What's happened to Poker?

[AlunB]

The simple fact is, the well has pretty much run dry of new blood.

The boom has long since finished.

Chess doesn't need gimmicks to remain popular, why should our game?

Better to appeal to poker enthusiasts, than a non existent new audience.

If you want poker to continue to keep you in the manner to which you have become accustomed into your dotage you better hope that doesn't happen.

It already has happened.

Poker just isn't in vogue any more.

Poker sites are far better off spending their marketing money trying to lure back former players back or encouraging infrequent players to play more often than attracting new ones to the game.

100% agree. That's been a real area of weakness in poker to-date.

BUT that also requires making poker seem fun. Most people who stopped playing poker, in my experience, did so because they were losing and/or stopped finding it fun.

You can't really stop people losing, it's the nature of the game that someone has to. But you can try and make it more fun.

[AlunB]

In other words it's a different audience, but a similar problem.

[pokerfan]

Poker is booming in pubs, don't expect to see many of them online but loads will move on to play live.

[The Camel]

In other words it's a different audience, but a similar problem.

You don't have to appeal to the Xfactor audience though, how about going for the Only Connect audience instead?

Poker is a game of skill, so why not market it as such?

The old way worked in the aftermath of Moneymaker winning the WSOP, but the market is more mature now.

How many times do you want to see AQ v TT all in preflop?

[AlunB]

In other words it's a different audience, but a similar problem.

You don't have to appeal to the Xfactor audience though, how about going for the Only Connect audience instead?

Poker is a game of skill, so why not market it as such?

The old way worked in the aftermath of Moneymaker winning the WSOP, but the market is more mature now.

How many times do you want to see AQ v TT all in preflop?

The obvious answer to that is that X Factor gets 9 million viewers while Only Connect gets 900,000

Your point is a good one though, in that there should be more variety and imagination in how poker is marketed.

[The Camel]

In other words it's a different audience, but a similar problem.

You don't have to appeal to the Xfactor audience though, how about going for the Only Connect audience instead?

Poker is a game of skill, so why not market it as such?

The old way worked in the aftermath of Moneymaker winning the WSOP, but the market is more mature now.

How many times do you want to see AQ v TT all in preflop?

The obvious answer to that is that X Factor gets 9 million viewers while Only Connect gets 900,000

Your point is a good one though, in that there should be more variety and imagination in how poker is marketed.

Yeah, but the XFactor audience are going to get bored and play online roulette after a couple of losing deposits while the OC viewers are more likely to get hooked and try to learn the game.

[Tal]

If Daniel Cates did a BBC4 show for an hour, explaining his decision making and thought process for six hands of a 500/1000 heads up encounter with Tom Dean, how many people would watch it?

And how many of those would tell others about it?

The game needs new blood and it can appeal to a wide market without sacrificing ability for shoddy entertainment.

Is Tony G confirming that he played it like a set such a bad thing? Still makes me laugh. Sorry!

[AlunB]

If Daniel Cates did a BBC4 show for an hour, explaining his decision making and thought process for six hands of a 500/1000 heads up encounter with Tom Dean, how many people would watch it?

And how many of those would tell others about it?

The game needs new blood and it can appeal to a wide market without sacrificing ability for shoddy entertainment.

Is Tony G confirming that he played it like a set such a bad thing? Still makes me laugh. Sorry!

The answer to your questions is probably hardly anybody and even less.

Oh wait, sorry I see that's what you meant! 

[The Camel]

If Daniel Cates did a BBC4 show for an hour, explaining his decision making and thought process for six hands of a 500/1000 heads up encounter with Tom Dean, how many people would watch it?

And how many of those would tell others about it?

The game needs new blood and it can appeal to a wide market without sacrificing ability for shoddy entertainment.

Is Tony G confirming that he played it like a set such a bad thing? Still makes me laugh. Sorry!

Show me where this army of new players are hiding and I'll agree with you.

You are much better off with one dedicated player than 10 people who play once, don't enjoy it and never come back.

Everyone who has any inclination to play poker has played it by now.

[AlunB]

If Daniel Cates did a BBC4 show for an hour, explaining his decision making and thought process for six hands of a 500/1000 heads up encounter with Tom Dean, how many people would watch it?

And how many of those would tell others about it?

The game needs new blood and it can appeal to a wide market without sacrificing ability for shoddy entertainment.

Is Tony G confirming that he played it like a set such a bad thing? Still makes me laugh. Sorry!

Show me where this army of new players are hiding and I'll agree with you.

Everyone who has any inclination to play poker has played it by now.

Possibly, although I very much doubt that's true.

But there are an awful lot of people who have tried poker, maybe even played a lot of poker, and don't play now. And a (big) part of that is that poker just doesn't seem much fun anymore.

[Tal]

BTW auto correct is a beautiful beast sometimes: Tom Dean. Marv.

So many of us were inspired, intrigued and interested in this game by Late Night Poker

[The Camel]

Basically the game will never be as good as it once was.

Far too much written, discussed and analysed.

Accept this and accept that there isn't going to be a magic influx of new players ever again.

[nirvana]

Who cares - for your average live fish it's all irrelevant.

[bobAlike]

Pre 2008 most casino tournaments were low buy in rebuy events with only the odd festivals offering big buy in freeze outs. Rebuy tournaments were fun and suited the recreational majority.

They suited the rec because they could budget for a few buyins and be guaranteed to have a game of poker for a few hours. Freeze outs stopped this because now the rec may spend the same money but it may only means he plays for 10 minutes. There's more emphasis on playing well and maybe not gamble so much as he could do in a RB.

Its not so much about losing its about the enjoyment whilst losing.

Cash games are the same, too many people taking it too seriously. I'm not saying that that is not correct I'm saying it takes the enjoyment out of it for the recs.

I have been playing this game for longer than I care to remember. I have never wanted to make poker my living just my hobby. Sometimes I win sometimes I lose.

I never play small buying freeze outs and I never play holdem cash games for the reasons above.

I love to play PLO cash because its fun.

Just my thoughts.

[smurf]

I watched a hand one the big game where Tony G raises £5k blind and declares it so to the table ( not sure of the blinds but the pot always seems to start with €375??) and Torrelli then jams for £20k. G then gives him hell for being bad for the game and telling him that he personally will make sure he never gets an invite to play again.

Having said that I also saw Tony G look at his cards and tell Hellmuth he was blind and even tried to get Hachem to lie for him too.

What's with the Big Cash game and the Premier League having pretty much the same players in it.

saw that myself...Tony G seemed pissed up and was trying to show off to the table then got a right arse on when he was shoved all in...not long after that he also had a right go at another player for rebuying with the minimum $5000

made himself look a complete twat if you ask me.