21 Jan 12

Putting The Drama Into Televised Poker

Following an interview with TV commentator Jesse May, Barry Carter discusses the future of televised poker, and what it needs to do to capture mainstream audiences.

Jesse May "The Voice of Poker"

I interviewed one of my heroes this week for the PokerStrategy Podcast, TV poker commentator Jesse May. One of the things he mentioned was an idea of his for 'face up poker' on TV poker shows. This is where at the end of a hand, everybody sees what everybody else had, including potentially a live studio audience.

He listed many reasons why this could prove a winning formula, but the main reasons were because it would create lots of drama when bluffs are shown at the end of a hand, and that it would be very entertaining for a live studio audience. Take a listen to the podcast when it airs, because he put together a very compelling argument for his idea. 

Watching poker can be pretty boring live when you cannot see the hole cards, but such an idea could be the change needed to make TV poker a fully fledged live spectator sport. I'm sure you would agree that in most other sports, the atmosphere from an excited live audience can really make the difference between entertaining and dull.

In recent years, televised poker has received a real shot in the arm from a variety of format changes. The live streams of the WSOP, WPT, and PartyPoker Big Game were all amazing, we are seeing cash game poker becoming more and more popular, and even starting to see heads-up and PLO getting more airtime.

Televised poker is becoming much less about advertising online poker sponsors, and much more about creating entertainment in its own right.

Characters

Matchroom Poker are the team behind a lot of the best poker shows on this side of the Atlantic. Recent examples of this have included the Durrrr Challenge, the PartyPoker Premier League, and the PartyPoker Big Game. All of which have changed the format of the traditional poker show.

The Durrrr challenge saw Tom Dwan take on three heads-up cash game opponents with a minimum sit down of $500,000, the Premier League was a recurring league format show with some of the biggest TV pros, and the Big Game was a 48 hour continuous cash game with Big Brother style player evictions.

The new formats are different to the usual 'six-max final table' format we expect to see on screen, but these shows boast much more than just that. What they also do is create easy to define characters for the audience to cheer for, or against.

The Durrrr challenge is all about this unbeatable online whizz kid taking on all comers, in the Premier League we see the same characters returning each week out so we become familiar with them, and the Big Game showed all the real unedited sweat, grit, and drama of a sleep deprived cash game, with some reality TV sensationalism thrown in.

This is what Matchroom do particularly well. They did it with both Darts and Snooker in the UK, two games most people would not expect to be compelling spectator sports, but both have become incredibly popular as a direct result of the same emphasis on character creation and razzmatazz.

TV audiences do not like to be confused, and this game is potentially very complicated to an outsider, but clearly defined heroes and villains are a great way to bridge that knowledge gap. Show anyone a Hellmuth or a Tony G, and they will instantly have an investment in poker before they even understand the hand rankings.

The satellite winner

To create these characters, invariably we need the better known 'TV Pros' - the aforementioned Tony Gs and Hellmuths. Larger than life characters, whom you either love or hate, who also know how to play and have a track record to boast about. TV producers understand this, which is why we increasingly see things such as high stakes cash games, super high roller, EPIC poker leagues, and invite only shootout events.

But some of them are making a huge mistake by leaving out the one character that turns poker television from a compelling spectacle, to the fuse that lights a fully-fledged boom; and that is the plucky amateur. The satellite winner, who is completely out of his depth, yet competing on a level playing field with the best in the game.

This, for me, is the most important element of poker, the fact that a complete amateur can take on, and beat, the best players in the world. It is the most attractive part of the game, and also the reason why poker is a profitable game.

In this respect, PokerStars got it dead right with their Big Game cash game shows. Catapulting a complete unknown, a 'Loose Cannon', into a cash game with some of the best players in the world. You got big names, great action, and an underdog to root for. It was addictive viewing for experienced players and newbies alike, and of course it created what is, in my opinion, the greatest hand in the history of televised poker.

Remembering the core audience

A lot of you might say that some of the examples above, or Jesse's idea for face up poker, sensationalises or cheapens the game. The quick answer to that is, yes of course it does; that is the point.

Serious poker players make up a very small percentage of the overall TV poker audience. The vast majority of people that watch TV poker are either recreational players, or are yet to play the game. They want to be entertained, which means we don't want to confuse them, and we have to be able to bring them up to speed very quickly. Crazy characters, dramatic plot twists, and easy to understand formats are all a sure-fire way to achieve that.

Of course there are some instances where serious poker players can also be catered for at the same time. Shows like High Stakes Poker, the Big Game (Both Pokerstars and Party Poker's versions), and ESPN's coverage of the WSOP did pretty good job of that.

But ultimately serious players need to remember that lots of new players discover poker through TV shows, and even if they don't like the shows themselves, they have to appreciate the importance of giving poker a much more mainstream appeal.

by Barry Carter