Quote:
Originally Posted by joeydb
It's been said before here, but it bears repeating:
If ESPN covered the NHC in a similar way to the World Series of Poker, this game would boom. In the same demographics -- college kids, young professionals, and just those currently unfamiliar with the game.
Millions of people watch the WSOP for weeks as a pool of over 7300 players narrow down to 9, and then to 1 winner -- where the winner gets several million dollars.
In contrast, a field of just over 300 players where the champion gets $500,000, and next year the winner is expected to get $1,000,000 has GOT to appear to be the value that it is. The NHC is much shorter -- two days in total. With the editing that is done similar to the WSOP, showing the highlights, it could be presented in 2 hours.
The similarity of horse racing to poker for the player is obvious. A pool of money is accumulated, a "rake" (or takeout) is siphoned off, and the rest is divided among the winner(s). Odds fluctuate that CAN make the game profitable in either case -- if you know the math and you get a little lucky.
It is universally accepted that Texas Hold 'Em Poker exploded in popularity after Chris Moneymaker won the whole thing back in 2003. He was one of 838 players that year. Seven years later, the tournament has grown to 7319.
If I had the money, I'd back this project myself. If done right, it can make a splash. I'd piggyback it off of the repeats of the World Series of Poker like networks do with new shows that are likely to have similar audiences...they call it the "lead in".
Am I the only guy who feels this way? I know some are opposed to the NHC itself expanding, just as some are dismayed that the WSOP is now so huge. But the benefits to the sport of getting positive exposure rapidly and stimulating new interest are enormous.
|
Honestly, I think it's a horrible concept. Poker has different things going for it.
#1- Most people now how to play and can relate to what's going on.
#2- After all these years of watching it, poker has personalities that people like to root for and against. It's almost like a secondary storyline.
#3- In poker you don't need the best hand to win. Obviously the tableside cameras make everything so mch more interesting, but watching somebody laying down their aces to a guy who has 2,7 offsuit is always fun to watch.
What is the horse racing show going to offer? Have some guy read the form and explain why he betting a certain horse at 7-1? I think it's just a poor introduction to the sport for beginers. Basically it's exposing them to contest play (which the betting rules and bets for that matter are different), with the percentage probably very low for many of these people just visiting a track, let alone going into a contest.
I just think if ESPN is really comitted to any type of horse racing programming, they would just be better of served showing races from a certain track for a two-three hour block. In between these races explain the different types of bets/angles while also getting into explaing how to dechiper a racing form for some of the newbies who might have intrest in learning. I think Friday night Hollywood cards would be a great place to start. Make it a weekly thing for the meet and see if intrest picks up. I believe that would do more justice for the sport than the airing of some contest that honestly I would think most horseplayers would have a hard time sitting through.