|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 8/28/2008 5:25:53 PM PACIFIC |
 World Series Of Poker, Roy Cooke, 17. Apr 2003 09:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| The first tournament (limit hold'em) had 422 (2nd hand report) entries as opposed to around 675 the year before. Are players in other areas with live games seeing a decline in live play? Roy Cooke | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, gary ford, 17. Apr 2003 10:16 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| could it be that the Horseshoe is dying and the Bellagio is replacing it? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, Roy Cooke, 17. Apr 2003 10:30 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| The Bellagio has open tables at 6pm with no long list like previous years! I don't think the the Bellagio is replacing the Horseshoe! Roy Cooke on 17. Apr 2003 10:16 gary ford wrote: > could it be that the Horseshoe is dying and the Bellagio is replacing it? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, gary ford, 18. Apr 2003 10:00 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| as a long-time professional, you may have a sentimental attachment to the Horsehoe, but you cant deny the fact that the Bellagio is a superior venue. Dr. Alan Schoonmaker has written a provocative article about pokers image and how that affects the search for corporate sponsors.. Lets see how the turnout is for the other WSOP events and maybe ask the WPT people their opinion of the things they are doing to upgrade the image of poker. You are a fine example of a professional who is also a professional outside of poker. The search for corporate sponsorship will depend on one word: image. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, 4 POKER, 18. Apr 2003 10:31 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| On 17. Apr 2003 10:16 Gary ford wrote: > could it be that the Horseshoe is dying and the Bellagio is replacing it? The Horseshoe is a dump and they have made no attempt whatsoever to change anything. They're still using the same crappy chips that have been there since day one and the tournament area looks worse then a broken down bingo hall. I think it's a shame that they still own the rights to the WSOP, they should make some serious changes or sell it to a casino who could do a better job. 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, TKarrde, 17. Apr 2003 10:24 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Lets wait to see the results of the entire tournament. But it will be a sad day for the sport if the Dodgers leave Brooklyn. :( TK | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, 4 POKER, 17. Apr 2003 10:32 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 17. Apr 2003 09:59 Roy Cooke wrote: > The first tournament (limit hold'em) had 422 (2nd hand report) entries as > opposed to around 675 the year before. Are players in other areas with live > games seeing a decline in live play? > > Roy Cooke I live in Atlantic City and the action is still great! I also drove up for the New England Classic in Foxwoods and the live action was about the same as usual. I can't speak much for tournament turn-outs but I just don't think poker in general is that swift in Vegas. There are so many better states to play in where the calibar of play is not as strong and the action and game selections are just better, plain and simple. 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, shorn, 17. Apr 2003 10:36 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Roy- I live in Massachusetts and play at Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun from time to time. Every time I go (although it is mostly on weekends), the place is full with a good 1/2 hour wait for most limits. My guess is that on-line poker will eventually lead to more players at B&M once they discover that manby casinos offer poker (belive it or not, a lot of people don't know that around here). My two cents. Steve P.S.- Could also be that a lot of the players wh were there last year are not finding the same amount of discretionary $$ to throw around this year due to the economic slowdown. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, Roy Cooke, 18. Apr 2003 10:57 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think Vegas has been hit by the 9/11 incident more than other venues in which more of their customers drive to. Also, in Vegas the International market has more impact and that market is definitely down. Roy Cooke on 17. Apr 2003 10:32 4 POKER wrote: > on 17. Apr 2003 09:59 Roy Cooke wrote: > > The first tournament (limit hold'em) had 422 (2nd hand report) entries as > > opposed to around 675 the year before. Are players in other areas with live > > games seeing a decline in live play? > > > > Roy Cooke > > I live in Atlantic City and the action is still great! > I also drove up for the New England Classic in Foxwoods and the live action was > about the same as usual. > I can't speak much for tournament turn-outs but I just don't think poker in general > is that swift in Vegas. > There are so many better states to play in where the calibar of play is not as > strong and the action and game selections are just better, > plain and simple. > > 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, stdioh, 21. Apr 2003 09:08 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think another germain factor is that with poker expanding, more poker players have a place to play that is close to them and don't need to fly somewhere to play. Thus Vegas gets fewer poker tourists. That said, big events in Vegas probably bring in a lot more poker players - I don't know how it would balance. