Not Live Enough
Sunday, November 23, 2008 - Gene Bromberg
It’s been almost two weeks since poker crowned its new World Champion—it’s Peter Eastgate, for those of you who forgot to emerge from your cave until well after ESPN’s broadcast. There’s been quite a bit of discussion about whether Harrah’s decision to delay the final table for 117 days was a good idea, but by one barometer the delay was a hit—ESPN’s ratings for the final table were up 50% from a year ago.
It’s important to recall that slumping television ratings were one of the big reasons why Harrah’s chose to put the final table on hiatus. The last few years the ratings for poker shows have been going down, down, down, and as with any TV show there’s always the risk of cancellation when the numbers fall. Part of the decline was probably due to some poker fatigue among the viewing public—in addition to expanded WSOP and WPT coverage it seemed like every cable channel developed some contrived and unspeakably awful poker show. Pardon me for refreshing your memory of Celebrity Poker Showdown and Poker Royale: Battle of the Sexes.
But the big problem is that most poker telecasts air months after the tournament is over and the champion crowned. There are a number of media outlets that provide live event coverage and scores of sites and blogs (including this one) that post interviews and updates and photos as well. It is well nigh impossible for poker fans NOT to know who won a tournament before they sit down to watch it on TV. And that kills much of the drama. Sure, you might tune in to see the hole cards of two players involved in a huge (but not decisive) hand, but if you already know who eventually takes it down…why bother watching?
By delaying the final table four months and then broadcasting the action the day after the bracelet was awarded Harrah’s was hoping to preserve much of that drama. Hardcore fans could, if they wished, try to avoid poker news outlets for 48 hours and hopefully keep themselves in the dark. While the general public could check their local listings, find that ESPN was broadcasting a poker tournament with a $9 million first prize, and decide that this was something worth watching.
Broadcasting the final table two days after it was played was a half-measure that ended up a half-success. Yes, the ratings were up. Yes, the Penn & Teller theater (where the final table was held) was packed to the rafters with hundreds of rowdy fans. And much of that excitement came through during the ESPN broadcast, which did a good job of conveying the energy in the room, the drama of the moment, and the personalities of the players. I’m still kicking myself for not going out there to see it in person.
The thing is, ESPN only aired two hours of that compelling coverage. Three, if you include the “pre-game” show that offered features on each of the November Nine. And that’s just not enough time to give viewers a true sense of what went on.. The final table took 274 hands and over 15 hours to play. Only two hours made it to air (far less, actually, when you subtract those pesky commercials). The heads-up battle between Eastgate and Ivan Demidov was a back-and-forth epic that lasted 104 hands. ESPN showed two of them. You’ll hear critics who say that people don’t want to watch 15 hours of players stealing the blinds and antes. My response is that, A) people watch endless hours of golf on TV and therefore must have a high tolerance for long periods of low drama, and B) any activity can be made interesting if presented in a creative and engaging manner. Two of the most popular TV shows feature amateurs singing songs everyone already knows and borderline celebrities performing formal dance routines. ANYTHING can be made appealing to the viewing public, if it’s done with wit, style, and respect for the audience. Well, maybe just two out of three.
The ideal situation would be a live broadcast of the final table (or as live as would be acceptable to the Nevada Gaming Commission), followed perhaps by an edited final-table broadcast that’s similar to what we see today (hole cards, better production values, featurettes, etc). I can’t see how it’s in poker’s long-term interest to expect it’s most ardent fans to AVOID hearing news about the game’s biggest event. Remember, in most sports much of the revenue derives from advertising, advertising that is presented during live broadcasts of the game. Asking fans to avoid watching or hearing about the final table also means that advertisers on poker sites aren’t getting their message to their full target audience during the most important event of the year.
The final table of the Main Event should DRAW people’s eyeballs to what’s happening at the Rio, not force them to shut their eyes so they can enjoy the drama of a truncated recap two days later. Once upon a time (actually it was just 30 years ago) the NBA Finals were broadcast on tape delay. Olympic coverage was embargoed until prime time. Today the idea of not showing major sporting events live is ludicrous. The technology is there for the final table to be live-streamed online, as ESPN360 did with a number of WSOP preliminary events and as many European Poker Tour events are shown. It’s time for poker to stop apologizing for itself and broadcast the game’s most important event in living color.
Tags: 2008 world series of poker, 2008 wsop, espn, espn poker, espn world series of poker, final table, Poker Poker Poker, world series of poker, world series of poker coverage, world series of poker main event, WSOP
