ESPN to Offer WSOP Final Table Pay-Per-View

ESPN and Harrah’s announced last week that the final table of the Main Event of the 2006 World Series of Poker (WSOP) will be broadcast live on pay-per-view this year. For $24.95, poker fans can see every hand of the final table, either on television, or on ESPN.com. The final table is scheduled to begin at 3:00pm EST on Thursday, August 10.

This simple and seemingly good idea is not without a bit of controversy.

Since the announcement, poker fans have debated as to whether or not ESPN will show viewers the players’ hole cards, as they do in their regular poker telecasts. The advent of the “lipstick cam” or “hole cam” has contributed greatly to the surge in poker’s popularity over the last few years, as it has allowed fans become more than just casual observers of a poker game. They are able to try to think along with the competitors.

But the problem that may arise if hole cards are displayed, even with a tape delay, is that final table participants may very likely be able to acquire information about their opponents’ past hands during play, or at least during breaks. In an easily imagined scenario, friends at home could possibly watch the contest and relay hand information back to the player via cell phone or text message. If the player doesn’t have a communications device to check on a break, the information could instead be given to another friend in the audience. Even if there is a ten minute, thirty minute, or two hour delay, such hand information could be very important as the final table moves on.

Many people feel that the hole cards must be shown, or else it will make for a very boring telecast, and for the most part, they are right. Watching fourteen hours of poker without knowing the cards can get quite excruciating. But what to do about the possibility of players receiving information during the game? Some have suggested sequestering the players during breaks and not allowing them to talk to anybody. Some have suggested not allowing cell phones in the room and if any spectator leaves, they are not allowed back in. Some have also suggested not allowing the players to step away from the table and talk with friends and family. These and other ideas are not without their merits, but all come with logistical problems that would quite likely detract from the final table experience, both for the players and the spectators.

The other topic of debate is where the pay-per-view revenues go. A common, and reasonable, gripe amongst players is that in today’s “golden age” of poker, more and more changes are being made to the game in the name of increasing revenue. In the meantime, the players have to put up their own money to play, so when other parties are benefiting from added revenue streams, yet no money gets added to the tournament prize pools, the players get upset. And why not? If, for example, I am told that I can’t have a sponsor’s logo on my cap because it conflicts with the tournament’s television sponsor, I am not going to be happy. Why should the company that runs the tournament make money off of my participation, while I can’t, when I am the one fronting the money? If game play is at all changed by the pay-per-view broadcast, players will be upset and will have every right to want a piece of the revenue, particularly when they are already having part of their tournament buy-in taken out to pay the house.

No matter what happens, though, this will easily be the best deal on a cost per hour basis in the history of pay-per-view television.

Originally published June 12, 2006