Television's Expanding Role and Its Impact on Poker

Author's note: Table Talk is intended to be an in-depth discussion of the most important issues in poker. My column will feature a wide range of perspectives designed to encourage debate on current topics within the poker industry.

Television's impact on the poker world has been nothing short of colossal. With all the subtlety of a hurricane and the temperance of a bulldozer, television has revolutionized the game of poker, from the way it's played to the way it's perceived by the general public. Television has made household names of its biggest stars. Television has helped to pack poker rooms from coast to coast and substantially increased the number of poker tournaments held year-round. Television has created a tidal wave of casual interest in online poker not only in North America, but overseas, as well. In short, if the era before televised poker was the Dark Ages, we have just entered the Renaissance.

Poker's skyrocketing popularity aside, with changes come questions. Namely, has television really changed poker for the better? On the surface, the positives seem to far outweigh the negatives. However, as televised poker continues to gain influence, will the day eventually come when we barely recognize the game we once knew – the game once played in saloons by ranch hands and riverboat gamblers? Have we slid down a slippery slope so far that the game is no longer in the players' hands, and is now controlled by television executives? How much of our individuality are we willing to sacrifice for the sake of gaining public acceptance? Perhaps most important, what impact does television have on strategy and the decisions we make at the poker table? Indeed, there are many vital questions brought about by television's increasing impact upon the poker scene that are worthy of discussion and debate.

Is television making poker more popular?

Yes – Poker is more popular now than ever before. It has never been played in as many countries by as many people from all walks of life as it is today. Poker's growth is largely due to television exposure. Aspiring poker players see people like themselves – such as 2003 World Series of Poker Champion Chris Moneymaker – winning millions of dollars, which drives them into hundreds of brick-and-mortar cardrooms and online poker sites. Poker tournaments are popping up at casinos everywhere – in the United States, overseas, even on cruise ships. The staggering television ratings achieved by the World Series of Poker on ESPN and the World Poker Tour on the Travel Channel prove that millions of viewers want to learn more about the game and are eager to play poker when they get the chance. In short, television has propelled poker into a new era.

No – While some cardrooms have increased their numbers, most rooms are still about the same size and spread the same number of games as before. Few new poker rooms have been added in casinos since poker has been widely televised. The underlying problem remains – poker is still looked at as the stepchild of the casino industry because many executives (often wrongly) believe that other games are more beneficial to the casino. The majority of states still do not have legal poker rooms. Furthermore, televised poker has not affected overseas markets, with the exception of England (which had its own televised poker tournaments a few years ago). Online poker's popularity has certainly skyrocketed. But, with Congress currently debating at least two bills that might outlaw online gambling, even the existence of Internet poker is in danger. In short, the easy access of online poker to everyone with a personal computer has probably created greater public interest in poker than events shown on television.

Is television changing the average poker game?

Yes – Thousands of novice players have watched televised poker for the first time and mimic what they have seen when they sit down at the table. The end result has been games that are much looser and wilder. No matter where you live, walk into most cardrooms and you will see plenty of new faces, many of which have never laid eyes on a poker book before. More hands are played, the pots are bigger, and the games are better – period.

No – Poker is still poker. It doesn't change. A flush still beats a straight, and so on. Sure, a few new faces have shown up inside cardrooms. But, the "average" poker game is still a low-limit hold'em table with a couple of rocks, three or four novices, a maniac, and a couple of semipros trying to grind out an hourly rate. Poker on television hasn't changed the composition of the "average" poker game, if there is such a thing.

Do television cameras (at final tables) influence player behavior?

Yes – Most players enjoy being seen on television and want to remain at the final table for as long as possible, for reasons that have as much to do with ego as money. Television cameras encourage more table conversation and banter, which then leads to changes in the way some hands are played and the way opponents are perceived. Cameras and microphones make some players more animated, and they shine in the spotlight of television. When the cameras are rolling, other players are more careful about what they say and generally behave in a more civil manner. This is good for the game.

