M
Mike_25
Guest
I have witnessed the rise of poker from a pastime for coal miners and ranchers to a multi-billion dollar industry with sky-high buy ins. My question for fellow players is: Has this evolution been good for the game?
On one hand, the high stakes have attracted publicity, sponsorship deals and glamorous tales of players winning fortunes. This has shed a spotlight on poker and grown the game. However, some argue that the game has lost its roots as an equalizer, where skill reigned supreme over the size of one's bank roll. Many average players have been priced out, leaving a more niche audience at the felt tables. The thrill of outplaying friends and neighbours for small stakes is disappearing.
Has the growth of ever increasing poker buy-ins enriched the strategic depth of the game and attracted new talented players? Or have we lost some of poker's soul in favor of million dollar headlines and fireworks on TV? I welcome thoughts from both sides of the felt on this debate.
On one hand, the high stakes have attracted publicity, sponsorship deals and glamorous tales of players winning fortunes. This has shed a spotlight on poker and grown the game. However, some argue that the game has lost its roots as an equalizer, where skill reigned supreme over the size of one's bank roll. Many average players have been priced out, leaving a more niche audience at the felt tables. The thrill of outplaying friends and neighbours for small stakes is disappearing.
Has the growth of ever increasing poker buy-ins enriched the strategic depth of the game and attracted new talented players? Or have we lost some of poker's soul in favor of million dollar headlines and fireworks on TV? I welcome thoughts from both sides of the felt on this debate.