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, Roy Cooke, 18. Apr 2003 11:00 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| While I think the games are better. The speed of play, time and cost of living issues make Las Vegas a good place to be for the good player. While the number of games is down in Vegas the action in the games that are going is still VERY good with cheap rakes and a very low cost of living. Roy Cooke on 17. Apr 2003 10:32 4 POKER wrote: > on 17. Apr 2003 09:59 Roy Cooke wrote: > > The first tournament (limit hold'em) had 422 (2nd hand report) entries as > > opposed to around 675 the year before. Are players in other areas with live > > games seeing a decline in live play? > > > > Roy Cooke > > I live in Atlantic City and the action is still great! > I also drove up for the New England Classic in Foxwoods and the live action was > about the same as usual. > I can't speak much for tournament turn-outs but I just don't think poker in general > is that swift in Vegas. > There are so many better states to play in where the calibar of play is not as > strong and the action and game selections are just better, > plain and simple. > > 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, 4 POKER, 18. Apr 2003 11:24 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 18. Apr 2003 11:00 Roy Cooke wrote: > While I think the games are better. The speed of play, time and cost of living issues make > Las Vegas a good place to be for the good player. While the number of games is down in > Vegas the action in the games that are going is still VERY good with cheap rakes and a > very low cost of living. > > Roy Cooke I agree, the cost of living is cheaper, and the rake is slightly less however, the action in Vegas compared to Atlantic City, Foxwoods, and California is not even close. If you're living in Vegas, like yourself, Roy, then the cost of living and less rake are factors to think about, definitely but... If people were to take a vacation or pick a spot where they could play poker and find the best games available with the best action, I really don't think Las Vegas would be on the top of that list.(at least not to someone who knew better). I don't know if you've ever played in Atlantic City for a period of time but both casinos(the Taj and the Trop) especially the Taj, have so many games and limits to chose from with people driving in from all over the east coast to play there. The same goes for Foxwoods, The money alone that people give away in that card room, every single day of the year would make your head spin! And as far as California goes, well that place speaks for itself, because IMO, there just isn't a better place that will give you the most opportunity to make money, not to mention they accomodate you pretty nicely over there. 4 POKER > on 17. Apr 2003 10:32 4 POKER wrote: > > on 17. Apr 2003 09:59 Roy Cooke wrote: > > > The first tournament (limit hold'em) had 422 (2nd hand report) entries as > > > opposed to around 675 the year before. Are players in other areas with live > > > games seeing a decline in live play? > > > > > > Roy Cooke > > > > I live in Atlantic City and the action is still great! > > I also drove up for the New England Classic in Foxwoods and the live action was > > about the same as usual. > > I can't speak much for tournament turn-outs but I just don't think poker in general > > is that swift in Vegas. > > There are so many better states to play in where the calibar of play is not as > > strong and the action and game selections are just better, > > plain and simple. > > > > 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, Roy Cooke, 18. Apr 2003 11:38 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I agree with your perspective on what you said. However , when I visited Atlantic City and Foxwoods the games were VERY slow moving. If you get 10% more hands in Vegas...and I think that might be low...then you earn will go up proportionately in a faster game. The games in Vegas move fast! I think the earn for a good player in Vegas is quite good! Roy Cooke on 18. Apr 2003 11:24 4 POKER wrote: > on 18. Apr 2003 11:00 Roy Cooke wrote: > > While I think the games are better. The speed of play, time and cost of living issues make > > > Las Vegas a good place to be for the good player. While the number of games is down in > > Vegas the action in the games that are going is still VERY good with cheap rakes and a > > very low cost of living. > > > > Roy Cooke > > I agree, the cost of living is cheaper, and the rake is slightly less however, the action in > Vegas compared to Atlantic City, Foxwoods, and California is not even close. > If you're living in Vegas, like yourself, Roy, then the cost of living and less rake are > factors to think about, definitely but... If people were to take a vacation or pick a spot > where they could play poker and find the best games available with the best action, I really > don't think Las Vegas would be on the top of that list.