   

so you create a ME consisting of LHE which is rarely played as a tourney, LO8 which is rarely played as a tourney, razz which nobody ever plays and 2 forms of stud which are rarely played now.

we completely omit NLHE the most played form of tournament poker and PLO hi the second most played and somehow decide this should decide who the best player is. I don't get it to be honest.

why should these 5 games played in a limit tournament decide who is world champion?

That's all well and good but that doesn't solve the problem that one NLHE tournament (no matter how high the buy-in) doesn't determine who the best poker player is.  Maybe it's time to create a new game that includes things like NLHE, PL Omaha, Limit Sud, etc.  As long as you can create an animal acronym with the initials.

Alternitavely, take the existing HOSE variation and change the limits according to the game being played (e.g. holdem is played NL as that's the most popular version of it, Omaha is played PL, Stud is Limit and O8 is played PL too).  It just seems a bit fairer than having a big NLHE tournament to decide who the best in the world is.  As another poster said though, ESPN put a lot of money in and they're only interested in seeing Matusow, Hellmuth, etc shouting after losing a half million dollar pot so it probably won't ever change.

The HORSE event should be the ME.  That'll help decide who the true 'world champion' is.  That's my 2 cents.

And, yeah, Negreanu is a moany little shit on this subject.

a lot of people advocate this but why? I don't see the logic in the ME being in a discipline that isn't played the rest of the year.
most other major tournies through the year are NLHE so we'll decide the world champion by playing a limit mixed game. does not compute

Cos you're looking for the best POKER player - not the best Holdem player.  I've no problem with a holdem world championship being in there somewhere too.   

The Open isn't decided by a putting challenge - putting is only one aspect of golf so the golfers are assessed over 18 full holes which will take in all the different range of skills required to be a great golfer.

Granted, you can be a great holdem player and make lots of money playing that game exclusively but then you're the best holdem player - not the best poker player.  There are many different forms of poker so i just think some more of these should be incorporated into the world championship when trying to find the best poker player around.  The only criticism I would have of HORSE being the ME is the fact it is played as a limit game but there would also be ways around this.

I guess it's a subject that there's always gonna be debate about but, hey, that's what we're on a forum for I suppose.

The HORSE event should be the ME.  That'll help decide who the true 'world champion' is.  That's my 2 cents.

And, yeah, Negreanu is a moany little shit on this subject.

Probably to improve my positional play.  Far too often these days, i'm looking at a marginal hand, realising i'm out of position and carrying on regardless.

This seems to be the techi thread!! Can anyone help? I been knocked off poker sites, and other sites, as usual I'm having trouble with the ISP. One thing may have done it but I may be completely wrong, is it possible that by 'uploading' large files, videos etc., that the download can be affected?

Help would be much appreciated!!!

Are you running Vista??