Rethinking the Moneymaker Boom 20 Years Later (2 Viewers)

[doublebooyah85]

I also believe perception is based in one’s age and prior familiarity with poker in general. I think for people who were teens or very young in 2003, Moneymaker has a bigger spot in their memory. If you are older and were familiar at least somewhat in poker already, things like Rounders and the fact you could see hole cards was a bigger piece of the poker boom.

Party Poker and WPT started the NL boom.

 

[ChrisTot]

Wasn’t Moneymaker actually on twoplustwo forums or whatever and studying the game quite a bit? Always felt like he had a lot more knowledge of the game than was advertised. Or I’m crazy. Or both =)

 

[Old State]

Party Poker and WPT started the NL boom.

Many People forget or are no old enough to remember, that NL cash poker was not a normal thing. We went to Borgata the opening week in the summer of 2003. They only had limit holdem and AC didnt offer NL cash until at least late 2004 or early 2005 and it took a bit of time for many to warm up to it at the casino. Then it completely took over.

Wasn’t Moneymaker actually on twoplustwo forums or whatever and studying the game quite a bit? Always felt like he had a lot more knowledge of the game than was advertised. Or I’m crazy. Or both =)

None of it ever materialized into actual sustained success

 

[Old State]

Interview with Norman Chad I just found. I agree.

http://amp.awfulannouncing.com/espn/poker-boom-20-years-later-chris-moneymaker.html

“We would have had a boom either way. Chris Moneymaker made it a bigger boom [but] I think we would have had it without Chris.”

You can see the rise in interest starting a few years before. Entries on the far right. After new TV format and Moneymaker it really boomed

 

[Lemonzest]

The NHL lockout in 2004-2005 season may have also been a factor as hockey fans had nothing to watch/do.

 

[Jimulacrum]

I can agree that both improved TV coverage and easy access to online poker were bigger factors in the boom than Moneymaker's "anyone can win" story.*

The one thing I don't see mentioned is the guy's name. It's a ridiculous coincidence that someone named Moneymaker would famously win millions of dollars in such a way—the kind of thing that would make you stop and look twice.

People did stop and look twice, by the millions. Poker was on a growth trajectory anyway, but the name Moneymaker was like dropping a tanker full of gas on the fire.

Spoiler: *

Let's be clear; Moneymaker wasn't just anyone. From my understanding, he was a full-on compulsive gambler, and winning the WSOP was basically the only thing that prevented him from ruining himself financially.

 

[Moxie Mike]

While Moneymaker made a great story I believe the ESPN producers that made the production so top notch deserve 99% of the credit.

Moneymaker legitimized 2 key things that drive interest in poker to this day: 1) He embodied the 'anybody can win'/'David vs. Goliath' narrative; and 2) (and probably more importantly), he gave instant credibility to online poker.

Remember, Moneymaker won his seat via an online satty on PokerStars.

Moneymaker's win not only led to a exponential boom in poker interest, but also the proliferation of all sorts of new poker sites that had either been around meekly or weren't even born yet. So not only were there a plethora of new opportunities to play the game online, but Moneymaker was living proof that one could do so safely.

If we're using the WSOP ME participation numbers as a metric, growth over the previous few years was solid and basically doubled from '99 to 2003... but that number tripled in ONE YEAR after Chris's win. I just don't believe that happens if ANYONE else wins the '03 ME.

I honestly still think there is a poker boom. The 2002 winner wasn’t a famous poker player either…he was a banker. The 2003 WSOP was a big deal as it was happening. People not that familiar with poker were tuning in well BEFORE Moneymaker was part of the final episodes.

I think you can thank the World Poker Tour at least in part for that. The presentation of the WPT and the fact that it was well received from the very beginning definitely had an effect on the growing interest in the WSOP.

Yes…but it was all the poker pros that became celebrities….far far bigger than Moneymaker. Kids didn’t want to be Moneymaker they wanted to be Johnny Chan, Dan Negreanu, Phil Ivey, Antonio Esfandari, etc. As I recollect in real time Moneymaker was considered more of a fluke and almost immediately started losing the lime light to the young pros.

Agreed - but no one wanted to be David Freese after the 2011 World Series - they still adored Albert Pujols.

Moneymaker's life became a whirlwind after the WSOP ME win but winning that event was his peak. He signed on as a PokerStars ambassador (or whatever they were calling their sponsored pros) and was required to travel a lot for the tournament circuit. He probably wasn't ready for that life and it cost him his marriage.

https://www.espn.com/poker/story/_/...-2003-wsop-main-event-win-changed-world-poker

Expecting him or anyone thrust into that situation to thrive is just unrealistic. Burnout seems like it would be the most likely outcome for most people.

I think the narrative around Moneymaker has been severely embellished over time because people prefer that version to reality. It’s a better story. But by 2004 no one was really talking about him anymore.