No – The vast majority of poker players are concerned with the prize money, not television cameras. This is especially true with tournament professionals. Most of the players who appear at final tables have won events before the influx of television coverage, and view television as little more than a minor distraction to their main objective – which is to win the tournament. The biggest talkers will talk regardless of whether or not cameras are present in the room. The more reserved players tune out the distractions of lights and cameras and play just as they would if it were a non-televised event.

Does revealing the holecards of players alter the way some hands are played?

Yes – Since every hand at the final table can now be seen on television, players are more reluctant to take reckless chances – lest they come off looking foolish in the public eye. Before television cameras were instituted at the biggest poker tournaments, players could play hands without fearing the ramifications of having their hands revealed. Now, players must worry about the fallout of making a bad decision, and they play more cautiously. The end result has been that most final tables are longer (in terms of time) than in the past.

No – When televised tournaments began about a year ago, there was some controversy about showing holecards. Top pros feared that showing holecards would reveal their secrets. With television cameras present, for the first time players could be recorded, tracked, and categorized according to the way they played certain hands. Now, after dozens of poker tournaments have been shown on television, the bottom line is – little has changed. The top players still win the most events. There is still just as much confusion about why players make odd decisions and do what they do – with or without cameras.

Should television networks enact rules that forbid deal-making?

Yes – It looks bad on television if players make deals. For example, assuming the final two players at a big tournament decide to cut up the prize money, what's the point of playing for first place? If a deal is struck, why would the dollar figures reported by the commentators matter when one player bets six figures and his opponent comes over the top with a million dollar raise? It would be a sham. The entire point of showing poker on television is to feature the drama and excitement of players playing for lots of prize money. For poker to be exciting, the most meaningful strategic and financial decisions must be legitimate, and not be jaded by some shady backroom deal.

No – Poker tournaments belong to the players – not the TV networks. Since the players buy in to the events with their own cash, they should retain every right to divide prize money and make deals as they wish. Until networks or sponsors put up the prize money themselves, players must retain the right to discuss how the prize money is distributed. Players must also retain the right to make a deal if they so wish. He who has the gold makes the rules.

Should television networks establish dress codes for players (who appear at final tables)?

Yes – It's about time poker cleaned up its act. Players who appear at final tables represent all of us, and have an obligation to present themselves to the public in a professional manner. There are dress codes for some restaurants and social clubs. There also must be dress codes for the biggest events in poker. Television must set standards for player appearance and conduct in order to sell the game to the general public, and these standards must appeal to the widest possible audience.

No – Poker is the last frontier of individual freedom. Like it or not, our clothes define us as people – who we are and what we stand for. The last thing television networks should do is try to make everyone dress up and look the same. We are not robots. Not everyone can look like James Bond inside a casino – nor should they be forced to. Poker is made up of truck drivers, college students, doctors, steel workers, waiters, and people from all walks of life and social classes. If a player is fortunate enough to make it to a final table at a tournament, he or she should be permitted to dress in what is comfortable. By establishing dress codes, we are destroying what makes poker unique. It's one of the few places where you see cowboy hats, baseball caps, fedoras, and turbans. It's the last place where people can be themselves. Don't let television kill it.

Overall, has televised poker been good or bad for the game?

Good – Televised poker has made an astounding impact on the game's popularity. The influx of new players has made many games easier to beat. It has made stars of the top players. For the first time, televised poker has given us admittance to advanced tournament strategies, because it allows us to see how the best players in the world play a poker hand from start to finish. The end result has been a positive one for all poker players, employees, and cardrooms.

Bad – While television has made a few positive changes, the irrefutable problems associated with television's pre-eminence far outweigh any benefits. Players are losing control of the game – from the strategies they employ to the manner in which prize money is divided to the way they dress and act at final tables. Television has become "Big Brother" – it sees and records everything for posterity. Poker was meant to be played by real people testing their skills, not by manufactured contestants who look as though they just walked onto the set of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire.

What do you think? You are encouraged to visit www.cardplayer.com, where you can register your vote on these questions. Please do so by Nov. 12. You also may e-mail your comments directly to: [email protected]. Some comments will be printed in a follow-up column with the poll results. Due to space constraints, please limit your comments to no more than 300 words. All comments received may be edited for content.