(at least not to someone who knew > better). > I don't know if you've ever played in Atlantic City for a period of time but both casinos(the > Taj and the Trop) especially the Taj, have so many games and limits to chose from with people > driving in from all over the east coast to play there. > The same goes for Foxwoods, The money alone that people give away in that card room, every > single day of the year would make your head spin! > And as far as California goes, well that place speaks for itself, because IMO, there just > isn't a better place that will give you the most opportunity to make money, not to mention they > accomodate you pretty nicely over there. > > 4 POKER > > on 17. Apr 2003 10:32 4 POKER wrote: > > > on 17. Apr 2003 09:59 Roy Cooke wrote: > > > > The first tournament (limit hold'em) had 422 (2nd hand report) entries as > > > > opposed to around 675 the year before. Are players in other areas with live > > > > games seeing a decline in live play? > > > > > > > > Roy Cooke > > > > > > I live in Atlantic City and the action is still great! > > > I also drove up for the New England Classic in Foxwoods and the live action was > > > about the same as usual. > > > I can't speak much for tournament turn-outs but I just don't think poker in general > > > is that swift in Vegas. > > > There are so many better states to play in where the calibar of play is not as > > > strong and the action and game selections are just better, > > > plain and simple. > > > > > > 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, 4 POKER, 18. Apr 2003 11:45 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 18. Apr 2003 11:38 Roy Cooke wrote: > I agree with your perspective on what you said. However , when I visited Atlantic City and Foxwoods > the games were VERY slow moving. If you get 10% more hands in Vegas...and I think that might be > low...then you earn will go up proportionately in a faster game. The games in Vegas move fast! I > think the earn for a good player in Vegas is quite good! Really? I go there every year for months at a time and I really didn't think that the game moved any faster. However, I do play Omaha exclusively when I'm there so maybe that has something to do with it, that game is always a slow pace! But I will say this, I have never had a losing trip yet- and even though I play professionally, the players in that 20-40w/1/2kill are some of the best players I have ever played with.(I guess they're still looking at me as just another tourist... yippee)!!!!!!!!!! 4 POKER > > Roy Cooke on 18. Apr 2003 11:24 4 POKER wrote: > > on 18. Apr 2003 11:00 Roy Cooke wrote: > > > While I think the games are better. The speed of play, time and cost of living issues make > > > > > Las Vegas a good place to be for the good player. While the number of games is down in > > > Vegas the action in the games that are going is still VERY good with cheap rakes and a > > > very low cost of living. > > > > > > Roy Cooke > > > > I agree, the cost of living is cheaper, and the rake is slightly less however, the action in > > Vegas compared to Atlantic City, Foxwoods, and California is not even close. > > If you're living in Vegas, like yourself, Roy, then the cost of living and less rake are > > factors to think about, definitely but... If people were to take a vacation or pick a spot > > where they could play poker and find the best games available with the best action, I really > > don't think Las Vegas would be on the top of that list.(at least not to someone who knew > > better). > > I don't know if you've ever played in Atlantic City for a period of time but both casinos(the > > Taj and the Trop) especially the Taj, have so many games and limits to chose from with people > > driving in from all over the east coast to play there. > > The same goes for Foxwoods, The money alone that people give away in that card room, every > > single day of the year would make your head spin! > > And as far as California goes, well that place speaks for itself, because IMO, there just > > isn't a better place that will give you the most opportunity to make money, not to mention they > > > accomodate you pretty nicely over there. > > > > 4 POKER > > > on 17. Apr 2003 10:32 4 POKER wrote: > > > > on 17. Apr 2003 09:59 Roy Cooke wrote: > > > > > The first tournament (limit hold'em) had 422 (2nd hand report) entries as > > > > > opposed to around 675 the year before. Are players in other areas with live > > > > > games seeing a decline in live play? > > > > > > > > > > Roy Cooke > > > > > > > > I live in Atlantic City and the action