The model is the World Series of Poker TV coverage

[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.