He'd served his purpose. Some famous people peak early and the public loses interest. If you think about it, there was never much to add to the story after he won the Main. That doesn't diminish his legacy or his place in poker history. By winning the ME the way he did from start to finish, he singlehandedly forever changed the poker world overnight.

 

[gmunny]

Party Poker and WPT started the NL boom.

I agree. This was the start of the boom and when marks the time I really got into online Poker. That is why I was watched the WSOP broadcasts on ESPN the year that Moneymaker won. Once Moneymaker won, it had a huge impact on the number of people playing on PP and PS. Plenty of fresh fish, i mean new players. . Also, after his win and great ratings, more poker shows were broadcast on TV, including Celebrity Poker, Poker Superstars, etc.

 

[gmunny]

Wasn’t Moneymaker actually on twoplustwo forums or whatever and studying the game quite a bit? Always felt like he had a lot more knowledge of the game than was advertised. Or I’m crazy. Or both =)

I think you are thinking of Fossilman? I was following his thread the year that he won. That was amazing as well.

 

[MrRossKeys]

I agree, but I think the narrative around Moneymaker has been severely embellished over time because people prefer that version to reality. It’s a better story. But by 2004 no one was really talking about him anymore. He never did well at anymore tournaments and became a memory. It was all about the new celebrity pro pokers player and the new TV shows with hole cards.
Dan Negreanu, Scotty Nguyen, Hulmuth and all the big pro personalities drove the poker boom FAR more than Moneymaker….and that actually started during the 2003 ESPN coverage.

All it took was for Moneymaker to win one time, and his story has been told/promoted/marketed by anyone from ESPN to your average poker player. It doesn't really matter what he did in 2004 or whether anyone was talking about him anymore.

Negreanu, Ivy, and Dwan are the reasons I really got into poker (after playing for the first time at a friends house and winning the tournament). They were "cool," "interesting," but very inaccessible in my mind. Moneymaker wasn't cool or interesting to me at all, but his story sounded like a path I could walk, so I gained a level of inspiration to start walking.

I still tell new poker players about Chris Moneymaker, the local hero, and it always inspires them just like it inspired me. Sure I'd still be into poker whether he won or not, but there is definitely a hope of grand success inside me that didn't exist before he won. This is probably true for a large number of Hold em' players who started their poker journey around that time like I did.

 

[Old State]

By winning the ME the way he did from start to finish, he singlehandedly forever changed the poker world overnight.

This is the part I simply can’t agree with. Without the new enhanced ESPN production value the millions of new viewers that never watched this stuff before would have never even seen him win. If someone else won there is still a major poker boom.

My memory as it was happening was that Moneymaker was just a cool story…maybe the cherry on top of the already groundbreaking new genre of reality TV that people could actually participate in. I was 29 at the time and part of a large group of poker friends. Many of us played in AC …especially after Borgata opened. Moneymaker was a memory within months of his win. No body was talking about him. But I do remember a night in late 2003 when Scotty Nguyen was playing in the high limit room people were going nuts to catch a view.

At the time I don’t remember Moneymaker being talked about much after the win. I certainly had very little interest in him. The young poker pros were all the rage…not him.

 

[Machine]

Interview with Norman Chad I just found. I agree.

http://amp.awfulannouncing.com/espn/poker-boom-20-years-later-chris-moneymaker.html

“We would have had a boom either way. Chris Moneymaker made it a bigger boom [but] I think we would have had it without Chris.”

You can see the rise in interest starting a few years before. Entries on the far right. After new TV format and Moneymaker it really boomed
View attachment 1230939

This was my point, moneymaker or any Joe schmoe was likely to win and the wheel stopped on moneymaker. It wasnt really anything he did, it’s where the dice fell.

The boom was coming!

 

[Huskerchipper]

This is the part I simply can’t agree with. Without the new enhanced ESPN production value the millions of new viewers that never watched this stuff before would have never even seen him win. If someone else won there is still a major poker boom.

My memory as it was happening was that Moneymaker was just a cool story…maybe the cherry on top of the already groundbreaking new genre of reality TV that people could actually participate in. I was 29 at the time and part of a large group of poker friends. Many of us played in AC …especially after Borgata opened. Moneymaker was a memory within months of his win. No body was talking about him. But I do remember a night in late 2003 when Scotty Nguyen was playing in the high limit room people were going nuts to catch a view.

At the time I don’t remember Moneymaker being talked about much after the win. I certainly had very little interest in him. The young poker pros were all the rage…not him.

I 100% agree with this. I was 29 as well and had been hosting tournaments for a few years. To me, and I know many have touched on this, it was how they made Poker so extremely easy and interesting to watch. It was a fascinating game to watch knowing what each player had and how they played. Add to that all of the fascinating personalities of those days. We could all easily list 20 pro players who we loved or hated (Hellmuth) to watch. The boom was going to happen and was already well underway when Moneymaker won. Poker is definitely rebounding since Covid but the game is missing all of the personalities from yesteryear.