is still great! > > > > I also drove up for the New England Classic in Foxwoods and the live action was > > > > about the same as usual. > > > > I can't speak much for tournament turn-outs but I just don't think poker in general > > > > is that swift in Vegas. > > > > There are so many better states to play in where the calibar of play is not as > > > > strong and the action and game selections are just better, > > > > plain and simple. > > > > > > > > 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, 4 POKER, 18. Apr 2003 11:55 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 18. Apr 2003 11:38 Roy Cooke wrote: > I agree with your perspective on what you said. However , when I visited Atlantic City and Foxwoods > the games were VERY slow moving. If you get 10% more hands in Vegas...and I think that might be > low...then you earn will go up proportionately in a faster game. The games in Vegas move fast! I > think the earn for a good player in Vegas is quite good! I'd like to add one more thing, the games in general are faster moving in Vegas because you simply have the best dealers around. The dealers there are trained to know how to deal EVERY game, including Omaha, therefore more hands are being dealt out. That is why, IMO that the pace is much faster. 4 POKER > > Roy Cooke on 18. Apr 2003 11:24 4 POKER wrote: > > on 18. Apr 2003 11:00 Roy Cooke wrote: > > > While I think the games are better. The speed of play, time and cost of living issues make > > > > > Las Vegas a good place to be for the good player. While the number of games is down in > > > Vegas the action in the games that are going is still VERY good with cheap rakes and a > > > very low cost of living. > > > > > > Roy Cooke > > > > I agree, the cost of living is cheaper, and the rake is slightly less however, the action in > > Vegas compared to Atlantic City, Foxwoods, and California is not even close. > > If you're living in Vegas, like yourself, Roy, then the cost of living and less rake are > > factors to think about, definitely but... If people were to take a vacation or pick a spot > > where they could play poker and find the best games available with the best action, I really > > don't think Las Vegas would be on the top of that list.(at least not to someone who knew > > better). > > I don't know if you've ever played in Atlantic City for a period of time but both casinos(the > > Taj and the Trop) especially the Taj, have so many games and limits to chose from with people > > driving in from all over the east coast to play there. > > The same goes for Foxwoods, The money alone that people give away in that card room, every > > single day of the year would make your head spin! > > And as far as California goes, well that place speaks for itself, because IMO, there just > > isn't a better place that will give you the most opportunity to make money, not to mention they > > > accomodate you pretty nicely over there. > > > > 4 POKER > > > on 17. Apr 2003 10:32 4 POKER wrote: > > > > on 17. Apr 2003 09:59 Roy Cooke wrote: > > > > > The first tournament (limit hold'em) had 422 (2nd hand report) entries as > > > > > opposed to around 675 the year before. Are players in other areas with live > > > > > games seeing a decline in live play? > > > > > > > > > > Roy Cooke > > > > > > > > I live in Atlantic City and the action is still great! > > > > I also drove up for the New England Classic in Foxwoods and the live action was > > > > about the same as usual. > > > > I can't speak much for tournament turn-outs but I just don't think poker in general > > > > is that swift in Vegas. > > > > There are so many better states to play in where the calibar of play is not as > > > > strong and the action and game selections are just better, > > > > plain and simple. > > > > > > > > 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, stdioh, 17. Apr 2003 13:29 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hold'em is waxing in Southern Ontario. A new influx of people are introduced every year at the Canadian National Exhibition where there is a full poker room for three weeks every summer. Brantford is full on weekends and mostly full the vast majority of the time throughout the week. Rama has dropped off significantly, but that is a function of Brantford and Port Perry having taken their business as both are closer to densely populated areas. Smoking Torontonians go to Perry and nonsmokers to Brantford. I'd say that poker participation is on the up and up here. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: World Series Of Poker, flintsword, 18. Apr 2003 23:21 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| The first tournament of the WSOP (Casino Employees) had 208 players compared to 272 in 2002. The second tournament of the WSOP (Limit Holdem) had 422 players compared to 610 in 2002. The key point you should keep in mind is that in 2002, the second event was on a SATURDAY, hence a very large crowd. This year, the second event was on a WEDNESDAY. I think it would make a difference. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|